Our incomprehensible God.

[Runningman]

Are you aware he is not reading your claims?

Yes I am aware of that.

 

[Runningman]

Here is an excellent example of someone who doesn't know how to harmonize scriptures. All that person did was pit scriptures against scriptures. It probably was his first time hearing the word "Hypostatic Union."

https://christcentered.community.forum/threads/a-trinity-of-reality.1404/page-4#post-57213

Looks like your hypostatic union theory got wrecked there. Not sure why you would publicly show everyone that.

From the link, if you scroll to post 71, I made it clearer and more articulate. I stated:

We call this the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union. Because there is a structural pattern found in Scriptures of Jesus Christ's Divine attributes as God and Human attributes as Man. For example, this is evident from the fact that Jesus Christ has divine intelligence being omniscient and his human intelligence that increased. You can also say, "Jesus Christ is"... "both omniscient and ignorant," "both omnipresent and localized," and "both omnipotent and powerless". The list goes on and on. If we know "this" and we know "that" about Jesus Christ, then Scriptures as a whole don't contradict but harmonizes.​

I am aware of what you call it. The bible doesn't call it that.

Let me know when you can harmonize this:

- The Son receives glory from the Father

1. The Father glorifies the Son (Isaiah 42:8, Hebrews 1:3, 2 Peter 1:17).​

2. At the Son's water baptism (Matthew 3:17, Mark 1:11, Luke 3:22).​

3. At the Son's transfiguration (Matthew 17:5, Mark 9:7, Luke 9:35).​

4. Before the Son's passion (John 8:54, 12:23, 27-30, 13:31-32, 17:1, 5, 24).​

5. The Father and the Son shares glory (John 11:4, 17:10, Revelations 5:11-13).​

Whatever glory Jesus received from his Father, he gave it to his disciples. Your premise falls apart on a single verse.

John 17
22I have given them the glory You gave Me, so that they may be one as We are one—

- The Son is worshiped

1. Worshiped God only (Luke 4:5-8, Deuteronomy 6:13-15).​

2. The Son is worshiped by three wise men (Matthew 2:2, 11).​

3. The Son is worshiped by Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (Matthew 28:9).​

4. The Son is worshiped by the disciples (Matthew 14:33, Matthew 28:17, Luke 24:52).​

5. The Son is worshiped by all angels (Hebrews 1:6, Revelations 5:11-12).​

6. The Son is worshiped by every creature (Revelations 5:13).​

All of those contexts say Jesus is worshipped as the Son of God.

Once again your premise falls apart because when Jesus is bowed to by anyone, anywhere, at any time he doesn't even get any glory for it because he isn't God.

Philippians 2
10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

Your conclusion would be: "The Son is not Lord." Only thing that tells the readers is that you don't know how to harmonize.

You had to ignore a lot to come to your false conclusions.

 

[Arial]

where is the photo section?

Forum list​

Other​

Photography​

Threads 6 Messages 118
Nature Photos

• Thursday at 11:11 AM
• Arial

Hobbies and Interests​

Threads 13 Messages 186
Beer is also mentioned in the Bible

• Oct 24, 2023
• 3 Resurrections

Sports​

Threads 2 Messages 37
Fan snowballs on scorable plays

• Jan 15, 2024
• EarlyActs

Computers​

Threads 2 Messages 9
Always listening... Even when off?

• Aug 26, 2023
• Dave_Regenerated

Home schooling​

 

[grace2]

Are you Roman Catholic? They believe Jesus is God.

Are you aware they are the creator of triune god?

You guys are the daughters of RCC.

 

[grace2]

I misaddressed the above comment.

It was not for @Runningman please disregard.

thank you.

 

[Binyawmene]

Are you Roman Catholic? They believe Jesus is God.


We are talking about the messenger who is Jesus. Read Revelation 22:8 again. The messenger said to John "I am a fellow servant with you and your brothers the prophets."

So the messenger is a fellow servant? Acts 3:13 and Acts 4:27 say Jesus is a servant.
Then John 20:17 calls the apostles Jesus' brothers.

Literal angelic beings are never said to be fellow servants of people, but rather servants of people according to Hebrews 1:14.

Revelation 22:8 is talking about Jesus rejecting being worshipped as God.

Jesus is not that angel.

This is Scriptural context. Revelation 1:1-2, 19:10, 22:8-9, 16

Revelation 1:1-2 The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, who testifies to everything he saw—that is, the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Revelations 19:10 At this I fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, “Don’t do that! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers and sisters who hold to the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For it is the Spirit of prophecy who bears testimony to Jesus.”

Revelations 22:8-9 I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I had heard and seen them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who had been showing them to me. But he said to me, “Don’t do that! I am a fellow servant with you and with your fellow prophets and with all who keep the words of this scroll. Worship God!”​

Clear distinction between Jesus and that angel.

Revelations 22:16 “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”​

 

[Binyawmene]

Looks like your hypostatic union theory got wrecked there. Not sure why you would publicly show everyone that.


I am aware of what you call it. The bible doesn't call it that.


Whatever glory Jesus received from his Father, he gave it to his disciples. Your premise falls apart on a single verse.

John 17
22I have given them the glory You gave Me, so that they may be one as We are one—

All of those contexts say Jesus is worshipped as the Son of God.

Once again your premise falls apart because when Jesus is bowed to by anyone, anywhere, at any time he doesn't even get any glory for it because he isn't God.

Philippians 2
10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

You had to ignore a lot to come to your false conclusions.

You failed miserably. It's obvious that you don't know how to harmonize scriptures.

 

[Eleanor]

Jesus is not that angel.

This is Scriptural context. Revelation 1:1-2, 19:10, 22:8-9, 16

Revelation 1:1-2 The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, who testifies to everything he saw—that is, the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ.​

​

Revelations 19:10 At this I fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, “Don’t do that! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers and sisters who hold to the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For it is the Spirit of prophecy who bears testimony to Jesus.”​

​

Revelations 22:8-9 I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I had heard and seen them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who had been showing them to me. But he said to me, “Don’t do that! I am a fellow servant with you and with your fellow prophets and with all who keep the words of this scroll. Worship God!”​

Clear distinction between Jesus and that angel.

Revelations 22:16 “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”​

Yep, Jesus is "as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs. For to which of the angels did God ever say:
'You are my Son; today I have begotten you'. . .or 'Let all God's angels worship him' (Dt 32:43, Ps 97:7)?" (Heb 1:5-6)

 

[Arial]

Your post is being answered.

You did not give an answer to the request for a definition of the full counsel of God. You gave examples of you using the full counsel of God that completely defy it definition.

Let's do it like Jesus did then. So what did Jesus say in Matthew 21:42? He quoted the counsel of Scripture, referring to Psalm 118:22,23

Matthew 2142Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:‘The stone the builders rejectedhas become the cornerstone.This is from the Lord,and it is marvelous in our eyes’

But on the matter of the cornerstone, is the cornerstone God or is the cornerstone not God, but someone that God installed in Zion? Jesus is the cornerstone and God laid the cornerstone. Paul understood this clearly in Romans 10:11, but what Scripture did Paul quote?

You begin your search for the meaning of the scripture with the mindset of proving that Jesus is not God, when that is not even the subject of what Jesus is pointing out in this passage. Your idea of the whole counsel of God becomes jumping from one isolated scripture to another, that also are not discussing the deity of Christ specifically, in order to prove your point. The very definition of proof texting. You start with Jesus is not God and to prove it you say that if God laid the cornerstone, and Jesus is the cornerstone, that means God is not the cornerstone, therefore Jesus is not God but a created human being only who God installed in Zion.

It sets out to disprove the Trinity without acknowledging the doctrine of the Trinity (the hypostatic union of the theology/doctrine)but only your own doctrine. IOW it merely states your own beliefs and proof texts scripture to do it. You do not even bother to include who God is as self revealed, who the creature man is in relation to God, or the dynamic and the magnitude of the work that Christ did or what that was. To do so and carefully and systematically, would be making use of the whole counsel of Scripture. You could start by acknowledging and addressing the utter uniqueness of Christ as outlined in post #167. Find the scriptures that verify what I said. It should be easy with a simple google search using the list I gave, one by one.

Romans 1011It is just as the Scripture says: “Anyone who believes in Him will never be put to shame.”
Paul was quoting from Isaiah 28:16:

Isaiah 2816So this is what the Lord GOD says:“See, I lay a stone in Zion,a tested stone,a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation;the one who believes will never be shaken.
Look at that. The New Testament can be cross-referenced with the Old Testament. YHWH was the one who laid the precious cornerstone? Then Jesus isn't YHWH. YHWH is God, Jesus is the cornerstone.

Now reread Romans 10---the full chapter, and tell me what Paul is talking about, instead of this preposterous assertion that you have arrived at Jesus not being God by using the whole counsel of God because you found one cross reference to one half phrase in the whole chapter, and then make the assertion that YHWH (as though the Hebrew adds a speck of weight to your argument) laid the Cornerstone, therefore Jesus is not YHWH. That is scarcely even using your mind, let alone the full counsel of God.

Tell me, using the full counsel of God, how what you claim does not contradict Romans 9:5 (note chapter 9 comes before 10 which you used to declare Paul knew Jesus was not God) To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.

 

[Binyawmene]

Yep, Jesus is "as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs. For to which of the angels did God ever say:
'You are my Son; today I have begotten you'. . .or 'Let all God's angels worship him' (Dt 32:43, Ps 97:7)?" (Heb 1:5-6)

Excellent.

I'm convinced the poster is suffering from "Dunning-Kruger" effect. One minute he knows Greek better than Greek Scholars when he doesn't even know the Greek alphabet. The next day he is a master in logic when he doesn't know basic logic. He claims that harmonizing scriptures is his middle name but failed to prove it. etc. Just lots of words and no substance.

 

[donadams]

There you are with your sacred Tradition again. I stand amazed at the RCC'c blasphemies. You act against them here but your church endorses how they come to their conclusions because your church comes to their conclusion the same way, that is the Socinians and the many others like JW's and such who reject the Trinity and Christ's deity.

Your folks are even baptized in the name of the Trinity and profess that they believe in the equality of three distinct persons in the same divine essence. And claim that the Trinity can be proven but by unwritten Traditions, by the testimony of the church of Rome. Yet, even some of your popes defended the doctrine of the Trinity against the Socinians. Yet you all do promote them by their vaine doctrine of unwritten traditions.

If you look you will find the Nicene Synod urged scripture for the maintenance of the truth, which they declared in the confession of their faith.

Consider Athanasius, he confronted the Arians with clear testimonies of scripture. He said the true disciples of Christ do clearly understand the doctrine of the holy Trinity preached by divine scripture.

Let her this right; you believe in the trinity, you believe in the divinity of Christ as we do to; but you don’t actually believe Christ’s own words? Matt 28:19 baptize in the name of the father and of the son, and of the Holy Spirit???

 

[donadams]

And trine churches deny all Jesus' noble and pure teaching and suit to majority professed followers.

It is so convenient faith. that's why they believe in OSAS crap.

that's the way of wide gate and claim to be saved.

so sad.

We only believe O.S.A.S as scripture says after we are dead Matt 24:13

 

[Arial]

Excellent.

I'm convinced the poster is suffering from "Dunning-Kruger" effect. One minute he knows Greek better than Greek Scholars when he doesn't even know the Greek alphabet. The next day he is a master in logic when he doesn't know basic logic. He claims that harmonizing scriptures is his middle name but failed to prove it. etc. Just lots of words and no substance.

He borrows words and phrases that are used by those presenting their case through the use of proper hermeneutics, exegesis, exposition, etc. and those words and phrases used to point out where he is failing to do the proper work in the proper way, I assume because the use of the words themselves will add credibility to what he says. But he does so without knowing their meaning, and not listening to their meaning when it is given, just arguing about it. So yeah, I agree with you. I have found these words and phrases to be absent from his posts, progressively brought into his own speech as they crop up.

Posts will point out that he needs to do such and such and this is how it is done. So he begins to say he is doing it with the assumption that it if he says he is doing it then he is doing it. And begins to accuse his opponent of not doing it.

 

[donadams]

And trine churches deny all Jesus' noble and pure teaching and suit to majority professed followers.

It is so convenient faith. that's why they believe in OSAS crap.

that's the way of wide gate and claim to be saved.

so sad.

Does the apostolic church have all authority from Christ to settle doctrine on matters of faith and morals?

 

[Arial]

The apostolic church is scripture!

2 Corinthians 3:3
Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.

2 John 1:12
Having many things to write unto you, I would not write with paper and ink: but I trust to come unto you, andspeak face to face, that our joy may be full.

Acts 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

Donadams,

This OP is not a discussion of the RCC. Forum rule 3.

3: Please make a conscious effort to post your opening posts in the appropriate board. Please specify a specific point(s) of inquiry or comment so that others understand the subject to be discussed. Please also make a conscious and deliberate attempt to post content relevant to the point of inquiry or comment specified in an opening post. For example, not every post is about end times. Not every thread on soteriology is about all of salvation. Do not hijack others' threads for your own purpose or agenda.

 

[Eleanor]

Scripture yes! Scripture alone no!

Scripture Verses that contradict the “Bible is our ONLY AUTHORITY”!

Matt 5:14
Matt 6:33
Matt 13:11
Matt 18:17
Matt 28:19
Lk 1:4
Lk 10:16
Jn 8:32
Jn 16:13
Jn 20:21
Acts 1:8
Acts 2:42
Acts 8:26
Acts 8:31
Acts 15:25-28
Acts 18:25
Rom 10:15
1 cor 4:11
1 cor 11:23
1 thes 2:23
2 thes 2:15
Col 2:7
Eph 1:9
Eph 4:5
Heb 13:7
Heb 13:17
1 Tim 3:15
1 Jn 1:3-5
1 Jn 4:6
2 Jn 1:12
Jude 1:3

In the NT, the church is the body of Christ (Eph 5:29-32), and nowhere is it ever anything else.

How can it be said scripture is “sole authority” or the only source of truth or the rule of faith when scripture says we must hear the church Matt 18:17

And there we have it--misrepresentation of the text.

IN CONTEXT, Mt 18:17 is referring to sins against the brethren, not to doctrine.

 

[Eleanor]

that's why they believe in OSAS crap.

so sad.

I suspect what is truly "crap" and indeed "sad" in the mind of God is unbelief of Jesus' word in Jn 6:37-39:

"All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. . .This is the will of him who sent me, that
I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day."

Such dismissal of the divine will and word of God is absolutely staggering!

 

[Binyawmene]

He borrows words and phrases that are used by those presenting their case through the use of proper hermeneutics, exegesis, exposition, etc. and those words and phrases used to point out where he is failing to do the proper work in the proper way, I assume because the use of the words themselves will add credibility to what he says. But he does so without knowing their meaning, and not listening to their meaning when it is given, just arguing about it. So yeah, I agree with you. I have found these words and phrases to be absent from his posts, progressively brought into his own speech as they crop up.

Posts will point out that he needs to do such and such and this is how it is done. So he begins to say he is doing it with the assumption that it if he says he is doing it then he is doing it. And begins to accuse his opponent of not doing it.

Yes, it's like a child trying to use big words but don't know the mean of those words. And it funny when those words are spoken in the sentence structure. Which is also funny watching him trying to harmonize scriptures when he doesn't know what harmonizing scripture means or how to do it.

I've also notice in this thread the fallacy of illicit transference on the word "glory." And the word glory has a wide range of semantical meaning in scriptures. It's like he doesn't know the different between the meaning usage of glory in its context. He simply lumps them all together as if it has one meaning. For example,

When he speak of God's glory as being intrinsic, the greatness of grandeur beauty and splendor, all-glorious in nature. God who was, is, and is to come, He is forever glorious and perfect, eternally the same, unchanging in His glory.

Hebrews 1:3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.

John 1:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.​

To glorify someone means to bestow honor, praise or admiration on them. People tend to glorify other people. Like athletes are glorified for their physical talents and championships. Political leaders are glorified for their leadership. And Jesus is glorified by the Father as the "Beloved Son" and the love is eternal.

2 Peter 1:17 He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”

John 17:24 “Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world.​

Then he tries to say that Father glorifying the Son and the Son shares that with us to actually mean our resurrection and glorification. And quote these two verses (John 17:22, Romans 8:30). Supper funny, right? And it's even more funny when he claimed Jesus is that angel in Revelations revealing the testimony of Jesus to John. His Unitarianism is getting more bizarre and strange.

https://christcentered.community.forum/threads/our-incomprehensible-god.1635/page-9#post-69802

 

[Carbon]

Are you Roman Catholic? They believe Jesus is God.

At least the Catholics got that part right.

 

[Carbon]

Let her this right; you believe in the trinity, you believe in the divinity of Christ as we do to; but you don’t actually believe Christ’s own words? Matt 28:19 baptize in the name of the father and of the son, and of the Holy Spirit???

What makes you think I don't believe Jesus?