Post Reply
Page 20 of 22  •  Prev 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Switch to Forum Live View ORIGIN OF LIFE - Question #2 - How Did the DNA Code Originate?
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 1:53AM #191
Abner1
Posts: 6,250

Abner1 wrote:


>> Nope; it's just that you don't understand what mainstream Christianity believes


>> at all.  You see, mainstream Christians believe that mankind was created in the


>> *spiritual* image of God, not in the *physical* image of God.[/quote]


iama wrote:


> You may recall that Christ Jesus stated,


Mat 16:18   And I say also unto you, That you are Peter (Petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

None of that does anything to say that God has a physical body with spleen, toes, and sweatglands.  None of that says that humanity was made in the physical image of God.  And none of that says that Jesus couldn't be sent to save mankind if mankind had looked differently than it does.  In short, you're just throwing random Bible verses that have nothing to do with the issue at hand; you don't even seem to realize that you aren't addressing the issue.


iama wrote:


> There is a difference between "My Church" / Christ Jesus' Church and man's church.


I rather strongly doubt that if Jesus Christ was here today that he'd agree with your church.  I rather strongly suspect that he'd regard you as a heretic, given how badly you warp the Old Testament.  He certainly wouldn't agree with you that God has a physical body with sweat glands and toes; that's quite heretical.  He was, after all, a Jew, and that was just one of the main distinctions between Judaism and most of the pagan religions that surrounded it.  The Jews certainly wouldn't have agreed with your claims about the Bible and God being different words for the same thing ('synonyms', as you put it); that also was highly heretical.  Most of your fundamentalist doctrine wasn't invented until around 1700-1800 years after Jesus Christ died; mainstream Christian doctrine was founded considerably closer to those events than yours was.  Your doctrine was heretical then and is still heretical now.


>> They don't believe that God had a nose, or a spleen, or ten fingers, or a kidney.  If


>> you rewound time and then moved it forward again, creatures might have ended


>> up with a radically different physical form than they did now - but that does absolutely


>> nothing to their spiritual nature.  Thus, the theory of evolution saying that we could


>> have had differently shaped bodies if things had gone differently has absolutely no


>> effect on their beliefs as to our fallen nature or other spiritual properties - we would


>> still have a fallen nature, we would still need a savior, and the savior would still have


>> had a physical body like ours.  Whether the savior had ten fingers and ten toes like


>> humanity does or had claws and gills like an alternative race might have had is


>> entirely irrelevant to the message of salvation of mainstream Christianity.


iama wrote:


> Then, they don't believe that Christ Jesus was / is God, incarnate, having a nose,


> a spleen, ten fingers and a kidney!


You don't seem to grasp the concept of the trinity, which is important to mainstream Christianity but seems to have been minimized in your heretical version (and you folded the Bible in there too, so your version is more of a square than a trinity anyway).  In the doctrine of the Trinity, God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost are three distinct aspects of the same overall being; they have the same essence, but they don't all three have exactly the same properties (if they did, they wouldn't be different aspects).  For example, Jesus had a physical body; God and the Holy Spirit do not have physical bodies.  Jesus was born to the Virgin Mary; God and the Holy Spirit were never born.  God begot Jesus; Jesus did not beget God.  Jesus was wholly human and wholly divine; God is wholly divine but is not a human being - nor is the Holy Spirit.  The Holy Spirit gives access to salvation, not Jesus.  God created the universe, not Jesus.  Essentially the different aspects of God have different jobs: God creates, Jesus was created and essentially revealed how to be saved / opened the way for salvation through his sacrifice, and the Holy Spirit saves people.  It's like a head, torso, and limbs - they're all parts of the same being but they're not exactly the same thing, and something can be true about a person's head but not be true about their torso or their limbs (i.e. 'my head is round' doesn't mean that my limbs must also be round).  Your beliefs are apparently closer to Unitarianism, which regards them all as the same being with different names rather than different aspects of the same being (though the Unitarians would reject your folding of the Bible into the Trinity, as would the Trinitarians; you're heretical by the standards of both branches).


> There is no "rewinding" of time as per the evolution paradigm.


The theory of evolution does not say that time has ever been rewound, nor did anyone say it did. 


> Man's church is not the same entity as "My Church" which is built upon the Rock, Christ Jesus.


Not quite; your church is built on the Bible, which is not the same thing as Jesus according to almost all Christians.  Very few Christians think that Jesus and the Bible are the same thing.


>> Do you really believe that if mankind had claws and gills that Jesus couldn't have come


>> or wouldn't have been needed?  Do you really believe that we were made in the


>> physical image of God?  If so, you're a heretic by the standards of mainstream Christianity.


> I believe that our Creator-God designed human beings as He did, because He had


> chosen, to incarnate / inflesh as a human being.  It was essential that "the Godhead


> fulness" be given a residence within the human being.


But none of that means that God couldn't have chosen to make people differently or have let things go down a path to a different physical body.  Having toes instead of claws just isn't essential to the doctrine of salvation in any way.  Your belief that people had to be shaped the way they were because otherwise they wouldn't have looked like Jesus assumes that Jesus *had* to be shaped a certain way and so people had to be shaped a certain way to look like Jesus.  That's apparently part of your doctrine, but it isn't part of mainstream Christian doctrine.


But with the precious blood of ChristWho verily was foreordained


> before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,


> Who by Him do believe in God, that raised Him from the dead, and gave Him glory;


> that your faith and hope might be in God."


That Bible quote doesn't support your beliefs either; Christ being foreordained before the foundation of the world doesn't mean that the *shape* of Christ was foreordained before the foundation of the world, or that God couldn't have foreordained a different shape for humanity.


>> None of that says a single word about Jesus only being able to come to save us if


>> our physical form was a certain shape, or our physical shapes being foreordained.


>>  It appears you don't understand the Bible very well, even the New Testament parts ...


> If you combine all relevant Scripture, you find that "in OUR likeness," stated following


> "in OUR image," is significant.


But there's nothing in mainstream Christian doctrine and definitely nothing in Jewish doctrine which says that the likeness is physical.  Since the Jewish God has no body, being made in the physical likeness of the Jewish God is a ridiculous notion.


>>> There was no way that Christ Jesus would not incarnate, as He did ~2,000 years ago.


>> Which has nothing to do with the theory of evolution[/quote]


> It certainly refutes the evolution speculation, which has no purpose evident in its


> paradigm description.


The theory of evolution doesn't say anything about a purpose at all - for *or* against.  Neither does the theory of gravity, the kinetic-molecular theory of gases, or indeed any other scientific theory.  They're all entirely silent about whether or not there is a purpose.   Belief in a purpose does not refute any part of science, including the theory of evolution.


>> But the likeness is spiritual, not physical.  It may be hard for you to believe this,


>> but mainstream Christians do *not* believe that God has a physical body.  You


>> apparently do, which is very odd.  It is very strange that I understand Christian


>> doctrine far better than you do!


> Yes, prior to God-Son's incarnation, God-Son was NOT a human being having a


> human spirit, soul and body.  But being "made of a woman," "made under the law,"


> were the requirements for our Savior.  Christ Jesus / God-Son is since His


> incarnation, eternally, the God-Man.


That's entirely irrelevant to what I said.  Try reading it and perhaps you will see why.


> The "likeness" is ALL that we, human beings, are!


Not according to mainstream Christian doctrine; according to mainstream Christian doctrine, the likeness is spiritual; God doesn't have a spleen.


> Mainstream Christians are of man's church, then!


That's really not your decision to make.  You reject the doctrine of mainstream Christianity, and they reject your doctrine, and for similar reasons: because it conflicts with their own hard-won interpretations of Christianity.  No matter how certain you are that you are right and all the other branches of Christianity are wrong, the fact of the matter is that your doctrine is just one among many and the other branches are just as certain of the correctness of their own doctrine as you are of yours.


The rest of your post was irrelevant preaching, not touching in any way on the subject being discussed here.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 7:49AM #192
Ken
Posts: 33,860

Apr 22, 2012 -- 1:01AM, iamachildofhis wrote:

You may recall that Christ Jesus stated,

Mat 16:18   And I say also unto you, That you are Peter (Petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

There are two "rocks" referred to in the above.


Petros: Peter = "a rock or a stone" - a soul hard and unyielding

1) one of the twelve disciples of Jesus


Petra: Christ Jesus - a man like a rock, by reason of His firmness and strength of soul


1) a rock, cliff or ledge

a) a projecting rock, crag, rocky ground

b) a rock, a large stone

c) metaph. a man like a rock, by reason of his firmness and strength of soul


There is a difference between "My Church" / Christ Jesus' Church and man's church.


This is another heretical view. When Jesus said "And I say also unto you, That you are Peter (Petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build my church," he wasn't referring to himself as a rock. He was referring to Simon Peter.


Iama is sorely in need of proper spiritual direction.




Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 12:21PM #193
iamachildofhis
Posts: 9,983

Apr 22, 2012 -- 7:49AM, Ken wrote:



iama: You may recall that Christ Jesus stated,


Mat 16:18   And I say also unto you, That you are Peter (Petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.


There are two "rocks" referred to in the above.


Petros: Peter = "a rock or a stone" - a soul hard and unyielding

1) one of the twelve disciples of Jesus


Petra: Christ Jesus - a man like a rock, by reason of His firmness and strength of soul


1) a rock, cliff or ledge

a) a projecting rock, crag, rocky ground

b) a rock, a large stone

c) metaph. a man like a rock, by reason of his firmness and strength of soul


There is a difference between "My Church" / Christ Jesus' Church and man's church.


Ken: This is another heretical view. When Jesus said "And I say also unto you, That you are Peter (Petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build my church," he wasn't referring to himself as a rock. He was referring to Simon Peter.


Iama is sorely in need of proper spiritual direction.



iama:  Simon Peter, revealed to him by "My (Christ Jesus') Father," made the following statement:  "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." 


It is "the Christ, the Son of the living God," the revelation given to Simon Peter, by "My Father," Who is the petra / The Rock "upon which" Christ Jesus, Himself, "will build My church."



Mat 16:15-16
"He (Christ Jesus) said unto them, But whom say you that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed are you, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood has not revealed [it] unto you, but My Father which is in heaven."


As the two men in the two videos came to realize, we, human beings, are nothing, without Christ Jesus.


.

The wonder of Christmas is that the God Who dwelt among us, now, can dwell within us. - Roy Lessin
.
"Father, forgive them for they know not what they do."
.
Justice is receiving what you deserve.
Mercy is NOT receiving what you deserve.
Grace is receiving what you DO NOT deserve.
.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 12:27PM #194
amcolph
Posts: 16,245

Apr 22, 2012 -- 12:21PM, iamachildofhis wrote:


 


As the two men in the two videos came to realize, we, human beings, are nothing, without Christ Jesus.


 




True enough, but what does that have to do with making a fetish out of literal inerrancy?

This post contains no advertisements or solicitations.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 12:48PM #195
Ken
Posts: 33,860

Apr 22, 2012 -- 12:21PM, iamachildofhis wrote:


Apr 22, 2012 -- 7:49AM, Ken wrote:

When Jesus said "And I say also unto you, That you are Peter (Petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build my church," he wasn't referring to himself as a rock. He was referring to Simon Peter.


Iama is sorely in need of proper spiritual direction.



Simon Peter, revealed to him by "My (Christ Jesus') Father," made the following statement:  "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." 


It is "the Christ, the Son of the living God," the revelation given to Simon Peter, by "My Father," Who is the petra / The Rock "upon which" Christ Jesus, Himself, "will build My church."


That's not what the text states. It clearly says that the "rock" is Peter. This is the orthodox Christian understanding. You must belong to some sort of heretical fringe cult.


Apr 22, 2012 -- 12:21PM, iamachildofhis wrote:

As the two men in the two videos came to realize, we, human beings, are nothing, without Christ Jesus.



I disagree. And their views are irrelevant to the topic of this thread.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 6:49PM #196
iamachildofhis
Posts: 9,983

Apr 22, 2012 -- 1:53AM, Abner1 wrote:



Abner1: Nope; it's just that you don't understand what mainstream Christianity believes at all.  You see, mainstream Christians believe that mankind was created in the *spiritual* image of God, not in the *physical* image of God.


iama:  You may recall that Christ Jesus stated,

Mat 16:18   And I say also unto you, That you are Peter (Petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Abner1: None of that does anything to say that God has a physical body with spleen, toes, and sweatglands.  None of that says that humanity was made in the physical image of God. And none of that says that Jesus couldn't be sent to save mankind if mankind had looked differently than it does.  In short, you're just throwing random Bible verses that have nothing to do with the issue at hand; you don't even seem to realize that you aren't addressing the issue.



iama: I was responding to your use of "mainstream Christianity."  There is ONLY one Church, and it is the Church which is invisible to us, human beings, presently.  A physical building is called a church building.  Buildings are not "My (Christ Jesus') Church." The physical attendance of physical bodies going into and out of church buildings, is not "My Church." Physical bodies, societal souls and spiritual spirits doing good works because they are members of a physical local church assembly, is not "My Church."  The "My Church" to which Christ Jesus was referring was Himself.  The "My Church" Body is Christ Jesus' Body of believers, who would / could proclaim, as Simon Peter did, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."


iama: There is a difference between "My Church" / Christ Jesus' Church and man's church.


Abner1: I rather strongly doubt that if Jesus Christ was here today that he'd agree with your church. I rather strongly suspect that he'd regard you as a heretic, given how badly you warp the Old Testament.



iama:  I am "in Christ Jesus" / I am a child of His Father-God.  There is no physical church body which is 100% comprised of only those who are "in Christ Jesus." It is important for an "in Christ Jesus" human being, that he / she attend and contribute to a congregation which is functioning and growing according to The Bible's description of believers meeting and fellow-shipping with our God and His birthed-from-above-believers.  "But grow in Grace even in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ." 


I am not aware of my "warping the Old Testament."  The Old Testament revelation of our Creator-God - Father-Son-Holy Spirit moves right into the New Testament revelation of our Creator-God - Father-Son-Holy Spirit. 


The Apostle Paul, a Pharisee, spent several years, post-his conversion "on the way to Damascus."  Saul knew the Old Testament Scriptures well, but he didn't have them aligned with what had taken place regarding Christ Jesus.  He, along with many of the Jewish leaders of his day, didn't believe that Christ Jesus could be their long awaited Messiah, because they weren't looking for the Isaiah 53 "suffering servant." There are all kinds of mental gymnastics which were used by the religious leaders of Saul / Paul / Jesus' day, in order to reject Jesus Christ as their long awaited Messiah.  They were only looking for the KING who would, they hoped, liberate them from the Roman occupation.


Jesus, speaking to the Samaritan woman, stated:


Jhn 4:24     
"God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship Him must worship [Him] in spirit and in truth."


God is: Father, Who is not visible to human beings, currently; Son, Who has been visible and Who has interacted with human beings, since the Garden of Eden fellowship with Adam and Eve; and Holy Spirit, Who is invisible to human beings, currently, but evidences Himself in power in behalf of believers, accomplishing the "works of God."


Abner1: He certainly wouldn't agree with you that God has a physical body with sweat glands and toes; that's quite heretical.



iama:  The Apostle John describes Christ Jesus as the Creator-God:


Jhn 1:1-5
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made. In Him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shone in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not."


Jhn 1:14
"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."


dwelt: (God-Son, incarnate / Christ Jesus, fixed His tabernacle "among us.")


Strong's G4637 - skēnoō


1) to fix one's tabernacle, have one's tabernacle, abide (or live) in a tabernacle (or tent), tabernacle


2) to dwell


iama: "The Word was made flesh."  That statement indicates that God-Son, incarnate - Christ Jesus, "made flesh," has a physical body with sweat glands and toes, etc.  Biblically stated, that idea is NOT heretical.


iama: The Apostle John, recording The Revelation, again, records that "the tabernacle of God is with men."



Rev 21:1-3
"And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God [is] with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself shall be with them, [and be] their God."

Rev 21:12           
"And had a wall great and high, [and] had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are [the names] of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:"

Rev 21:14           
"And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb."  

Rev 21:22-23
"And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb [is] the light thereof."


Abner1: He was, after all, a Jew, and that was just one of the main distinctions between Judaism and most of the pagan religions that surrounded it.  The Jews certainly wouldn't have agreed with your claims about the Bible and God being different words for the same thing ('synonyms', as you put it); that also was highly heretical.  Most of your fundamentalist doctrine wasn't invented until around 1700-1800 years after Jesus Christ died; mainstream Christian doctrine was founded considerably closer to those events than yours was.  Your doctrine was heretical then and is still heretical now.



iama: You are, surely, not claiming that a Jew does not have "a physical body with sweat glands and toes, etc." are you? :)


This post has many, many words / statement / ideas / claims / etc., in it which are attributed to Abner1.  What is the relationship of your statements, to you, Abner1?  Is there any relationship there between your words and you, yourself?


The Apostle John uses Logos / the Word as referring to Christ Jesus.  Why does John use this term, Logos / Word as a name for Christ Jesus?  Why is The Bible called The Word of God? 


Mat 4:4     
"But He answered and said, 'It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.'"


There is a difference between worshiping God and worshiping The Bible, God's recorded words!


The Fundamentalist Baptist


What is heretical about fundamentalist doctrine, since it is biblical?


From "before the foundation of the world," our Creator-God has been moving toward the culmination of His purposed Plan of the Ages, which is described, above. Our Creator-God (The Lord God Almighty and The Lamb / Christ Jesus) will, eventually, dwell / tabernacle with human beings, who are indwelt by God-Holy Spirit.  


Abner1: They don't believe that God had a nose, or a spleen, or ten fingers, or a kidney.  If you rewound time and then moved it forward again, creatures might have ended up with a radically different physical form than they did now - but that does absolutely nothing to their spiritual nature.  Thus, the theory of evolution saying that we could have had differently shaped bodies if things had gone differently has absolutely no effect on their beliefs as to our fallen nature or other spiritual properties - we would still have a fallen nature, we would still need a savior, and the savior would still have had a physical body like ours.  Whether the savior had ten fingers and ten toes like humanity does or had claws and gills like an alternative race might have had is entirely irrelevant to the message of salvation of mainstream Christianity.


iama: Then, they don't believe that Christ Jesus was / is God, incarnate, having a nose, a spleen, ten fingers and a kidney!



iama: The point made by our Creator-God re:


Gen 1:26-28
"And God said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness:"


is that there is a repeated phrase having two different direct objects of the preposition, and the prepositions differ.  Why is that so?


Strong's H1823 - dĕmuwth


image: shaddowing forth


likeness: according to his likeness, after his image


from: Strong's H1819 - damah


1) to be like, resemble


a) (Qal) to be like, resemble


b) (Piel)


1) to liken, compare


2) to imagine, think


c) (Hithpael) to make oneself like





The "image" of God which we receive from God in Genesis regarding man is:


- US - Godhead of Persons makes the man


- OUR - image of unity of the Godhead of Persons is already conceived at the time of The Creation of the man


- OUR - likeness of Godhead exists at the time of The Creation of the man


Our human being entity is a "shaddow"-image of The Godhead of Persons: spirit (like Father), soul (like Son), body to accomplish work (like Holy Spirit working-POWER). 


Christ Jesus "tabernacled" / pitched God's tent in Israel "with man" / He dwelt, as a human being: human spirit, human soul, human body. Christ Jesus' human body remained behind when He died and his soul-spirit went to Paradise / the place of the dead believers.  Christ Jesus soul-spirit returned to his once dead physical body which was resurrected / became an eternal-realm body existing in this physical realm (He ate, was felt, spoke, moved through doors / walls, disappeared, appeared, rose up / ascended, etc.) In order for Christ Jesus to be the "perfect Lamb of God," He had to have become all that Adam, originally, was as a human being, live the perfect human life, which Adam failed to do, die as the perfect Lamb of God to redeem fallen human beings, rise to a resurrection body, and ascend to the "right hand of the Father," so that all believing human beings could, one day, FOLLOW HIM - "We shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is."


Regarding the evolution speculation, you will notice that Adam and Eve were, immediately, given "DOMINION OVER" fish, fowl, cattle, all the earth, and creeping things. There was no "goo to zoo to you" long-ages process for which Adam and Eve were to await! Adam and Eve were already there, and all of the life-forms were already there "In the beginning God..."


"and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.


So God created man


in His [own] image,


in the image of God created He him;


male and female created He them.


And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and plenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moves upon the earth."


Abner1: You don't seem to grasp the concept of the trinity, which is important to mainstream Christianity but seems to have been minimized in your heretical version (and you folded the Bible in there too, so your version is more of a square than a trinity anyway).  In the doctrine of the Trinity, God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost are three distinct aspects of the same overall being; they have the same essence, but they don't all three have exactly the same properties (if they did, they wouldn't be different aspects).  For example, Jesus had a physical body; God and the Holy Spirit do not have physical bodies.  Jesus was born to the Virgin Mary; God and the Holy Spirit were never born.  God begot Jesus; Jesus did not beget God. Jesus was wholly human and wholly divine; God is wholly divine but is not a human being - nor is the Holy Spirit.



iama: Here is Christ Jesus making an interesting and revealing statement:


Jhn 14:23     
"Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love Me, he will keep My words: and My Father will love him, and WE will come unto him, and make OUR abode with him."


iama: Where do we find "My words"?


How would "the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom?"


Col 3:16     
"Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord."


How would a Christian "grow in grace"?


2Pe 3:18     
"But grow in grace, and / (even) [in] the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him [be] glory both now and for ever."


Abner1: The Holy Spirit gives access to salvation, not Jesus.  God created the universe, not Jesus.  Essentially the different aspects of God have different jobs: God creates, Jesus was created and essentially revealed how to be saved / opened the way for salvation through his sacrifice, and the Holy Spirit saves people.  It's like a head, torso, and limbs - they're all parts of the same being but they're not exactly the same thing, and something can be true about a person's head but not be true about their torso or their limbs (i.e. 'my head is round' doesn't mean that my limbs must also be round).  Your beliefs are apparently closer to Unitarianism, which regards them all as the same being with different names rather than different aspects of the same being (though the Unitarians would reject your folding of the Bible into the Trinity, as would the Trinitarians; you're heretical by the standards of both branches).



iama:  Yes, Christ Jesus accomplished the work of Salvation, and God-Holy Spirit applies God-Son's / Christ Jesus' accomplished work to the believer in Christ Jesus' accomplished Lamb of God work. God-Father demands righteousness / holiness / justice / etc.


Abner1: God created the universe, not Jesus.



Genesis 1:1-3 states:

"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. GOD-FATHER - originated


And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. God-Holy Spirit - moved


And God said, Let there be light: and there was light." God- Son - spoke


Abner1: Essentially the different aspects of God have different jobs: God creates, Jesus was created and essentially revealed how to be saved / opened the way for salvation through his sacrifice, and the Holy Spirit saves people.


 


iama: Since Christ Jesus is God-Son, incarnate, and since He is called "The Word / The Logos," and since "The Word became flesh and dwelt / tabernacled among us," we must be careful stating that "Jesus was created"!  We, human beings, don't understand how Christ Jesus can be the God-Man - how the incarnation was / is possible, but we believe that it happened.  We know that the first Adam was a created / made human being, and Christ Jesus is called "the second Adam."  


Jesus' human body was, certainly, of the physical elements; they were derived via His mother, Mary's body / the food which she ate.  God-Holy Spirit re: Christ Jesus' conception, ensured that no human sperm / the sin-nature would contaminate the Lamb of God's spirit-soul-body.


Hbr 10:5     
"Wherefore when He came into the world, He said, Sacrifice and offering You would not, but a body have You prepared Me:"


prepared:


Strong's G2675 - katartizō


1) to render, i.e. to fit, sound, complete


a) to mend (what has been broken or rent), to repair


1) to complete


b) to fit out, equip, put in order, arrange, adjust


1) to fit or frame for one's self, prepare


c) ethically: to strengthen, perfect, complete, make one what he ought to be


Abner1: It's like a head, torso, and limbs - they're all parts of the same being but they're not exactly the same thing, and something can be true about a person's head but not be true about their torso or their limbs (i.e. 'my head is round' doesn't mean that my limbs must also be round).  Your beliefs are apparently closer to Unitarianism, which regards them all as the same being with different names rather than different aspects of the same being (though the Unitarians would reject your folding of the Bible into the Trinity, as would the Trinitarians; you're heretical by the standards of both branches).



iama:  If you have the time and the inclination, read through the following, and you will understand how I understand that The Bible describes our Creator-God - Father-Son-Holy Spirit and we, human beings "made in His image" and "after His likeness."


II - THE INNER UNIVERSE


The Secret of the Universe - index


iama: There is no "rewinding" of time as per the evolution paradigm.


Abner1: The theory of evolution does not say that time has ever been rewound, nor did anyone say it did.



iama:  You were the one who stated "IF you rewound time and then moved it forward again, creatures might have ended up with a radically different physical form than they did now."


iama: Man's church is not the same entity as "My Church" which is built upon the Rock, Christ Jesus.


Abner1: Not quite; your church is built on the Bible, which is not the same thing as Jesus according to almost all Christians.  Very few Christians think that Jesus and the Bible are the same thing.



iama:  I dealt with this, above.  The Bible is a physical entity, which contains the recordings which God-Holy Spirit inspired human recorders to record.  "My words," said Christ Jesus,  are to be obeyed.  What does that tell you? 


Abner1:  Do you really believe that if mankind had claws and gills that Jesus couldn't have come or wouldn't have been needed?  Do you really believe that we were made in the physical image of God?  If so, you're a heretic by the standards of mainstream Christianity.


iama:  I believe that our Creator-God designed human beings as He did, because He had chosen, to incarnate / inflesh as a human being.  It was essential that "the Godhead  fulness" be given a residence within the human being.


Abner1: But none of that means that God couldn't have chosen to make people differently or have let things go down a path to a different physical body.  Having toes instead of claws just isn't essential to the doctrine of salvation in any way.  Your belief that people had to be shaped the way they were because otherwise they wouldn't have looked like Jesus assumes that Jesus *had* to be shaped a certain way and so people had to be shaped a certain way to look like Jesus.  That's apparently part of your doctrine, but it isn't part of mainstream Christian doctrine.



iama:  Your "IF" statement is not relevant, because we already know what our Creator-God created, why He created, and where The Creation is headed.  Yes, had our Creator-God CHOSEN different life-form parameters, certainly, He could have accomplished His purposes. BUT, He didn't!  What IS ESSENTIAL was that human beings be created "in OUR image" and "after OUR likeness." I believe that once the "image" and the "likeness" had been determined "before the foundation of the world," all other UNIVERSE parameters were required / mandated to comply with that which was "OUR image" and "OUR likeness."  The anthropic principle comes to mind.


But with the precious blood of ChristWho verily was foreordained


before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,


Who by Him do believe in God, that raised Him from the dead, and gave Him glory;


that your faith and hope might be in God."



Abner1: That Bible quote doesn't support your beliefs either; Christ being foreordained before the foundation of the world doesn't mean that the *shape* of Christ was foreordained before the foundation of the world, or that God couldn't have foreordained a different shape for humanity.



iama: See above.


I, actually, believe that SINCE eternity is timeless, and SINCE Christ Jesus was conceived, lived, died, resurrected, ascended ~2,000 years ago, that Christ Jesus in His eternal, resurrected human body, was the One Who "walked with Adam and Eve in the cool of the day," spoke to Enoch, "and God took him," spoke to Noah about building the Ark, called Abraham from Ur of the Chaldees,  visited Abraham and Sarah along with two angels and ate food, spoke with Moses on Mt. Sinai, appeared to Joshua as "the Captain of the LORD's hosts," etc. 


Abner1: None of that says a single word about Jesus only being able to come to save us if our physical form was a certain shape, or our physical shapes being foreordained. It appears you don't understand the Bible very well, even the New Testament parts ...


iama: If you combine all relevant Scripture, you find that "in OUR likeness," stated following "in OUR image," is significant.


Abner1: But there's nothing in mainstream Christian doctrine and definitely nothing in Jewish doctrine which says that the likeness is physical.  Since the Jewish God has no body, being made in the physical likeness of the Jewish God is a ridiculous notion.



iama:  Christ Jesus came as "the second Adam," to undo what the first Adam had done, and that being "the second Adam" required "after OUR likeness" to have been determined "from before the foundation of the world." "A body have you prepared Me," and "the Word was made flesh," human flesh, means that the likeness must be physically human as well as all else that makes a human being a human being.


The following speaks of the physical body of Christ Jesus, suffering, as The Lamb of God.


Isa 53:4-6
"Surely He has borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem Him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But He [was] wounded for our transgressions, [He was] bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace [was] upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all."


It is Christ Jesus, God-Son, incarnate, Who was "made in OUR likeness," and THEN, human beings were made in Christ Jesus, Who is "OUR likeness."  The parameters of God-Son, incarnate / Christ Jesus was FIRSTLY decided - He is "OUR likeness," and then we have the statement in Genesis 1: "Let us make man in OUR image and after OUR LIKENESS (Christ Jesus)."


iama: There was no way that Christ Jesus would not incarnate, as He did ~2,000 years ago.


Abner1: Which has nothing to do with the theory of evolution


iama:  It certainly refutes the evolution speculation, which has no purpose evident in its paradigm description.


Abner1: The theory of evolution doesn't say anything about a purpose at all - for *or* against.  Neither does the theory of gravity, the kinetic-molecular theory of gases, or indeed any other scientific theory.  They're all entirely silent about whether or not there is a purpose. Belief in a purpose does not refute any part of science, including the theory of evolution.



iama: Since the evolution-speculation has no statement of PURPOSE either for or against, it doesn't agree with The Bible revelation of our Creator-God's Plan and Purposes.  There is a great contradiction between the statements of The Creation in Genesis, which exposes the speculation as a lie.


Abner1:  But the likeness is spiritual, not physical.  It may be hard for you to believe this, but mainstream Christians do *not* believe that God has a physical body.  You apparently do, which is very odd.  It is very strange that I understand Christian doctrine far better than you do!


iama: Yes, prior to God-Son's incarnation, God-Son was NOT a human being having a human spirit, soul and body.  But being "made of a woman," "made under the law," were the requirements for our Savior.  Christ Jesus / God-Son is since His incarnation, eternally, the God-Man.


Abner1: That's entirely irrelevant to what I said.  Try reading it and perhaps you will see why.



iama:  IF the "likeness" was only spiritual, why did "the Word become flesh"?


I always find the following statement of Christ Jesus significant regarding this point.


At the time of Jesus Christ speaking the following, He was existing on Earth.
Jhn 3:13     
"And no man has ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, [even] the Son of man which is in heaven."


iama: The "likeness" is ALL that we, human beings, are!


Abner1: Not according to mainstream Christian doctrine; according to mainstream Christian doctrine, the likeness is spiritual; God doesn't have a spleen.



iama:  Christ Jesus, God-Son, incarnate, does have a spleen!  He, currently, exists in the eternal realm in His resurrection body-soul-spirit - The God-Man.


iama: Mainstream Christians are of man's church, then!


Abner1: That's really not your decision to make.  You reject the doctrine of mainstream Christianity, and they reject your doctrine, and for similar reasons: because it conflicts with their own hard-won interpretations of Christianity.  No matter how certain you are that you are right and all the other branches of Christianity are wrong, the fact of the matter is that your doctrine is just one among many and the other branches are just as certain of the correctness of their own doctrine as you are of yours.


The rest of your post was irrelevant preaching, not touching in any way on the subject being discussed here.



iama:  "Their own hard-won interpretations of Christianity" are not the criteria for "I will build My Church."  It is The Bible which must decide that which is true and that which is false.  Human beings are not the final authority regarding eternal matters; The Bible's revelations according to God-Holy Spirit opening up our human spirits to the truths He has inspired human recorders to record, is the final authority, upon Earth. 


.

The wonder of Christmas is that the God Who dwelt among us, now, can dwell within us. - Roy Lessin
.
"Father, forgive them for they know not what they do."
.
Justice is receiving what you deserve.
Mercy is NOT receiving what you deserve.
Grace is receiving what you DO NOT deserve.
.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 7:29PM #197
Ken
Posts: 33,860

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:49PM, iamachildofhis wrote:

There is ONLY one Church, and it is the Church which is invisible to us, human beings, presently.  A physical building is called a church building.


Or, more commonly, a church. That's English. 


Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:49PM, iamachildofhis wrote:

The "My Church" to which Christ Jesus was referring was Himself.  The "My Church" Body is Christ Jesus' Body of believers, who would / could proclaim, as Simon Peter did, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."


No kidding. All Christians proclaim that. It isn't limited to your heretical cult.


Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:49PM, iamachildofhis wrote:

Abner1: He certainly wouldn't agree with you that God has a physical body with sweat glands and toes; that's quite heretical.



"The Word was made flesh."  That statement indicates that God-Son, incarnate - Christ Jesus, "made flesh," has a physical body with sweat glands and toes, etc.  Biblically stated, that idea is NOT heretical.


It is. You fail to recognize that the Incarnation was a temporary condition. The Second Person of the Trinity did not have a physical form before the Incarnation and does not have one today.  The First and Third Persons of the Trinity have never had physical forms.




Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 8:49PM #198
iamachildofhis
Posts: 9,983

Apr 22, 2012 -- 12:48PM, Ken wrote:



iama: When Jesus said "And I say also unto you, That you are Peter (Petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build my church," he wasn't referring to himself as a rock. He was referring to Simon Peter.


Ken: Iama is sorely in need of proper spiritual direction.


iama: Simon Peter, revealed to him by "My (Christ Jesus') Father," made the following statement:  "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." 


It is "the Christ, the Son of the living God," the revelation given to Simon Peter, by "My Father," Who is the petra / The Rock "upon which" Christ Jesus, Himself, "will build My church."


Ken: That's not what the text states. It clearly says that the "rock" is Peter. This is the orthodox Christian understanding. You must belong to some sort of heretical fringe cult.


iama: As the two men in the two videos came to realize, we, human beings, are nothing, without Christ Jesus.


Ken: I disagree. And their views are irrelevant to the topic of this thread.



iama:  The DNA codes of all life-forms were CREATED by "the petra" / The Rock of Ages!


Jhn 1:1-5
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not."


Jhn 1:14
"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."


Rev 1:5           
"And from Jesus Christ, [who is] the faithful witness, [and] the first begotten of the dead,"


Rev 1:7           
"Behold, He comes with clouds; and every eye shall see Him, and they [also] which pierced Him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Even so, Amen."


Here is the Apostle John's description of Christ Jesus in the eternal realm; notice the mention of His body parts:


Rev 1:11
"Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What you see, write in a book, and send [it] unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea. And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; And in the midst of the seven candlesticks [one] like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle. His head and [His] hairs [were] white like wool, as white as snow; and His eyes [were] as a flame of fire; And His feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and His voice as the sound of many waters. And He had in His right hand seven stars: and out of His mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and His countenance [was] as the sun shines in his strength. And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. And He laid His right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last: I [am] He that lives, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death."


Christ Jesus will return - this same Jesus:


Act 1:11     
"Which also said, You men of Galilee, why stand you gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as you have seen Him go into heaven."


.

The wonder of Christmas is that the God Who dwelt among us, now, can dwell within us. - Roy Lessin
.
"Father, forgive them for they know not what they do."
.
Justice is receiving what you deserve.
Mercy is NOT receiving what you deserve.
Grace is receiving what you DO NOT deserve.
.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 9:43PM #199
Ken
Posts: 33,860

Apr 22, 2012 -- 8:49PM, iamachildofhis wrote:

The DNA codes of all life-forms were CREATED by "the petra" / The Rock of Ages!


What are you babbling about now?


Here is the Apostle John's description of Christ Jesus in the eternal realm; notice the mention of His body parts:


Rev 1:11
"Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What you see, write in a book, and send [it] unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea. And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; And in the midst of the seven candlesticks [one] like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle. His head and [His] hairs [were] white like wool, as white as snow; and His eyes [were] as a flame of fire; And His feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and His voice as the sound of many waters. And He had in His right hand seven stars: and out of His mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and His countenance [was] as the sun shines in his strength. And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. And He laid His right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last: I [am] He that lives, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death."



The Book of Revelation was not written by the Apostle John. Whoever wrote it was using a deliberately obscure, symbolic style. At best, you might argue that Jesus chose to make himself visible to the author in the rather bizarre image described in Revelation 1:11, but you can hardly argue that he actually looks like that.



Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 22, 2012 - 9:49PM #200
McAtheist
Posts: 7,583

iama:  The DNA codes of all life-forms were CREATED by "the petra" / The Rock of Ages!


But not in the whacky fashion described by YECism ---- the strong evidence that contradicts that set of stories fully discredits YECism as non-factual, non-historical and non-scientific.  From a factual/scientific point of view, it makes as much sense to believe in Greek mythology.


Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 20 of 22  •  Prev 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook