- This topic is empty.
- Posts
I tried one more time to post something that would actually make a difference in people's lives. It was ignored again. It seems no one is really interested in if their teaching actually does anything to help them or not.
Too many on here ae doctrinal rather then functional. Doctrinal rather then relational. Doctrinal rather then scriptural.
i was right to leave before and only boredom brought me back. Boredom is better then heart break over seeing all these people missing what God has for them.
Good bye —
Brother,
Be encouraged. Press on towards the prize! We have not yet attained the prize but we work towards it.
Not everyone will embrace your teaching. Maybe no one will buy your book? What then? Never give up sharing and living the gospel. Your reward will always be in heaven (paradise)….rarely is your reward here (on earth).
The beauty of God's word is that he wants people to seek him out. God never meant his word to be spoon-fed to his children. In my humble opinion, God never meant for church to be so easy, or for his word to be conveniently bound in one book (at your fingertips). God's word is everywhere – including here on these forums – but you have to seek it out – and that through God's holy Spirit that teaches us.
You may never know who you help, Martian. But if you're here to change someone's mind and that is your goal…..you may be dissapointed in every venue you choose, including life. Only God can call his children into truth and into loving relationship. You're his hands, feet, voice….keep sharing the gospel….I encourage you this morning. Look up, brother! God is smiling on your efforts.
Martian,
I tried to talk to you about this in the dualism thread but you just called me irrational and refused to talk to me. Do you want me to respond to your functionality post?
Tim
Quote (Tim2 @ June 02 2007,05:21) Martian, I tried to talk to you about this in the dualism thread but you just called me irrational and refused to talk to me. Do you want me to respond to your functionality post?
Tim
not interestedQuote (Not3in1 @ June 02 2007,02:46) Brother, Be encouraged. Press on towards the prize! We have not yet attained the prize but we work towards it.
Not everyone will embrace your teaching. Maybe no one will buy your book? What then? Never give up sharing and living the gospel. Your reward will always be in heaven (paradise)….rarely is your reward here (on earth).
The beauty of God's word is that he wants people to seek him out. God never meant his word to be spoon-fed to his children. In my humble opinion, God never meant for church to be so easy, or for his word to be conveniently bound in one book (at your fingertips). God's word is everywhere – including here on these forums – but you have to seek it out – and that through God's holy Spirit that teaches us.
You may never know who you help, Martian. But if you're here to change someone's mind and that is your goal…..you may be dissapointed in every venue you choose, including life. Only God can call his children into truth and into loving relationship. You're his hands, feet, voice….keep sharing the gospel….I encourage you this morning. Look up, brother! God is smiling on your efforts.
not interested. This is in no way a ministry. It is philosophical debate with no real meat other then head knowledge. Not interested in wasting my time.If you are not interested why are you reading this post? Why are you responding at all? I think you are interested but are puffed up with pride.
I disagree with you – this is a ministry.
You're in my prayers.
Quote (Not3in1 @ June 02 2007,08:46) If you are not interested why are you reading this post? Why are you responding at all? I think you are interested but are puffed up with pride. I disagree with you – this is a ministry.
You're in my prayers.
Actually I was reading them to see if anyone would change their mind and wish to dicuss the reality of doctrine.BTW thanks for judging my motives. Did God give you that position or did you usurp it.
Quote Actually I was reading them to see if anyone would change their mind and wish to dicuss the reality of doctrine. Anyone but me?
Quote (martian @ June 02 2007,09:03) Quote (Not3in1 @ June 02 2007,08:46) If you are not interested why are you reading this post? Why are you responding at all? I think you are interested but are puffed up with pride. I disagree with you – this is a ministry.
You're in my prayers.
Actually I was reading them to see if anyone would change their mind and wish to dicuss the reality of doctrine.BTW thanks for judging my motives. Did God give you that position or did you usurp it.
m42You show your true colors again!
You come here dishonestly disguising your self as your own friend because you had such a bad attitude and critical condescending spirit that no body wanted to talk to you before.
Your fruit is proof that your heretical doctrine is made by carnal man.
I sincerely pray for you that you would not continue in this kind of critical and condescending spirit.
Tim2 I think has been very gracious and sincere in his talks to you, and like before if he or anyone else dosnt agree with you then you begin to come across with a critical and judgmental spirit.
Your doctrine obviously is not functional!
Quote (Tim2 @ June 02 2007,09:07) Quote Actually I was reading them to see if anyone would change their mind and wish to dicuss the reality of doctrine. Anyone but me?
Tim,
I mean no disrespect or personal judgment of you. I suspect that what you do you do innocently enough. I do believe that you are so entrenched in your doctrine that you are refusing to face rational thought because it will discredit your doctrine.I will explain one more time. —
The nature of a being bespeaks of it’s character, will, personality, soul and tendencies to act in a certain manner. God and man have two different natures. They are different species of life, both in physical and character traits. Even the opposite possibilities of behaviour make it impossible for them to exist in the same creature. To say that they do would be like saying I have a pet that is both fully cat and fully dog. As I said before, you say that to someone and they will lock you up for being irrational.When you say that Christ has more then one nature you are defining a being that would have two opposite abilities to act and two different tendencies to respond. You will also imply that Christ would have two different wills, souls, personalities, and characters. This being would not be functional. This being would have as it is called today Multiple personality disorder.
We are to become like Christ. Nowhere in scripture does it say we are to become like the human nature of Christ. Nowhere does scripture even say Christ has a dual nature.
You say Christ is human and yet augment His nature with a dual nature. This makes Him different then the rest of humanity. As I posted before and you admitted that you do not have a dual nature so you are different then Christ. It is not rational to say something is different and yet the same. That is an irrational statement. Two opposite natures cannot be equal. One being cannot be temptable and not temptable. One creature cannot be non failable and failabe at that same time. This is illogical and irrational. As long as you persist in this irrational stand there is no discussing the matter with you.
I will not discuss the matter in the realms of illusuionary analogies on philosophical mathmtics. These have nothing to do with the reality of the situation.
Untill you admit that your belief is irrational there is no discussion to have.
Hi Martian,
I said some of this in your function post but I'll try to answer some of your comments more directly here.
I agree that believing in a person with two natures that do not mix is irrational, if both of the natures are of created beings. The natures of two created beings cannot coexist in one person without mixing and reacting. I agree. But I think you would agree that God cannot react with or be changed by creation, no matter how immanent in creation He becomes. And I think you would agree that God can sovereignly refrain creation from being changed by His immediate presence. So if He becomes immanent with all of His deity in Jesus, there is no way He can be changed by the human nature of Jesus. And God can sovereignly cause the human nature of Jesus not to be changed by His presence.
Quote When you say that Christ has more then one nature you are defining a being that would have two opposite abilities to act and two different tendencies to respond. You will also imply that Christ would have two different wills, souls, personalities, and characters. This being would not be functional. This being would have as it is called today Multiple personality disorder. Perhaps this would be the case if God indwelt normal sinful flesh, but remember that Jesus in his humanity did not have a sin nature. Jesus was not corrupted in his flesh by the fall of Adam, the way every other human is. Now I believe the pre-fall disposition of humanity is to obey God as humble servants, which is exactly what Jesus did. The only issue that would come up is temptation, but pre-fall humanity is capable of being tempted, considering whether or not to sin, and then deciding not to sin. Just as Jesus did.
Quote This makes Him different then the rest of humanity. The only reason we believe Jesus is different from the rest of humanity in certain respects is because He is said to be different in the Bible. The Bible says that He laid the foundation of the earth and upholds all things by the Word of His power. These aren't human attributes. We have to take these Scriptures into account, and I would very much like to hear how you understand them.
Tim
Quote (martian @ June 02 2007,02:14) I tried one more time to post something that would actually make a difference in people's lives. It was ignored again. It seems no one is really interested in if their teaching actually does anything to help them or not. Too many on here ae doctrinal rather then functional. Doctrinal rather then relational. Doctrinal rather then scriptural.
i was right to leave before and only boredom brought me back. Boredom is better then heart break over seeing all these people missing what God has for them.
Good bye —
Good bye!Quote As I said before, you say that to someone and they will lock you up for being irrational. No one said the trinity was rational. Well, I'm sure someone did, but they weren't being reasonable.
Quote (Tim2 @ June 02 2007,15:30) Hi Martian, I said some of this in your function post but I'll try to answer some of your comments more directly here.
I agree that believing in a person with two natures that do not mix is irrational, if both of the natures are of created beings. The natures of two created beings cannot coexist in one person without mixing and reacting. I agree. But I think you would agree that God cannot react with or be changed by creation, no matter how immanent in creation He becomes. And I think you would agree that God can sovereignly refrain creation from being changed by His immediate presence. So if He becomes immanent with all of His deity in Jesus, there is no way He can be changed by the human nature of Jesus. And God can sovereignly cause the human nature of Jesus not to be changed by His presence.
Quote When you say that Christ has more then one nature you are defining a being that would have two opposite abilities to act and two different tendencies to respond. You will also imply that Christ would have two different wills, souls, personalities, and characters. This being would not be functional. This being would have as it is called today Multiple personality disorder. Perhaps this would be the case if God indwelt normal sinful flesh, but remember that Jesus in his humanity did not have a sin nature. Jesus was not corrupted in his flesh by the fall of Adam, the way every other human is. Now I believe the pre-fall disposition of humanity is to obey God as humble servants, which is exactly what Jesus did. The only issue that would come up is temptation, but pre-fall humanity is capable of being tempted, considering whether or not to sin, and then deciding not to sin. Just as Jesus did.
Quote This makes Him different then the rest of humanity. The only reason we believe Jesus is different from the rest of humanity in certain respects is because He is said to be different in the Bible. The Bible says that He laid the foundation of the earth and upholds all things by the Word of His power. These aren't human attributes. We have to take these Scriptures into account, and I would very much like to hear how you understand them.
Tim
I agree that believing in a person with two natures that do not mix is irrational, if both of the natures are of created beings. The natures of two created beings cannot coexist in one person without mixing and reacting. I agree. But I think you would agree that God cannot react with or be changed by creation, no matter how immanent in creation He becomes. And I think you would agree that God can sovereignly refrain creation from being changed by His immediate presence. So if He becomes immanent with all of His deity in Jesus, there is no way He can be changed by the human nature of Jesus. And God can sovereignly cause the human nature of Jesus not to be changed by His presence.Response –
What philosophical nonsense and mumbo jumbo. What are you going to do next pull a rabbit out of your hat?Sure creation cannot change the nature of God and God can choose to refrain the nature of creation from being changed by His presence. This is true in all of creation except man. Your analogy of the burning bush does not hold water because a bush has no soul or free will.. God took a risk with His creation. He gave them the ability to reject Him and reject living according the image and likeness God designed Him to have. This again brings us back to function. You cannot have the kind Christ you describe without causing a change in His free will. In order for this creature you propose to exist God’s nature of non temptability must prevail. Since this is contrary to the nature of humanity God would have to change the human nature of the creature away from the temptability of humanity to something else. Any other conclusion is irrational. This being cannot be temptable and non temptable at the same time. The most primary ingredient of God’s intentions with creation is that man of HIS OWN FREE WILL would chose to follow God. No matter how much mumbo jumbo you pour on it you can never get away from the fact that one creature, one consciousness one being, one person cannot be temptable and non temptable at the same time. This is also true of failability. No matter how many natures you conjure. No matter how many mystical formulas you squirt out. No matter how much Greek philosophical nonsense you spew out. The result is always the same.
As to your posts on other threads in which you throw out supposed proof that Christ created the universe ect ect. I do not have to deal with them in the least. WHY? Because your conclusion is dysfunctional so your scripture interpretation and process is wrong.
There is no point in discussing the subtle way in which the Hebrew mindset and culture wrote in ways we cannot filter through our western culture. Those like you especially, being so inundated with Greek thinking would never understand it. You insist on being irratinal and then hiding it in supposed intellectual/philosophical mumbo jumbo, hoping the more simple minded will assume you are correct just by the intelecutal falsly called knowledge. How very sad for you and those you speak to. I will be praying that those to whom you push this nonsense will see through it as clearly as I do.I am not inclined to point out all the dead ends you insist on traveling. If you are so stubborn to continue turning that way then live in your ignorance, lack of reason and loss.
Hi Martian,
Quote The most primary ingredient of God’s intentions with creation is that man of HIS OWN FREE WILL would chose to follow God. Where does it say this in the Bible? Philippians 2:7 says that Jesus took the form of a bond-servant. I don't believe that a bond-servant has free will, but must obey his owner.
Quote In order for this creature you propose to exist God’s nature of non temptability must prevail. No, God's nature of not sinning must prevail. There is a difference between temptation and sin. Jesus was tempted. But the author of Hebrews immediately adds “without sin.” He was capable of being tempted but not sinning. The Bible never says Jesus was capable of sinning. Do you think Jesus was capable of sinning?
Quote one person cannot be temptable and non temptable at the same time Well, Jesus was temptable. We know this because He was tempted. Just like He could hunger and thirst and die. I think the union of God and man in Jesus is demonstrated by all these things. He was hungry for forty days, but survived. He died, but rose to life. He was tempted, but did not sin. This might bring into question His free will, as you say, but I don't recall any Scriptures emphasizing the free will of Jesus while He was a man on earth.
So, to wrap it up, there is no reason why Jesus couldn't function the way He did if He were both God and man. For the nature of His manhood was not sinful, but it was to obey God as a bond-servant. He could be tested and tempted, but He could pass the test and not sin.
If Jesus were not God and man, then wouldn't He be essentially the same as Adam? Then it would have been possible for Him to have sinned at some point, just as Adam did?
Still waiting for you to explain how a mere man created the heavens and the earth.
Tim
Hi Tim2:
I know that you are addressing Martian, but if I may give my understanding.
First Phillipians says “he took the form of a bond servant”. If he took it that indicates that he has a free will to take it or not to take it. He did it for our sakes.
Secondly you say:
If Jesus were not God and man, then wouldn't He be essentially the same as Adam? Then it would have been possible for Him to have sinned at some point, just as Adam did?
Hebrews 2:17
WHEREFORE IN ALL THINGS IT BEHOVED HIM TO BE MADE LIKE UNTO HIS BRETHREN (THIS INDICATES THAT HE WAS CABABALE OF SINNING JUST AS WE ARE CAPABLE), that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
2:18
For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.And you say to Martian:
Still waiting for you to explain how a mere man created the heavens and the earth.
The answer is that he didn't as the following scripture shows plainly.
Hebrews 1
1:1
God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
1:2
Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;God Bless
Hi 94,
He who was begotten of God existed and then was made like his brethren.
Look at the sequential order of Heb 1
” 1God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:
4Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
5For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
6And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.”
Where does it say this in the Bible? Philippians 2:7 says that Jesus took the form of a bond-servant. I don't believe that a bond-servant has free will, but must obey his owner.
Response –
What you believe or your opinion is not relavent. Are you going to tell me that bond servant/slave has no free will? Free will entitles the person to choose in which way they will act. A slave chooses to obey his master. He is not a robot that is preprogrammed to do as the master orders. That’a not a slave that is a robot. Again non human.Your statements become more and more irrational. Now you deny free will?
Quote
In order for this creature you propose to exist God’s nature of non temptability must prevail.
No, God's nature of not sinning must prevail. There is a difference between temptation and sin. Jesus was tempted. But the author of Hebrews immediately adds “without sin.” He was capable of being tempted but not sinning. The Bible never says Jesus was capable of sinning. Do you think Jesus was capable of sinning?Response –
Are you going to sit there straight faced and tell me there can be temptation without the capability of sinning? Talk about irrational. Of course Jesus was capable of sinning. Without the capacity to sin there is no temptation.Quote
one person cannot be temptable and non temptable at the same time
Well, Jesus was temptable. We know this because He was tempted. Just like He could hunger and thirst and die. I think the union of God and man in Jesus is demonstrated by all these things. He was hungry for forty days, but survived. He died, but rose to life. He was tempted, but did not sin. This might bring into question His free will, as you say, but I don't recall any Scriptures emphasizing the free will of Jesus while He was a man on earth.Response –
YOU ARE HONESTLY GOING TO TELL ME THAT JESUS HAD NO FREE WILL? WHY DID HE SAY “NOT MY WILL BUT THINE BE DONE”. IF HE HAD NO WILL OF HIS OWN THAT STATEMENT WOULD MAKE NO SENSE. If Jesus had no free will then he was not capable of sin and therefore not able to be tempted. Temptation involves a choice between what is right and wrong. Without free will there is no choice. There is no choice involved. He would have no choice but to be righteous. AGAIN NON HUMAN.You say –
So, to wrap it up, there is no reason why Jesus couldn't function the way He did if He were both God and man.
RESPOPNSE – BINGO!!! YOU FINALLY SAID IT!!! JESUS IS BOTH GOD AND MAN. THAT IS THE ONLY CONCLUSSION THAT CAN COME FROM YOUR DOCTRINE. THAT MAKES JESUS NON HUMAN. I AM NOT GOD AND MAN AND NEITHER ARE YOU.YOU SAY –
For the nature of His manhood was not sinful, but it was to obey God as a bond-servant. He could be tested and tempted, but He could pass the test and not sin.If Jesus were not God and man, then wouldn't He be essentially the same as Adam? Then it would have been possible for Him to have sinned at some point, just as Adam did?
Response – What test? Without free will or the capabiblity to sin there is no test.
Response – That is the whole point. If Jesus a full man with the same capabilities as us to fail and sin could do it then so can we. Our past sins forgiven as far as from the East to the West and overcoming to the point of being sinless. Do the terms second Adam ring a bell with you?
Again if Jesus was incapable of sin then He is not human. He does not have human temptability or failability. Without the capacity to sin there can be no temptation. Without the capacity to sin Jesus is not human. You just invalidated all of the plan of God. No matter what street you go down if you hold onto the dual nature concept it leads to the same wrong conclusion. The same kind of dead end. Now you have had to come to the statement that Jesus was not capable of sin. All of the verses pertaining to overcoming as Christ overcame the world have no meaning. According to you Christ did not overcome sin or the world. He did not have to. The would could not have overcome Him because He was not capable of sin. OUTLANDISH.
Still waiting for you to explain how a mere man created the heavens and the earth.
Response – You can wait till the cows come home. I am not going to try to get you to understand Hebrew concepts till you are capable of thinking rationally. You are not scriptural you are doctrinal. Your scriptural interpretation is subject to your doctrine. If it lines up great if it does not then we will make up some irrational statements, hide them in flowery philosophical terms and basically go on in your mystical reverie. Your doctrine and tradition supersedes scripture and reason. You are not reasonable or rational in your approach to truth but rather insist that all truth fit within your preconceived idea of doctrine. If it doesn’t just make something up. Better yet others have been doing this for 1200 years lets just use their irrational made up philosophies. We can even try to milk it’s age as some sort of proof of it’s validity.
I want the rest of the board to observe what is happening here and understand why I am fed up with the nonsense. The irrational statements made by Tim continue to compound till one outlandish belief must be piled upon another to try to prove a doctrine that cannot be explained in a meaningful or rational way. It is mystical philosophy outside of reality. He continues to attempt to drag me back to the so-called scriptural proofs because the realms of function and reason will shoot his doctrine down. A person can misuse scripture in unreasonable and irrational ways, but the end conclusions will always find them out. It has been this way from the inception of the Trinity Doctrine in 325. One council after another trying to find some philosophy that a reasonable person cannot see through. A philosophy to attempt to explain a rhetoric that cannot be stated in a meaningful way. A doctrine that cannot stand up to reason or functionality. Once you get a person to understand that their philosophy is wrong they “might” be willing to look at scripture without reading their philosophy into it.
This thread started because Martian wanted to share what a waste of time this board really is. May I suggest if you want to continue meaningful debates that you move to a thread where others can find you more easily. As it stands now, this thread has one title of, “Waste of time.”
It would be a shame for others not to be able to locate the specific teaching you guys are discussing.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
