bmks270 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

So you believe Christ was a mere prophet?

I want to understand.

---

I believe he was an embodied being/consciousness visiting Earth, distinct from the Father, with the purpose to educate and draw the human spirit/consciousness nearer to the Father.

---

So no Incarnation?

---

Depends how you define incarnation. Can you restate the question using different language?

---

I assume this question could be restated: Was Mary a virgin who conceived Jesus through the Holy Spirit, not a man.

Gator03 said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

So you believe Christ was a mere prophet?

I want to understand.

---

I believe he was an embodied being/consciousness visiting Earth, distinct from the Father, with the purpose to educate and draw the human spirit/consciousness nearer to the Father.

---

So no Incarnation?

---

Depends how you define incarnation. Can you restate the question using different language?

---

I assume this question could be restated: Was Mary a virgin who conceived Jesus through the Holy Spirit, not a man.

---

Yes, I do agree with that.

OK, then next question would be is Jesus Christ the Logos that is referenced in John 1 who has existed before creation?

I first read this sentence "Was Mary a virgin who conceived Jesus through the Holy Spirit, not a man."
as "Was Mary a virgin, who conceived Jesus through the Holy Spirit, not a man."
And agreed: yes Mary was not a man. Grammar is fun.

Gator03 said:

---

OK, then next question would be is Jesus Christ the Logos that is referenced in John 1 who has existed before creation?

---

That's a more difficult question.
Jesus existed and was close to the Father before coming to Earth as man, I believe that.

However with respect to the trinity, Jesus here refers to himself and the Father as two.

John 8:14
Jesus answered and said to them, "Even if I bear witness of Myself, My witness is true, for I know where I came from and where I am going; but you do not know where I come from and where I am going. 15 You judge according to the flesh; I judge no one. 16 And yet if I do judge, My judgment is true; for I am not alone, but I am with the Father who sent Me. 17 It is also written in your law that the testimony of two men is true. 18 I am One who bears witness of Myself, and the Father who sent Me bears witness of Me."

More grammar fun:

"For many will come in my name saying I am the Christ and will mislead many."
"For many will come in my name, saying I am the Christ, and will mislead many."
"For many will come in my name, saying, I am the Christ, and will mislead many."
"For many will come in my name saying, 'I am the Christ,' and will mislead many."

I am with my Father who sent me

dermdoc said:

---

I am not alone, but I am with my Father who sent me

---

Here is talking about judgement.

Quote:

---

Jesus existed and was close to the Father before coming to Earth as man, I believe that.

---

How do you square this with John 1?

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with (toward - pros) God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God....And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us."

Quote:

---

However with respect to the trinity, Jesus here refers to himself and the Father as two.

---

It's really frustrating to see people continually argue against the Trinity, when they're not actually arguing against the Trinity.

Jesus explicitly says "I and the Father are One" and "I do not ask for these only, but also for those believing in Me through their word, that all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You, that they also may be in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And I have given them the glory which You have given Me, so that they may be one, as We are one I in them, and You in Methat they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me and loved them even as You loved Me."

It is as much of an error to say "Jesus and the Father are the same thing in every way" as it is to say "Jesus and the Father are two distinct things in every way." Both views contradict scripture.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Quote:

---

Jesus existed and was close to the Father before coming to Earth as man, I believe that.

---

How do you square this with John 1?

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with (toward - pros) God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God....And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us."

Quote:

---

However with respect to the trinity, Jesus here refers to himself and the Father as two.

---

It's really frustrating to see people continually argue against the Trinity, when they're not actually arguing against the Trinity.

Jesus explicitly says "I and the Father are One" and "I do not ask for these only, but also for those believing in Me through their word, that all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You, that they also may be in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And I have given them the glory which You have given Me, so that they may be one, as We are one I in them, and You in Methat they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me and loved them even as You loved Me."

It is as much of an error to say "Jesus and the Father are the same thing in every way" as it is to say "Jesus and the Father are two distinct things in every way." Both views contradict scripture.

---

Using consistent logic would require then that you profess I am God and you are God, and we are all one, not a trinity but a collective of all beings. It is more logically consistent based on scripture than limiting the connection to three.

I think the only consistent views are a). All are a part of the one, or that b). Jesus, the Father, Holy Spirit are separate.

Quote:

---

"The King will reply, 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.'

---

St Irenaeus is a good resource for this type of discussion. He was an ante-Nicene father, writing in the 200s. So his writing lacks the specificity of the baptized philosophical language that was developed to express the ineffable mysteries of our faith. Nevertheless, he speaks clearly and powerfully on the Trinity. The best case is in "Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching."

He writes:

Quote:

---

This then is the order of the rule of our faith, and the foundation of the building, and the stability of our conversation: God, the Father, not made, not material, invisible; one God, the creator of all things: this is the first point of our faith. The second point is: The Word of God, Son of God, Christ Jesus our Lord, who was manifested to the prophets according to the form of their prophesying and according to the method of the dispensation of the Father: through whom all things were made; who also at the end of the times, to complete and gather up all things, was made man among men, visible and tangible, in order to abolish death and show forth life and produce a community of union between God and man. And the third point is: The Holy Spirit, through whom the prophets prophesied, and the fathers learned the things of God, and the righteous were led forth into the way of righteousness; and who in the end of the times was poured out in a new way a upon mankind in all the earth, renewing man unto God. And for this reason the baptism of our regeneration proceeds through these three points: God the Father bestowing on us regeneration through His Son by the Holy Spirit.

---

After this he goes through a very thorough reading of the OT, the prefiguring of Christ in the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets.

Before moving into the action of Christ on earth, he writes quite extensively on the divinity of Christ, beginning with:

Quote:

---

So then the Father is Lord and the Son is Lord, and the Father is God and the Son is God; for that which is begotten of God is God. And so in the substance and power of His being there is shown forth one God; but there is also according to the economy of our redemption both Son and Father. Because to created things the Father of all is invisible and unapproachable, therefore those who are to draw near to God must have their access to the Father through the Son.

---

He supports this with Psalm 45:6, Psalm 110 (the most-quoted OT in the NT, incidentally) Psalm 2:7, Isaiah 49:5. He continues...

Quote:

---

Here, first of all, is seen that the Son of God pre-existed, from the fact that the Father spoke with Him, and before He was born revealed Him to men: and, next, that He must needs be born a man among men; and that the same God forms Him from the womb, that is, that of the Spirit of God He should be born; and that He is Lord of all men, and Savior of them that believe on Him, both Jews and others...And that the Son of the Father calls Himself servant, (this is) on account of His subjection to the Father: for among men also every son is servant of his father.

That Christ, then, being Son of God before all the world, is with the Father; and being with the Father is also nigh and close and joined unto mankind; and is King of all, because the Father has subjected all things unto Him; and Saviour of them that believe on Him, such things do the Scriptures declare. For it is not feasible and possible to enumerate every scripture in order; and from these you may understand the others also which have been spoken in like manner, believing in Christ, and seeking understanding and comprehension from God, so as to understand what has been spoken by the prophets.

This Christ, who was with the Father, being the Word of the Father, was thereafter to be made flesh and become man and undergo the process of birth and be born of a virgin and dwell among men, the Father of all bringing about His Incarnation...

---

In other words, St Irenaeus preaches the Trinity and Christ from the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets. Just as the Apostles did. Anyone simply reading the NT will badly miss the bulk of the witness to the Father and His Son Jesus Christ.

If you haven't read it before, it's very interesting.
http://www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu/03d/0130-0202,_Iraeneus,_Demonstration_Of_The_Apostolic_Preaching,_EN.pdf

Quote:

---

Using consistent logic would require then that you profess I am God and you are God, and we are all one, not a trinity but a collective of all beings. It's not hard to understand why people believe in universal consciousness, it is more logically consistent based on scripture than limiting the connection to three.

---

To begin with, God is not subject to logic. He is beyond knowing and not-knowing, understanding and mystery. "To whom will you liken God? To what image will you compare Him?" "To whom will you liken Me or count Me equal? To whom will you compare Me, that we should be alike?" God is like nothing we know or can fathom.


There is no way a creature, something in the created order, can ever be what God is by nature. God has no beginning or end, He is outside of all creation, He is the cause of all things, of creation, and all that was made was created by and through and for the Word of God. Therefore no, we are not one in the sense of a collective of all beings as Trinity. This is why the Word of God's pre-existence with God, before becoming flesh, is the key teaching here.

You are teaching a blasphemy that is close to a wonderful truth though! This is the beautiful joy of the Gospel and the entirety of our Lord's action in a nutshell. Human beings were created for union -- oneness - with God. To become by grace what God is by nature. This is the oneness we are offered!

Christ Jesus is the firstfuit. Everywhere in the NT when it speaks of Christ as firstfruit it is singular in the Greek. (No idea why KJV and others use plural, maybe it just sounded better to them in English). But He is the firstfruit, the first of many sons. This is the whole reason He became like us - like us in every way but sin. And yes, this is the whole reason He became sin for us - not a sinner, not only a sin offering, but sin. This is why He died. So that by being joined to Him we may become One with the Father by grace the way He and the Father are One by nature. Or, to use St Paul's lingo, He is the Son and the Heir (the only begotten Son), but we become sons and heirs by adoption.

So yes, all are called to be part of the One who Is, the Existing One, the I AM. That's why it says, God will be All in All. This is the great teleological purpose of humanity!

Quote:

---

I think the only consistent views are a). All are a part of the one, or that b). Jesus, the Father, Holy Spirit are separate.

---

This is a false dichotomy confessing different things. As I said, saying the are completely separate is unsupportable in the scriptures. Saying they are completely the same is also. There is a God. He has a Word, who was always with Him, whom He converses with, whom He sent, who became Flesh. He has a Spirit, He is never without His Word, or His Spirit. The Word is begotten of God; the Spirit proceeds from God. This is what the scriptures say. These are true before and apart from creation. So they are one in their uncreatedness, one in their divinity, one in what they are.

The same exercise could be shown about groups that have specific identities. Are all human beings one? Yes, in some ways we very much confess that all humans are the same. They all have souls, they all have intrinsic worth and value as humans, there are things all humans have and are by virtue solely of their humanity. Are all human beings separate? Also yes, by virtue of their unique personhood.

What we are called to be is joined to the divine nature, through communion - partakers of the divine nature, as St Peter puts it. Then, through Christ, we become One as He and the Father are One - us in Him, and Him in the Father. Everything by grace what He is by nature. This is the great joy of the gospel.

One other thing - there's a certain kind of arrogance to the position that we can have logical certitude about anything, that we can categorically rule out ontological truths based on our limited understanding. We can barely affirm truths about commonplace things - and in some sense we can't categorically affirm actual Truth, only what is true in a practical way - much less transcendent realities that exist outside of the created order.

"That's not logical so it can't be" is simply a foolish way of looking at the world. Is light a particle or a wave? Are objects solid? Is it mass or energy? Yes, and no. Our understanding is a model that interprets reality, and underdefines reality, and poorly expresses reality. Logic itself is like this. Categories and syllogisms are only as robust as the capability to create sets, and definitions, and properties to on which to act.

Anything God, anything that is before and outside of creation, by necessity is so utterly different that to subject it to adjectives, categories, and limited statements in an ontological way is a waste of time, it is complete nonsense. Is God One? Is He Multiple? Yes and No to both, He is beyond Oneness and Multiplicity because both of those things are in some way understandable conceptually and He is beyond concept. It is nonsense to say "God can't be three and one because logic."

It's more consistency in application of terms than pure logical conclusions.

Jesus says God is all of us. Give to God what is Gods. Yet we obviously acknowledge our differences to God and Jesus and don't make an equivalency.

Jesus was man, servant to the Father, bound to a physical matter, the spirit is not of physical matter. I think these differences are sort of dismissed by the trinity doctrine.

bmks270 said:

---

It's more consistency in application of terms than pure logical conclusions.

Jesus says God is all of us. Give to God what is Gods. Yet we obviously acknowledge our differences to God and Jesus and don't make an equivalency.

Jesus was man, servant to the Father, bound to a physical matter, the spirit is not of physical matter. I think these differences are sort of dismissed by the trinity doctrine.

---

Where does Jesus say God is all of us? I'm not familiar with that.

And how does "give to God what is God's" relevant?

Jesus was man. Yes, this is a confession of the church. As Hebrews said, He was made like us in every way except sin.
Bound to matter, yes this is what the word incarnation means. Enfleshed, become flesh.

The spirit is not matter, yes, God is spirit.

They are not "sort of" dismissed, they're not dismissed at all. They're a key part, this is what the incarnation is. There is the Word, and the Word is God, and the Word became flesh, as St John says. Or as St Paul said, being in the form of God He took the form of a servant.

Again, y'all don't have a problem with the doctrine of the Trinity. Y'all have a problem with the Incarnation.