They do get really passionate about that pre-Trib doctrine! I’ll never forget the first time I experienced the wrath of a Pre-Trib believer when I dared discuss my views which were different.
David I had thought for 2009, you should host a conference. You could call it the Naked Pastors Convention. I would come and be totally prepared to go naked. Sounds better than national pastors convention, it would have to be somewhere hot to combat the difficulties of shrinkage that take place in colder climes!!!!!
If theres only one God then why call it the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. I dont know about your math but for me thats called 3. But then again what do I know about Christian math.
Those who claim Jesus ‘is not God’ are wrong, and those who say He is’ just one way’ are wrong.
TitforTat,
You got that right! The Trinity is surely a mysterious doctrine and one that (I believe) no one can truly get their head around. But when Jesus says that, “I and the Father are one…I believe it. The scriptures do not mention the Trinity by name…but there are references to it. The baptism of Jesus for one.
Steve…consider this scenario?…someone comes to yr church wanting to find a place to worship and fellowship with other believers…you soon come to admire this person’s remarkable love and compassion for their family,friends ,the congregation and even those who are known to be antagonistic toward the faith…one day,after a brief discussion,you discover that this person, though a believer in God,claims not to believe in the deity of Christ,but claims to find certain Christological beliefs more mythical than historically true,albeit they find the core of the gospel story to be helpful in their faith.
I’d take it slow. Talk to him or her about it when THEY brought it up. Not push them out. And hope that they wouyld continue to come and put themselves in the path of the Living Word of God and that the Word would grab hold of them.
We actually have a full blown atheist that semi-regularily attends our worship service.
Only the pastor and I know about it (to my knowledge). But what the hey…it’s great that he comes to church…for whatever reason. He just might hear something!
The atheist man is from the old Soviet Union. The pastor and I and this gentleman were talking about Christ Jesus one day and the guy blurts out that he doesn’t believe any of it!
We ask him, “why do you come to church then?”.
He says with a strong Russian accent…”Tradition!”
The pastor and I looked at each each in astonishment and then continued our conversation as if he had never revealed that info. to us.
He still comes to church and we don’t say boo to him about it. We hope that one day, the Holy Spirit will say ‘BOO!’ to him… or whatever…
If theres only one God then why call it the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. I dont know about your math but for me thats called 3. But then again what do I know about Christian math.
Hell yeah man! Why those oldies who figured out the Trinity thingy stuck with it? Isn’t it obvious that people don’t generally dig what they don’t understand or can’t imagine?
It would’ve been so much easier for us if they would just do Arianism, Modalism, or stuff like that!
Those old fellas just didn’t get it, that facts don’t really matter as long as they’re easy!
I can’t help ,but notice yr words…”put themselves in the path of the Living Word of God and that the Word would grab hold of them.”
It seems that you think, despite the obvious fruit of the Spirit in our imagined subject,that something is missing and that something is correct theology or to be more specific, particular beliefs. Is it possible in yr world to think that a person can have an authentic and soul-enriching faith and have a different theology, slightly or completely different.Jesus seemed to welcome many into the kingdom for much less.
I think there is a problem and I’m not sure how to articulate it,but here goes.For some it appears, despite what they might have read that wd suggest a different view,that ‘God wrote a Book”. In itself,that can work for some,but often I see many that have their favorite chapters.It’s like rather than play the game on open ice,what many want is to play table hockey where the players can be controlled by those push rods.They all look the same,they can be turned the same way, and of course Paul is the only ref allowed ,if there are linesman,then they have to agree with him.This is the game I see played over and over and over.
But,I hear there’s a rumour of other games played elsewhere,where the players aren’t attached to the controlling interests and are free to think and make up their own plays.As long as they ‘heartfully’ play the game,it’s a beautiful thing to watch…almost makes ‘ya wanna strap on the blades and join’em.
Zefi,,,I wasn’t sure if you were being sarcastic or not…I’ll assume not
You said….”Isn’t it obvious that people don’t generally dig what they don’t understand or can’t imagine? ” and…”Those old fellas just didn’t get it, that facts don’t really matter as long as they’re easy!”
I wd disagree…if you want facts-we have science,but theology’s ‘modus operandi’ ,like art ,includes the imagination.If it doesn’t work for you,there are other galleries.
Heh. Only you people in the free world would have the opportunity to talk about all these stuff. I guess that’s a good thing. Somewhat.
I wd disagree…if you want facts-we have science,but theology’s ‘modus operandi’ ,like art ,includes the imagination.If it doesn’t work for you,there are other galleries.
I agree with you. God does not save us on the basis of good theology.
But good theology is important to keep us centered on the Word (which is Christ).
As a Lutheran, I too, have my favorite books (games) in the bible. All the ones that are Christ centered (Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, the gospels, 1st Peter, etc.). When we do theology, we see that Christ is at the center of scripture. Bu playing other games, we can get away from Christ and His work for us into the game of our work for Him…which in my opinion, is not the story and which can lead to legalism and self-righteousness.
So, we don’t jump on people for bad theology, but we do argue for good theology and for putting Christ first in everything.
St. Paul tells us that the gospel actually is the power of God, so we want to have everyone in it’s path (the gospel being that Christ loves , and forgives sinners). By hearing the gospel, people are transformed…not by anything we say or do, but by HIm and Him alone.
Thanks, Faithlessinfatima! (great handle, by the way)
Zefi…I have re-read and don’t believe I misunderstood.This how I came to see it:
1)TitforTat made a statement denying the reasonableness of the Trinity
2)I took yr reply as an agreement with him…You also said,”Isn’t it obvious that people don’t generally dig what they don’t understand or can’t imagine?”,which seemed to suggest that the doctrine was as unimaginable as unreasonable.
3)You continued,”Those old fellas just didn’t get it, that facts don’t really matter as long as they’re easy”,which I took as support for yr previous comment.
4) As I said,unless yr being sarcastic,I don’t quite see how I cd understand it differently.
2)I took yr reply as an agreement with him…You also said,â€Isn’t it obvious that people don’t generally dig what they don’t understand or can’t imagine?â€,which seemed to suggest that the doctrine was as unimaginable as unreasonable.
So, you’re saying that you’re actually able to imagine the Trinity, like perfectly to the core?
Zefi….”So, you’re saying that you’re actually able to imagine the Trinity, like perfectly to the core?”
…in yr words,hell no…forget the Trinity, can any of us imagine God(singularly) to the core..I don’t think so,thus we say we have faith in certain things,especially the metaphysical things
I’m not saying that a doctrine of the Trinity is a provable fact, because I don’t see scripture as a record of revealed religion even if the explanations were more explicit.But I don’t see it as unreasonable to the writers of the NT documents given the theology that they were constructing; not as fact,but as metaphor,a dirty word to some.
If there is anything under construction in those documents,it’s Christology. Consider the birth narratives and start with the first gospel(circa 65CE)Mark; none…Matthew has a birth story,which Luke imaginatively adds to.As I stated before on this blog,it’s like the difference between a cabin,a bungalow and a mansion.Now,turn to John;no birth narrative there either,but what do we find?.Nothing less than the pre-existent Son of God,not only with God,but God.Talk about movin’ on up…now,that’s imagination at work.Wd you agree?
What I said was just “people would generally shy away from things that are beyond their imagination, or from things that are beyond their understanding, or from things that are beyond their logic,” and you went and wrote all those things?
Zefi…”What I said was just “people would generally shy away from things that are beyond their imagination, or from things that are beyond their understanding, or from things that are beyond their logic,†and you went and wrote all those things?”
Not true,you didn’t ‘just’ say that …you seemed to suggest that imagination is somewhat an unreliable guide to said beliefs(the Trinity),as in..”So, you’re saying that you’re actually able to imagine the Trinity, like perfectly to the core? ”
My reply suggested that a belief in the ‘utility of imagination’ ,with respect to a progressive understanding of the ‘Jesus experience’is firmly supported by the documents.The implicit roots of the later explicit belief in the Trinity are there,if one wants to look close enuf and more importantly,whether or not you treat them as fact or metaphor.
If you disagree,then give me a good arguement that reveals the fallacy of my position. But then maybe I did misunderstand…I thot your replies suggested you were interested in a serious discussion of theology.My apologies…if true or in yr words…Never mind.
Steve…you said,”So much of this stuff is so far beyond our capabilities to understand.
I guess that is where the holy Scriptures come in, and where faith comes in.
Sometimes we just have to trust…against all our “better†judgement.”
I was gonna let ‘ya off the hook after the fancy stickhandling of the previous(2:45 PM) statement,but it looks like I’m gonna have to take you in the corner and drop the gloves again.
But serioulsly,I don’t buy into the latter statement either.It seems to suggest that God wrote a book,so Read it…Believe it..and Don’t question it.Furthermore you said,”When we do theology”…as if we were applying a method foreign to the subject,like a doctor performing an operation.But,isn’t it true that were reading theology when we read the NT,if not the whole Bible.Someone said that the gospels were written by believers-to believers-to promote belief.The difference in theological intent is not that hard to see,especially with respect to a dynamic and progressive understanding of the ‘Jesus experience’
When I read Paul’s letters,I believe I’m reading his theology,his human understanding of what his experience of Jesus means to him and what it can mean to others.I don’t think that his goal was our acceptance of his theology as ‘propositional truth’,but a means(a utility) to have yr own experience of ’salvation”.If he thought it cd be accomplished in any other way,I’m sure he wd have considered it.I usually don’t like to argue about specific verses ,but you mentioned that Paul’s gospel is “the power of God”…but as you know,the verse continues,”unto salvation to every one that believes’..I take that to mean that what he’s declaring has a goal…’a saving faith in God ‘I see that same goal in the synoptics,but the theology is not quite the same coming from Jesus.Again to make my point,Paul’s apologia to promote faith is not to be confused wth Faith…if you know what I mean.
If you disagree,then give me a good arguement that reveals the fallacy of my position. But then maybe I did misunderstand…I thot your replies suggested you were interested in a serious discussion of theology.My apologies…if true or in yr words…Never mind.
LOL. Now, the problem is not that I disagree with what you said. I only disagree with the part that you misinterpreted what I said. BADLY! Not to mention that you put words into my mouth!
It goes beyond my understanding that you cannot link “So, you’re saying that you’re actually able to imagine the Trinity, like perfectly to the core?” with “Isn’t it obvious that people don’t generally dig what they don’t understand or can’t imagine?” with “people would generally shy away from things that are beyond their imagination, or from things that are beyond their understanding, or from things that are beyond their logic.”
Well, if you want to kept debating about things I’ve never said but that you insist that I’ve said, whatever rocks your socks man. Just so you know you’re arguing with a straw man of your own creation.
Or perhaps I’ve written it in a misleading way. Perhaps you want to ask a few of your friends to check on what I’ve written to know whether I’ve written em wrongly, or you’ve been misinterpreting them incorrectly?
Zefi…I think I see the error of my ways…if sarcasm was a hammer,I’d have a sore thumb…shld’ve known that you were’nt willing to give up orthodoxy without a fight.My apologies.I’ll catch ‘ya on the flip side
I never said, “don’t question it.” We ought question it. We ought discuss it.
Can we understand completely the trinity? I think not. That God would incarnate Himself as a man and die for my sins? So many things that I believe are inscrutable to our minds about God.
But what He wanted us to know He revealed to us in scripture.
The writers were men and have different takes, different methods (as you say) but the goal was the same…faith in Christ , comfort in Christ, promote Christ…Christ, Christ, Christ.
So much of the trouble in the Church today happens (in my opinion) is when we misunderstand or interpret the texts with a ‘man centered’ emphasis(what we do) as opposed to a ‘Christ centered’ emphasis…what He does(did).
Steve …consider this…if the men/women of the early church didn’t do anything,we wdn’t be having this conversation…talk about yr cosmic flip of the coin…it appears that God likes to gamble
Subcutaneous…I think the traditional doctrine states three persons/One God…the Father is not the Son,nor the Son the Father,likewise the Holy Spirit…not neccessarily one person in three roles ,as yr comment might suggest….but there have been debates.
Martin Luther says it better than I can:
“All the works of God are unsearchable and unspeakable: no human sense can find them out; only faith takes hold of them without human power and wisdom. No human creature can take hold or know God in His majesty, and therefore He has set Himself down in the simplest manner, and was made man, yea, was made sin, death, and weakness.
But who can believe it? No man is able to imagine, much less to understand, what God has done and still does without ceasing. All that He has done, all those things which He daily creates, the ungodly, blind world does not see, nor acknowledge for God’s wonders; they think all is done by chance and haphazardly.
On the contrary, the good and godly, wherever they cast their eyes, see and acknowledge all as God’s wonders, at which they are astonished; they see in them their delight and joy, they laud and praise the Creator, and know also that God is well pleased with their praise.
The children of the world, which are in darkness, see nothing of these things, but still less do they know of the causes of faith. That three persons are only one God; that the true Son of God was made man; that in Christ are two natures, divine and human, all this offends them; they consider these things myths and fables. Truly, it is a very high and hard article, that God was made man!”
David Hayward is a pastor artistically stripping to the essential.
They do get really passionate about that pre-Trib doctrine! I’ll never forget the first time I experienced the wrath of a Pre-Trib believer when I dared discuss my views which were different.
I randomly picked a theological issue. The central issue of this cartoon, for me, is how we with theological differences respond to each other.
Tell me about it. I thought a guy was going to do that to me because we disagreed on the inerrant Bible (or infallible Bible) topic. Venom!
I think I’ve been to that message board …
David I had thought for 2009, you should host a conference. You could call it the Naked Pastors Convention. I would come and be totally prepared to go naked. Sounds better than national pastors convention, it would have to be somewhere hot to combat the difficulties of shrinkage that take place in colder climes!!!!!
Ya, I’m thinking some place like Ibiza!
My credo…multiple theologies…one God to have faith in
faithlessinfatima,
I like it. (so long as the one God is Jesus Christ)
Steve…that’s one of the theologies…apparently not one of jesus’s
“Steve…that’s one of the theologies…apparently not one of jesus’s”
I think you are right. But the all roads to “God’ thing is as popular as ever.
Stevo
If theres only one God then why call it the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. I dont know about your math but for me thats called 3. But then again what do I know about Christian math.
Steve…not sure what you mean by..”I think you are right. But the all roads to “God’ thing is as popular as ever. ”
…you mean you agree with those who say Jesus did not claim to be God or those who wd make that claim are on the wrong road ?
If you host the conference in Finland, then we can go to the sauna and then jump in a hold in the ice… all naked of course.
faithlessinfatima,
Those who claim Jesus ‘is not God’ are wrong, and those who say He is’ just one way’ are wrong.
TitforTat,
You got that right! The Trinity is surely a mysterious doctrine and one that (I believe) no one can truly get their head around. But when Jesus says that, “I and the Father are one…I believe it. The scriptures do not mention the Trinity by name…but there are references to it. The baptism of Jesus for one.
Steve…consider this scenario?…someone comes to yr church wanting to find a place to worship and fellowship with other believers…you soon come to admire this person’s remarkable love and compassion for their family,friends ,the congregation and even those who are known to be antagonistic toward the faith…one day,after a brief discussion,you discover that this person, though a believer in God,claims not to believe in the deity of Christ,but claims to find certain Christological beliefs more mythical than historically true,albeit they find the core of the gospel story to be helpful in their faith.
What wd be yr response?
Faithlessinfatima,
I’d konk him on the head.
Just kidding.
I’d take it slow. Talk to him or her about it when THEY brought it up. Not push them out. And hope that they wouyld continue to come and put themselves in the path of the Living Word of God and that the Word would grab hold of them.
We actually have a full blown atheist that semi-regularily attends our worship service.
Only the pastor and I know about it (to my knowledge). But what the hey…it’s great that he comes to church…for whatever reason. He just might hear something!
The atheist man is from the old Soviet Union. The pastor and I and this gentleman were talking about Christ Jesus one day and the guy blurts out that he doesn’t believe any of it!
We ask him, “why do you come to church then?”.
He says with a strong Russian accent…”Tradition!”
The pastor and I looked at each each in astonishment and then continued our conversation as if he had never revealed that info. to us.
He still comes to church and we don’t say boo to him about it. We hope that one day, the Holy Spirit will say ‘BOO!’ to him… or whatever…
Hell yeah man! Why those oldies who figured out the Trinity thingy stuck with it? Isn’t it obvious that people don’t generally dig what they don’t understand or can’t imagine?
It would’ve been so much easier for us if they would just do Arianism, Modalism, or stuff like that!
Those old fellas just didn’t get it, that facts don’t really matter as long as they’re easy!
So, I totally agree with you, dude!
Steve…that’s a good story….but,but,but
I can’t help ,but notice yr words…”put themselves in the path of the Living Word of God and that the Word would grab hold of them.”
It seems that you think, despite the obvious fruit of the Spirit in our imagined subject,that something is missing and that something is correct theology or to be more specific, particular beliefs. Is it possible in yr world to think that a person can have an authentic and soul-enriching faith and have a different theology, slightly or completely different.Jesus seemed to welcome many into the kingdom for much less.
I think there is a problem and I’m not sure how to articulate it,but here goes.For some it appears, despite what they might have read that wd suggest a different view,that ‘God wrote a Book”. In itself,that can work for some,but often I see many that have their favorite chapters.It’s like rather than play the game on open ice,what many want is to play table hockey where the players can be controlled by those push rods.They all look the same,they can be turned the same way, and of course Paul is the only ref allowed ,if there are linesman,then they have to agree with him.This is the game I see played over and over and over.
But,I hear there’s a rumour of other games played elsewhere,where the players aren’t attached to the controlling interests and are free to think and make up their own plays.As long as they ‘heartfully’ play the game,it’s a beautiful thing to watch…almost makes ‘ya wanna strap on the blades and join’em.
Zefi,,,I wasn’t sure if you were being sarcastic or not…I’ll assume not
You said….”Isn’t it obvious that people don’t generally dig what they don’t understand or can’t imagine? ” and…”Those old fellas just didn’t get it, that facts don’t really matter as long as they’re easy!”
I wd disagree…if you want facts-we have science,but theology’s ‘modus operandi’ ,like art ,includes the imagination.If it doesn’t work for you,there are other galleries.
Heh. Only you people in the free world would have the opportunity to talk about all these stuff. I guess that’s a good thing. Somewhat.
Hell yeah man! I agree with you too!
Eh, wait. I take that back. You wrote:
My, my. Where the hell did I even wrote “theology requires no imagination,” or even implied such thing?
Either you need to re-read what I wrote, or you need to explain what you wrote.
faithlessinfatima,
I agree with you. God does not save us on the basis of good theology.
But good theology is important to keep us centered on the Word (which is Christ).
As a Lutheran, I too, have my favorite books (games) in the bible. All the ones that are Christ centered (Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, the gospels, 1st Peter, etc.). When we do theology, we see that Christ is at the center of scripture. Bu playing other games, we can get away from Christ and His work for us into the game of our work for Him…which in my opinion, is not the story and which can lead to legalism and self-righteousness.
So, we don’t jump on people for bad theology, but we do argue for good theology and for putting Christ first in everything.
St. Paul tells us that the gospel actually is the power of God, so we want to have everyone in it’s path (the gospel being that Christ loves , and forgives sinners). By hearing the gospel, people are transformed…not by anything we say or do, but by HIm and Him alone.
Thanks, Faithlessinfatima! (great handle, by the way)
Zefi…I have re-read and don’t believe I misunderstood.This how I came to see it:
1)TitforTat made a statement denying the reasonableness of the Trinity
2)I took yr reply as an agreement with him…You also said,”Isn’t it obvious that people don’t generally dig what they don’t understand or can’t imagine?”,which seemed to suggest that the doctrine was as unimaginable as unreasonable.
3)You continued,”Those old fellas just didn’t get it, that facts don’t really matter as long as they’re easy”,which I took as support for yr previous comment.
4) As I said,unless yr being sarcastic,I don’t quite see how I cd understand it differently.
So, you’re saying that you’re actually able to imagine the Trinity, like perfectly to the core?
Zefi….”So, you’re saying that you’re actually able to imagine the Trinity, like perfectly to the core?”
…in yr words,hell no…forget the Trinity, can any of us imagine God(singularly) to the core..I don’t think so,thus we say we have faith in certain things,especially the metaphysical things
I’m not saying that a doctrine of the Trinity is a provable fact, because I don’t see scripture as a record of revealed religion even if the explanations were more explicit.But I don’t see it as unreasonable to the writers of the NT documents given the theology that they were constructing; not as fact,but as metaphor,a dirty word to some.
If there is anything under construction in those documents,it’s Christology. Consider the birth narratives and start with the first gospel(circa 65CE)Mark; none…Matthew has a birth story,which Luke imaginatively adds to.As I stated before on this blog,it’s like the difference between a cabin,a bungalow and a mansion.Now,turn to John;no birth narrative there either,but what do we find?.Nothing less than the pre-existent Son of God,not only with God,but God.Talk about movin’ on up…now,that’s imagination at work.Wd you agree?
Seriously dude, WTH are you talking about?
What I said was just “people would generally shy away from things that are beyond their imagination, or from things that are beyond their understanding, or from things that are beyond their logic,” and you went and wrote all those things?
Are you experiencing what we call…
Never mind.
Uh, and about the things I wrote earlier, it was BOTH SARCASM AND NOT. Go figure.
So much of this stuff is so far beyond our capabilities to understand.
I guess that is where the holy Scriptures come in, and where faith comes in.
Sometimes we just have to trust…against all our “better” judgement.
Zefi…”What I said was just “people would generally shy away from things that are beyond their imagination, or from things that are beyond their understanding, or from things that are beyond their logic,†and you went and wrote all those things?”
Not true,you didn’t ‘just’ say that …you seemed to suggest that imagination is somewhat an unreliable guide to said beliefs(the Trinity),as in..”So, you’re saying that you’re actually able to imagine the Trinity, like perfectly to the core? ”
My reply suggested that a belief in the ‘utility of imagination’ ,with respect to a progressive understanding of the ‘Jesus experience’is firmly supported by the documents.The implicit roots of the later explicit belief in the Trinity are there,if one wants to look close enuf and more importantly,whether or not you treat them as fact or metaphor.
If you disagree,then give me a good arguement that reveals the fallacy of my position. But then maybe I did misunderstand…I thot your replies suggested you were interested in a serious discussion of theology.My apologies…if true or in yr words…Never mind.
Steve…you said,”So much of this stuff is so far beyond our capabilities to understand.
I guess that is where the holy Scriptures come in, and where faith comes in.
Sometimes we just have to trust…against all our “better†judgement.”
I was gonna let ‘ya off the hook after the fancy stickhandling of the previous(2:45 PM) statement,but it looks like I’m gonna have to take you in the corner and drop the gloves again.
But serioulsly,I don’t buy into the latter statement either.It seems to suggest that God wrote a book,so Read it…Believe it..and Don’t question it.Furthermore you said,”When we do theology”…as if we were applying a method foreign to the subject,like a doctor performing an operation.But,isn’t it true that were reading theology when we read the NT,if not the whole Bible.Someone said that the gospels were written by believers-to believers-to promote belief.The difference in theological intent is not that hard to see,especially with respect to a dynamic and progressive understanding of the ‘Jesus experience’
When I read Paul’s letters,I believe I’m reading his theology,his human understanding of what his experience of Jesus means to him and what it can mean to others.I don’t think that his goal was our acceptance of his theology as ‘propositional truth’,but a means(a utility) to have yr own experience of ’salvation”.If he thought it cd be accomplished in any other way,I’m sure he wd have considered it.I usually don’t like to argue about specific verses ,but you mentioned that Paul’s gospel is “the power of God”…but as you know,the verse continues,”unto salvation to every one that believes’..I take that to mean that what he’s declaring has a goal…’a saving faith in God ‘I see that same goal in the synoptics,but the theology is not quite the same coming from Jesus.Again to make my point,Paul’s apologia to promote faith is not to be confused wth Faith…if you know what I mean.
LOL. Now, the problem is not that I disagree with what you said. I only disagree with the part that you misinterpreted what I said. BADLY! Not to mention that you put words into my mouth!
It goes beyond my understanding that you cannot link “So, you’re saying that you’re actually able to imagine the Trinity, like perfectly to the core?” with “Isn’t it obvious that people don’t generally dig what they don’t understand or can’t imagine?” with “people would generally shy away from things that are beyond their imagination, or from things that are beyond their understanding, or from things that are beyond their logic.”
Well, if you want to kept debating about things I’ve never said but that you insist that I’ve said, whatever rocks your socks man. Just so you know you’re arguing with a straw man of your own creation.
Or perhaps I’ve written it in a misleading way. Perhaps you want to ask a few of your friends to check on what I’ve written to know whether I’ve written em wrongly, or you’ve been misinterpreting them incorrectly?
Uh, just in case the problem came from the word can’t, let me rephrase the “problematic statement.”
Isn’t it obvious that people don’t generally dig what they don’t understand or are not capable of imagining? (previously: can’t imagine?)
If that didn’t help, I don’t know what will. Heh.
Zefi…I think I see the error of my ways…if sarcasm was a hammer,I’d have a sore thumb…shld’ve known that you were’nt willing to give up orthodoxy without a fight.My apologies.I’ll catch ‘ya on the flip side
Faithlessinfatima,
I never said, “don’t question it.” We ought question it. We ought discuss it.
Can we understand completely the trinity? I think not. That God would incarnate Himself as a man and die for my sins? So many things that I believe are inscrutable to our minds about God.
But what He wanted us to know He revealed to us in scripture.
The writers were men and have different takes, different methods (as you say) but the goal was the same…faith in Christ , comfort in Christ, promote Christ…Christ, Christ, Christ.
So much of the trouble in the Church today happens (in my opinion) is when we misunderstand or interpret the texts with a ‘man centered’ emphasis(what we do) as opposed to a ‘Christ centered’ emphasis…what He does(did).
Steve …consider this…if the men/women of the early church didn’t do anything,we wdn’t be having this conversation…talk about yr cosmic flip of the coin…it appears that God likes to gamble
Faithlessinfatima,
So true…so true.
But it is God through the Holy Spirit acting in us that does the things necessary for His Church to survive.
If it was up to us…there would be no Church. (although there might be plenty of churches)
Of course we ‘do’. My point is that to obtain the righteousness of God, there is nothing we can ‘do’. It has all been done…by Him!
Thanks Faithlessinfatima!
As far as “understanding” the Trinity.
I’m “just a human”, but I can be a Father, Son, Brother, Husband, etc. One person, but different roles at different times – or all at the same time.
Why can’t we accept that an omnipotent God could do likewise, albeit on a grander scale?
Subcutaneous…I think the traditional doctrine states three persons/One God…the Father is not the Son,nor the Son the Father,likewise the Holy Spirit…not neccessarily one person in three roles ,as yr comment might suggest….but there have been debates.
This is an example of Modalism, I think.
Martin Luther says it better than I can:
“All the works of God are unsearchable and unspeakable: no human sense can find them out; only faith takes hold of them without human power and wisdom. No human creature can take hold or know God in His majesty, and therefore He has set Himself down in the simplest manner, and was made man, yea, was made sin, death, and weakness.
But who can believe it? No man is able to imagine, much less to understand, what God has done and still does without ceasing. All that He has done, all those things which He daily creates, the ungodly, blind world does not see, nor acknowledge for God’s wonders; they think all is done by chance and haphazardly.
On the contrary, the good and godly, wherever they cast their eyes, see and acknowledge all as God’s wonders, at which they are astonished; they see in them their delight and joy, they laud and praise the Creator, and know also that God is well pleased with their praise.
The children of the world, which are in darkness, see nothing of these things, but still less do they know of the causes of faith. That three persons are only one God; that the true Son of God was made man; that in Christ are two natures, divine and human, all this offends them; they consider these things myths and fables. Truly, it is a very high and hard article, that God was made man!”