-Removed-He cannot admit that because to do so would mean that most of what he says is unnecessary. 99% of what the man says is LESSER things. The GREATER things [love, charity, righteousnerss and good works ] are like a dagger that stabs him every thing he says it. This the sign that a mans doctrine is Satanic.
-Removed-Referring to the keeping of the teachings of Christ as
- Legalistic - is a condemnation
- Pharisaical - is also a condemnation
- Works salvation - is another one
Starting a thread on the curse of the Law and referring to all law keeping {including the laws of Christ] as a curse, is another condemnation of the teachings of Christ.
According to the trinity doctrine God is made up of three distinct persons, each with shared but also different attributes. This is despite the Bible insisting all the way through that God is one.
According to the Bible there are three ____________s of the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit.
All three _________ are eternal.
All three __________ co-exist at same time.
All three __________ are God.
We could say three "Persons". But doing so would not solve all problems such a matter which human language hardly has the words to express.
Some people have a "What's all the fuss about?" kind of attitude. Like they are saying that somehow the obviousness of God not being able to be this way has escaped lots of people but themselves.
Some express a pretension that it is all that simple, is unrealistic.
While we can experience God we cannot exhaustively explain God.
There is no need to show this in any more elaborate examples but in John 1:1.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
You hardly have to go much further to know something profound and challenging the limits of human speaking is about to be unveiled. The Word was with God and the Word was God? That is an unusual way to speak.
Some tortured attempts have been made to hammer this into something human language can more easily express. Theories like the God whom the Word was with is not the same God as the Word was. Then you have two Gods. That does no favors for monotheism.
Theories like the Word was a god but was with THE God are simply polytheism.
Trying to uphold "God is one" you make two gods self defeating monotheism. You just made a god with God and God. I think the Apostle John knew quite well that what he wrote was too difficult to express in any other words.
That is all for this post. Of course enough has not been said in one post on this by me or anyone else. I leave with this.
"In Him was life, and the life was the light of men." (v.4)
This mysterious One the triune God is reaching out from eternity to dispense Himself into man to be his life. That is that the saved could live in God and have God live in them.
Confused yet?
I find the best route is to say "amen" to whatever the Bible reveals. But we must all the time receive and enjoy this living God, adoring His presence.
If the word says the Son has His throne and kingdom forever, we should just say "Amen" and receive the Person.
If the word say the Son delivers up the kingdom to His God and Father, we should just say "Amen" to that as well. Why change anything if God is with us in our experience and enjoyment?
There are two sides to many major themes in the Bible.
This is like a bird that needs two wings to fly.
As tempting as it may be to show we can reconcile all contradictory truths, some of us are willing to admit that some things are too difficult to fully explain.
The Word was with God and the Word was God - Amen.
We can receive this Person as divine life.
The kingdom of the Son is forever and the Son delivers up the kingdom to His
God and Father - Amen.
Revelation 11:15 says "The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ., And He will reign forever and ever."
I believe our Lord and ... His Christ is two _______.
I believe "and He will reign forever and ever" refers to both as "He".
So you have distinction and also co-inherence - one lives within the other.
Dive didn't help when he alluded that after the so called "hand over" maybe the Son would be a prince. Well the Prince of Peace is also the King of kings.
If the "sons" of God reign forever and ever (Rev. 22:5), how could it be that the Son does not?