Universal reconciliation

[jugghead]

life is too short to read all that men write ..... so I will listen to His Spirit and agree with what is said by Him.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

My answer was given. I thought your 'claim' was incorrect correct to say "all humans are only temporarily separated from God", especially since most of them end up in Hell eternally separated from God." That's also the reason why I quoted Genesis where it talked about Cain still being in the presence of God, but outside of Paradise. Which was a comment you never addressed; If murdering Cain was in God's presence then how could Adam and Eve not have still been also?


I think mankind was made to be dependent upon 'fellowship with God' and His 'tree of life' to have imortality. That's why God said Adam could have continued to live forever if they didn't 'kick him out of the Garden so he couldn't continue to access the life tree, without the presence of God, like Adam did with the death tree. Adam never died upon eating, he entered into the death sentence which still took 900 years to kill him. And he died physically in the 'day/'age before the flood'...the 'thousand year long' antedulvian/day/age is like the hundred year long 'day of the locomotive'. Adam didn't have to 'die' in a 24 hour period of time.

They why do Christians still die and get buried just like Jesus did on the cross?

2TI 1:10 and now has manifested through the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life AND immortality to light through the gospel.

Jesus had immortality because he never sinned. And after receiving the Holy Spirit he walked continually in the presence/'knowing of God'. This availed Him and all He came into contact with 'the life of God available in each and every age'. And Jesus ministered this aionian/age-during life of God to man. Scripture says 'this is eternal life to know God' or to know the will of God and "do/say" His will, even as Jesus did.


I don't believe 'spiritual death' is biblically supported. Do you have a verse? And the body doesn't 'decay' until it's in the grave. But death of the body does require that the sin matures therefore causing death.

JAM 1:15 Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin; and sin when it is full-grown brings forth death.

Not really. Adam could have had 'immortality' accessing the tree of life while being separated from the fellowship of God's aionian/age-during life which gets translated incorrectly as 'eternal'. That's why God kicked him out and put guards to guard him from coming back in.


I disagree, I think history proves that from 476-1066, the 'dark ages' (Spiritually also IMO), the Church excommunicated or killed anyone who disagreed, and the congregational masses were kept in scriptural ignorance and basically spiritual as well as mental slaves of their 'priests' and the hierarchy of Roman Catholicism. I am happy to answer any questions I can from my UR perspective.

But there's still too many questions, forcing my many answers to be too brief and a post that's still too long.

So by claiming ignorance of "spiritual death" and supposing God's Omnipresence makes everyone "in His Presence", are we now to believe this UR view of reality has just gotten more bizarre in saying there is no difference in the spiritual walk (which for one example, is depicted when the Bible speaks of God "walking" with someone) between Cain and Able, or the righteous and the unrighteous?
No wonder you have everyone going to Heaven - so you are hereby and apparently proudly acknowledging this view of reality based on your understanding of scripture clearly shows how we live our lives makes absolutely no difference. We can murder our brother and according to you still be considering walking with God. According to your view God walks with all of us no matter what we do. Interesting.

Then we have double speak –your post said Adam was not going to die as long as he had access to the Cross (which is about the only thing we agree on) then you claim he did not die when or because he ate (in spite of what God said – and exactly the lie the devil said) – then you say it just took a long time then he died. So which is it, he never died because he ate or he did not die right away but took a long time and so that had nothing to do with eating?

Why did Jesus and Christians die? In my view that is simple and well defended. Not at all simple in your view. According to you God made men suffer and die to teach us a lesson. You claim those who “get it”(the lesson) in this life get to move on to better things. Those who do not get it in this life, you claim God removes the ability to die from them (part of the lesson needed in this life but apparently not the next) so they have more time then to “get it” in the next life. So essentially removing immortality in the first place really and logically could not be said to be part of a lesson – when one claims the next life is a continuation of the “same” process until they get it, how ever long that takes. Your having God give back to the damned what you claim He originally took away to help them learn the lesson in order to continue learning the same lesson. So, am confused, in your view does removing immortality help man “learn the lesson” or not?

Do I have a verse supporting “spiritual death”? Why yes there are many. Do you have a verse that says God being Omnipresent means He “walks with” or “abides with” or “dwells with” the righteous equally with the ungodly as you apparently claim?

I do not see you answering any of these questions at all, merely attacking the Church and the orthodox view and quoting scripture or whomever out of context, while claiming to be offended at my pointing out that people can justify almost anything doing the same.

 

[2KnowHim]

I have never seen such a misunderstanding or twisting of someone's words as I have seen you do to Hillsage's.
And anyone who can ask such a question as this has never "Truly" had a relationship with Him or for that matter even been born of The Spirit.

saying there is no difference in the spiritual walk (which for one example, is depicted when the Bible speaks of God "walking" with someone) between Cain and Able, or the righteous and the unrighteous?

"OR"

No wonder you have everyone going to Heaven - so you are hereby and apparently proudly acknowledging this view of reality based on your understanding of scripture clearly shows how we live our lives makes absolutely no difference. We can murder our brother and according to you still be considering walking with God. According to your view God walks with all of us no matter what we do. Interesting.

Do you have a verse that says God being Omnipresent means He “walks with” or “abides with” or “dwells with” the righteous equally with the ungodly as you apparently claim?

Act 17:24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;
Act 17:25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
Act 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
Act 17:27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
Act 17:28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

The only reason I can see that you would go to such measures as this to twist and add to someone's post your own words, is because you yourself are either being almost persuaded of UR and are fighting it....or you simply cannot accept the fact that all your works that you have done and acomplished in Him over the yrs. here on earth ..will carry no weight compared to someone who has none on the other side of the grave. And that God could rightfully give what is His to whom He chooses.
It reminds me of this parable:

Mat 20:10 But when the first came, they supposed that they should have received more; and they likewise received every man a penny.
Mat 20:11 And when they had received it, they murmured against the goodman of the house,
Mat 20:12 Saying, These last have wrought but one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us, which have borne the burden and heat of the day.
Mat 20:13 But he answered one of them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a penny?
Mat 20:14 Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this last, even as unto thee.
Mat 20:15 Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?

 

[2KnowHim]

Let me ask you something DR. I'm really curious about, do you think that the Jewish Holocaust victims of World War 2 deserved what they got because of their Rejection of Christ... Ha? Or was that just a prelude to what they "will" suffer for all Eternity?

 

[Hillsage]

life is too short to read all that men write ..... so I will listen to His Spirit and agree with what is said by Him.

And even if one did read 'all' that was posted it still would simply prove ONE THING, which is....EVERYTHING I posted!

Not one word refuting what I based my post on, and not one quoted scripture from a translation reputable to the very rules of Greek and grammar which I pointed out. But having confirmation from His Spirit concerning 'the truth' is supported scripturally too, in all translations.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

I have never seen such a misunderstanding or twisting of someone's words as I have seen you do to Hillsage's.
And anyone who can ask such a question as this has never "Truly" had a relationship with Him or for that matter even been born of The Spirit.


"OR"





Act 17:24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;
Act 17:25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
Act 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
Act 17:27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
Act 17:28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

The only reason I can see that you would go to such measures as this to twist and add to someone's post your own words, is because you yourself are either being almost persuaded of UR and are fighting it....or you simply cannot accept the fact that all your works that you have done and acomplished in Him over the yrs. here on earth ..will carry no weight compared to someone who has none on the other side of the grave. And that God could rightfully give what is His to whom He chooses.
It reminds me of this parable:

Mat 20:10 But when the first came, they supposed that they should have received more; and they likewise received every man a penny.
Mat 20:11 And when they had received it, they murmured against the goodman of the house,
Mat 20:12 Saying, These last have wrought but one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us, which have borne the burden and heat of the day.
Mat 20:13 But he answered one of them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a penny?
Mat 20:14 Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this last, even as unto thee.
Mat 20:15 Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?

Pointing out the illogic of what someone says is not twisting.

In talking about "death" "immortality" and trying to elude answering by suggesting that by immortality I meant "eternal life" in post 635 the sage on the Hill said:
“Some lessons in life are 'taught' and learned, for some people the lesson must be 'caught' by experience.”
And
“Plan or no plan wasn't the issue or lesson of man in the Garden.Adam/Eve failed receiving what God told them they would...a death sentence”

So he is saying the "death sentence" resulting from man's sin is at least part of the lesson. Am assuming most UR are not of the no more body crowd, which means like the orthodox, he believes we all are resurrected with bodies that will never die (immortal - not eternal life) including those destined for Hell.

So I just pointed out that this view has God removing mankind's access to the Cross (immortality-Tree of Life) as part of a lesson (indeed a death sentence) that people either get or don't get in this life. Then in the next life, those who do not get it - are looked at as still needing to learn the lesson - are given access again to something that Hillsage claims was removed in the first place to help them learn that same lesson.

So, I simply asked why remove something one claims was necessary as part of learning a lesson only to then give it back to those who had not learned it yet so they can learn it. I agree it make no sense. I don't agree it is twisting anyone's words.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

Let me ask you something DR. I'm really curious about, do you think that the Jewish Holocaust victims of World War 2 deserved what they got because of their Rejection of Christ... Ha? Or was that just a prelude to what they "will" suffer for all Eternity?

Do you write for Jack Chic or just hate Catholics?

Am certain, as the Church teaches, there will be people of all faiths eternally in Hell. Just as certain Heaven will not exclude non-Catholics and people who have never heard of Jesus.

 

[Hillsage]

Do I have a verse supporting “spiritual death”? Why yes there are many.

I only asked for one. Your waffled answer here PROVES you have NONE.

Do you have a verse that says God being Omnipresent means He “walks with” or “abides with” or “dwells with” the righteous equally with the ungodly as you apparently claim?

No I don't, because I never claimed any of what you just said.

I do not see...

I know, you continually prove it to me too, just like 2knowhim just pointed out. That's why I don't see any reason to dialogue with you. As long you are just looking to defend where you're at, you'll not be open to see where you're wrong.

 

[2KnowHim]

Do you write for Jack Chic or just hate Catholics?

First of all, I have never heard of this person you speak of, and I do not hate anyone. I do however hate what people teach others about Our Loving and Merciful God and His Son Jesus Christ.
But I am impressed with the way you accused me in order to wiggle your way out of answering the question.

Claiming someone's statement is illogical, could only mean you don't understand what they are saying. And that is very easily fixed by just asking someone to clarify or explain further. Instead of attacking or accusing. That is if you "Really" want to know.

This is why I don't always answer you, because I don't really think you want to understand.

 

[fatherjimparker]

MY: THe life is being intimately united to God in Christ. The CHurch, as the bride of Christ, is "one flesh" with Christ.

[/QUOTE]Got a scripture for that?[/QUOTE]

Eph 5:29-32 (RSV) For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." This mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church;

 

[Hillsage]

MY: THe life is being intimately united to God in Christ. The CHurch, as the bride of Christ, is "one flesh" with Christ.

I said;

Got a scripture for that?

Eph 5:29-32 (RSV) For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." This mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church;

I think the context of this verse you share is a little vague to state we are "one flesh" as much as it is talking about treating your spouse as being one flesh. Otherwise, what is your reason for belief in transubstantiation of the host? Wouldn't that simply be 'eating yourself'? Or are you guys 'Substantiation'?

BUT, the 'spiritual' body of Christ, on the other hand, is a little different IMO. There, I do believe scripture definitely says we are 'one spirit'.

1CO 6:17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

Honestly, I'm not sure why we ended up here in relation to Ultimate Reconciliation anyway. Oh well, I think it was my bunny trail.

 

[fatherjimparker]

I said; I think the context of this verse you share is a little vague to state we are "one flesh" as much as it is talking about treating your spouse as being one flesh.

Paul did say it is a mystery. I don't have a need to explain matters of faith in scientific terms.

[/QUOTE] Otherwise, what is your reason for belief in transubstantiation of the host? Wouldn't that simply be 'eating yourself'? Or are you guys 'Substantiation'? [/QUOTE]

Neither. The bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ.

How? Jesus didn't say. It's also a mystery.

[/QUOTE]BUT, the 'spiritual' body of Christ, on the other hand, is a little different IMO. There, I do believe scripture definitely says we are 'one spirit'.

1CO 6:17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

Honestly, I'm not sure why we ended up here in relation to Ultimate Reconciliation anyway. Oh well, I think it was my bunny trail.[/QUOTE]

Salvation, having eternal live, being reconciled ultimately ends up as being united to God in Christ.

John 17:20-21 I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us,..

Being "in Christ", being "one flesh with Christ" is God's desired end for mankind. That is "eternal life."

 

[DrBubbaLove]

I only asked for one. Your waffled answer here PROVES you have NONE.

LOL. No it proves am here to debate/discuss your view not defend the orthodox position, which whenever you are questioned is your only defense - attack the person, the orthodox view, the Church....anything except defend or explain your view.

No I don't, because I never claimed any of what you just said.

That was a question not a claim about a statement. But since you now deny it - let's review and see where I misunderstood.

I claimed spiritual death was one result of the Fall, physical death being another, and both beginning immediately. I said spiritual death is depicted by a separation from God(said nothing about total). You then claimed in post 657 that you do not believe in spiritual death - (also oddly claimed that the human body does not decay (???) in same post) and suggested as evidence against any kind of spiritual death/separation that God being with Cain demonstrates there is no "spiritual death" due to the fall (or sin for that matter). So I just put your view all together and asked if you had a verse to supporting the notion that God dwells equally with the righteous and unrighteous. Apparently you either do not have a verse or did not think all those various statements through if you are going to suggest God's Omnipresence means He "walks" equally with the righteous and unrighteous.

I know, you continually prove it to me too, just like 2knowhim just pointed out. That's why I don't see any reason to dialogue with you. As long you are just looking to defend where you're at, you'll not be open to see where you're wrong.

How is pointing out the obvious holes in someone else's beliefs looked at as defending where am at? Am asking you to defend/explain where you are at. The purpose of this section of the forums.
Again, and according to this section rules here - we are not here to defend the orthodox view, you are suppose to be explaining your opposing view. All am getting is hatred of the Church, attacks on the orthodox view, being told I am not open and only wanting to defend where I am at, you defending someone else saying most folks here including myself are not Christian.....(now you will deny that too I suppose)

How are those things a defense of suggesting things like God walked with Adam before the Fall the same way He is Omnipresent for Cain while he commits murder?

 

[DrBubbaLove]

First of all, I have never heard of this person you speak of, and I do not hate anyone. I do however hate what people teach others about Our Loving and Merciful God and His Son Jesus Christ.
But I am impressed with the way you accused me in order to wiggle your way out of answering the question.

Claiming someone's statement is illogical, could only mean you don't understand what they are saying. And that is very easily fixed by just asking someone to clarify or explain further. Instead of attacking or accusing. That is if you "Really" want to know.

This is why I don't always answer you, because I don't really think you want to understand.

If you do not hate people, why would you lie and claim I wiggle my way out of answering a direct and intentional insulting question?

The rest of my post reads and addresses your rather hateful insult:

Am certain, as the Church teaches, there will be people of all faiths eternally in Hell. Just as certain Heaven will not exclude non-Catholics and people who have never heard of Jesus.

 

[2KnowHim]

Ok DrBubbaLove, lets lay aside our accusations to one another and start afresh, whatta ya say?
How about we take a different approach to this subject, such as....I will quote a portion of scripture and you tell me what you understand it to be saying, and why, (based on other scriptures) and then I'll tell you what I understand it to be saying, and why, (based on other scriptures)... and visa=versa.

Maybe that will keep our personl attacks out of it all together...maybe.

 

[Hillsage]

Paul did say it is a mystery. I don't have a need to explain matters of faith in scientific terms.

I'm not asking you to. I'm asking you to explain things from the bible. Since church doctrine is not my source of authority you and Bubba really need to quote scripture because I am in the Unorthodox/Controversial forum for that reason.

Hillsage; Otherwise, what is your reason for belief in transubstantiation of the host? Wouldn't that simply be 'eating yourself'? Or are you guys 'Substantiation'?

FatherJ; Neither. The bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ.

How? Jesus didn't say. It's also a mystery.

But hat is the def. of transubstantiation....RIGHT? You believe like Catholics. Therefore, as I said before, if 'your flesh' and 'Jesus' flesh' are the same you're eating yourself, and what's the point, concerning "matters of faith, in non scientific terms"? IOW, why do you believe it in 'FAITH terms'?

BUT, the 'spiritual' body of Christ, on the other hand, is a little different IMO. There, I do believe scripture definitely says we are 'one spirit'.

1CO 6:17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

Fatherjim; Salvation, having eternal live, being reconciled ultimately ends up as being united to God in Christ.

According to scripture "being reconciled" has already happened, so do you believe all are "united in Christ" now? I do not.

ROM 5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

COL 1:21 And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled 22 In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight:

The world wasn't reconciled because they believed, they were reconciled 2000 years ago, because Jesus died for ALL.

1JO 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

John 17:20-21 I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us,..

Hmmm. One word missing in this verse...'FLESH'. And since "GOD IS SPIRIT" according to John which was even written AFTER Jesus ascended???....well Houston, we have a problem. Therefore, I believe Jesus was speaking about being "one spirit" with the Father, even as we are "one spirit if joined to the Lord". That may not line up with you or Bubba's church allegiance, but it lines up with the authority of scripture.

FatherJ; Being "in Christ", being "one flesh with Christ" is God's desired end for mankind. That is "eternal life."

Everyone here is entitled to 'their opinions'. But when all you have is 'an opinion' and we're begging for just ONE SCRIPTURE, I hope you can see why we're in disagreement.

Not to offend...but, I don't care what YOUR CHURCH tells you to believe. To come here and tell us you trust THE CHURCH isn't going to win any arguments.

BTW... you added a '/' in your opening [ /quote] brackets, that's why it didn't put things in a 'quote' box. The '/' only goes at the end of what you're quoting. [ quote]..text, text..[ /quote], with no spaces like I just did.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

But hat is the def. of transubstantiation....RIGHT? You believe like Catholics. Therefore, as I said before, if 'your flesh' and 'Jesus' flesh' are the same you're eating yourself, and what's the point, concerning "matters of faith, in non scientific terms"? IOW, why do you believe it in 'FAITH terms'?
.

We could quote John 6, the Bread of Life discourse - the longest single continuous discourse of our Lord God recorded for us; we could quote it all day and we would never agree on meaning. Just like those shown leaving, some no doubt after following for years, it would be a hard saying for you. To me such "discourse" is fruitless as we will just start throwing quotes around and going "no it doesn't" "yes it does".

To me it is more interesting to see how the whole picture fits together complete - not fragmented and contradictory. Which is why I ask you and others here the questions I do, not to defend my beliefs but to see how you explain the holes in yours.

What was removed from the Garden - the Tree of Life. What does man no longer have access to - that Tree (the Cross). What does the Bread of Life offer? Access, His Blood, His Body, at least temporary for now to that same Tree and for the Good of our souls. It all fits together from the Beginning, to the End. As does the understanding of the Creation stories with the stated purpose of creating man and the effect of the Fall providing the intro to why God's intervention is necessary for us. Remove a single element and the rest of it of starts falling a part.

So one cannot just say of the creation story "well creation was not really originally Perfect, but it will be one day" without explaining then why God would make something less perfect than He could have - essentially saying God does not always do His best, in fact does not always do Good - which among other things contradicts who we say He is. And that is just a couple of things off the top of my head.

 

[2KnowHim]

So one cannot just say of the creation story "well creation was not really originally Perfect, but it will be one day" without explaining then why God would make something less perfect than He could have - essentially saying God does not always do His best, in fact does not always do Good - which among other things contradicts who we say He is. And that is just a couple of things off the top of my head.

I don't think anyone is saying that God would make anything less than Good, but what happens to that Good after it has been made subject to the elements is entirely different. Why would God feel the need to Repent? But He did.
Gen 6:6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

 

[fatherjimparker]

I'm not asking you to. I'm asking you to explain things from the bible. Since church doctrine is not my source of authority you and Bubba really need to quote scripture because I am in the Unorthodox/Controversial forum for that reason.

That's too bad. The Church is the source of the Bible. It is the apostolic tradition that enabled the Church to discern which books belonged in the Bible and the apostolic teaching which provided the proper understanding of what was contained in the Bible.

Going to the Bible alone is a recipe for disaster. (as demonstrated by the tens of thousands of denominations, sects, schisms, and cults all claiming to have the truly true interpretation of what Jesus really meant to say)

But hat is the def. of transubstantiation

....RIGHT? You believe like Catholics.

Wrong. Transubstantiation is an artifact of the attempt to apply of Aristotelian logic to a mystery in order to make it understandable to man. It's not understandable. Jesus said it was His body and blood. I'm happy with that. I don't need an explanation.

Therefore, as I said before, if 'your flesh' and 'Jesus' flesh' are the same you're eating yourself,

My flesh and Jesus flesh are not the same. He's a totally different person.

and what's the point, concerning "matters of faith, in non scientific terms"? IOW, why do you believe it in 'FAITH terms'?

I believe it because that is what Jesus said and what the church has always taught.

According to scripture "being reconciled" has already happened, so do you believe all are "united in Christ" now? I do not.

ROM 5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

COL 1:21 And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled 22 In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight:

The world wasn't reconciled because they believed, they were reconciled 2000 years ago, because Jesus died for ALL.

1JO 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

OK. You're conflating two concepts. A very common error.

Reconciliation has to do with relationship. Being reconciled to God requires belief and repentance on the part of the believer followed by the pursuit of holiness. So that is only for believers.

The propitiation for sin, Jesus' death and resurrection, is for the whole of mankind. (And I think for all of creation) By His death and resurrection he destroyed the power of death to hold mankind. All of mankind will be raised from the dead imperishable and immortal. (1 Cor 15:51-57)

Hmmm. One word missing in this verse...'FLESH'. And since "GOD IS SPIRIT" according to John which was even written AFTER Jesus ascended???....well Houston, we have a problem. Therefore, I believe Jesus was speaking about being "one spirit" with the Father, even as we are "one spirit if joined to the Lord". That may not line up with you or Bubba's church allegiance, but it lines up with the authority of scripture.

Paul specifically used the words "one flesh." Therefore, I conclude he meant "one flesh."

Everyone here is entitled to 'their opinions'. But when all you have is 'an opinion' and we're begging for just ONE SCRIPTURE, I hope you can see why we're in disagreement.

We are in disagreement that the proper approach to Christianity is "sola scriptura." It is the teaching of the church, from the beginning, even before the NT scriptures were accepted as scripture, that provides us with the correct understanding of the teaching of the apostles including what they wrote.

Not to offend...but, I don't care what YOUR CHURCH tells you to believe. To come here and tell us you trust THE CHURCH isn't going to win any arguments.

That is exactly the rebellious attitude which incited the Protestant schism and the notion that individuals had the authority to re-form the church which Jesus personally established according to their own imaginations. (That's my perspective. I don't mean to sound offensive. It's a bit difficult to be frank and concise in writing without appearing to be "in your face.")

BTW... you added a '/' in your opening [ /quote] brackets, that's why it didn't put things in a 'quote' box. The '/' only goes at the end of what you're quoting. [ quote]..text, text..[ /quote], with no spaces like I just did.

Ok. Lets see if I can get that right..............

 

[Hillsage]

I don't think anyone is saying that God would make anything less than Good, but what happens to that Good after it has been made subject to the elements is entirely different. Why would God feel the need to Repent? But He did.
Gen 6:6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

Good point, especially concerning "Good". But especially so when we note that there is nothing in scripture about creation being made perfect. As a matter of fact the creation story itself says 6X that what He created as "good" and the last verse of chapter 1 ends up saying

GEN 1:31 And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good.

But then what happens? In chapter 2 we find out He screwed UP according to HIM????

Genesis 2:18 Then the LORD God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him."

So Plan B was make a "helper"? Who knows. What I do know is none of this was considered 'PERFECT' and scripture does make allowance for 'good' being less than 'perfect' IMO;

Romans 12:2 Do not be conformed to this world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may prove what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.

But I'm sure there are those here who will blast 'my opinion' with all the authority of....their opinion... ...and not ONE other scripture of course.