Baptism is only a symbol?

[DaRev]

The word μονογενης does not mean "unique only" as one person said. The roots are fairly clear. μονο means "one or only" and γενης means "generated."

I believe that most do not treat "monogenes" as a compound word. But in any case, context dictates meaning and the word "generate" indicates a beginning and the rest of the Scripture clearly states that Christ is uncreated, un"generated". Thus your meaning of "monogenes" would contradict Scripture which cannot contradict itself.

 

[jamescarvin]

The context is as one in the bossom of the Father. The translation begotten fits very well, depicting both Son, from the wider context, and God.

gen-, geno-, -geny, genesis bring to life, create, make (gene, genetics, genotype, parthenogenesis, sporogenous, zymogen)
But on what basis do these people say this word should not be understood by its roots?

I mean, I understand how this can happen. I park in my driveway. I drive on the parkway. Go figure. But this is a key Christological verse, as I see it, so I don't want to be thoroughly misunderstanding the passage.

 

[RadMan]

hmmm...A Ukrainian Orthodox who promotes eschatology. Sounds like a contradiction in terms.

 

[DaRev]

The context is as one in the bossom of the Father. The translation begotten fits very well, depicting both Son, from the wider context, and God.

gen-, geno-, -geny, genesis bring to life, create, make (gene, genetics, genotype, parthenogenesis, sporogenous, zymogen)
But on what basis do these people say this word should not be understood by its roots?

So you believe that Christ is a created being?

 

[Edial]

hmmm...A Ukrainian Orthodox who promotes eschatology. Sounds like a contradiction in terms.

.

Oh, this is nothing compared to some Lutherans that promote pre-milleniallism.
These Lutheran "heretics" drive me crazy.

(slinking outta here).

 

[RadMan]

.

Oh, this is nothing compared to some Lutherans that promote pre-milleniallism.
These Lutheran "heretics" drive me crazy.

(slinking outta here).

Well it's one thing to privately believe that but when you are a president of a Christian college and then promote it on a web page?

 

[Edial]

Well it's one thing to privately believe that but when you are a president of a Christian college and then promote it on a web page?

Oh really? Interesting. I did not know that.

... by the way, you were instrumental for me changing my icon from Christian to Lutheran when you said to someone else something to the effect: "Stand up for what you believe ... "

My theological convictions just flew out of window when I read that.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

IMHO....

I suppose Christians could "argue" Scripture and Tradition on this - maybe both ways, but I think it all comes down to our soteriology.

If Christianity is basically about what we do for God, our obedience and "hoop jumping," if we are our own Savior (in whole or in part), then infant baptism is moot. OBVIOUSLY, the little baby can't DO anything. We need to be old enough to at least use our own will if nothing else....

If Christianity is about what God does for us, if Christ is THE Savior, if salvation is the 'gift of God.' then OBVIOUSLY a baby does not render God impotent and is no more "impossible" for God to save than any other.

For anyone were it's all about ME - then Infant Baptism will not be embraced.
For anyon e were it's all about JESUS - suddenly it all becomes a beautiful Means of Grace.



That's my $0.00 on that (all I have left after leaving the gas station).


Pax


- Josiah




.

 

[LutheranMafia]

Show me the Scripture where it says that souls are uncreated.

It takes a combination of firebrand nature and pure genius to rebut in such a succinct and poigant manner.

My argument is intuitive and not strictly Biblical (and thus highly vulnerable to more astute Biblical insight). I view the soul as a fragment of the Holy Father, the sum toto of All souls.

Edit: I must add, as the old sayings about many things goes, "The whole is greater than the sum of the parts." God is much more than the sum toto of all souls, but He is most certainly that too; like the Mandlebrot Set, made up of an infinite number of little copies of itself, in the Image of God, and yet each copy is still infinitely unique and distinct from every other tiny little copy.

 

[Till]

My argument is intuitive and not strictly Biblical (and thus highly vulnerable to more astute Biblical insight). I view the soul as a fragment of the Holy Father, the sum toto of All souls.

Then why don't you stop fooling yourself as to the ability of your intuition and your reason and focus on using your God-given reason to study and understand God's revelation in Scriptures? Why wasting your time?

P.S. I alwasy thought "Holy Father" is the Pope. Do you think that we are a fragment of Ratzinger? That would explain why I am so snappish.

 

[Edial]

It takes a combination of firebrand nature and pure genius to rebut in such a succinct and poigant manner.

My argument is intuitive and not strictly Biblical (and thus highly vulnerable to more astute Biblical insight). I view the soul as a fragment of the Holy Father, the sum toto of All souls.

Edit: I must add, as the old sayings about many things goes, "The whole is greater than the sum of the parts." God is much more than the sum toto of all souls, but He is most certainly that too; like the Mandlebrot Set, made up of an infinite number of little copies of itself, in the Image of God, and yet each copy is still infinitely unique and distinct from every other tiny little copy.

Well, in a neverending hope that the authority of the Bible just might somehow slink above your intuition (no sarcasm intended, just playing) I would try this verse (in KJV, since it accurately renders nephesh as soul) to try and counter your theory.

GE 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Here I see that man was without life. God breathed on him and a soul "became".

And here I see that Christ created all things, visible as well as invisible.

COL 1:16 For by him (Christ) all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, ...

Since soul is invisible and Christ created all invisible things, would you still say that soul was uncreated?

Thanks,
Ed

 

[LutheranMafia]

I would try this verse (in KJV, since it accurately renders nephesh as soul) to try and counter your theory.

[FONT=&quot]GE 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.[/FONT]

Here I see that man was without life. God breathed on him and a soul "became".

And prior to that the soul did not have a spirit, i.e. the breath of life (spiritus in Latin literally means breath). This does not clearly state that the soul was created as oppose to the soul simply acquiring something. The spirit and body were created, but prior to being a living soul the soul was a pre-incarnate soul.

The word nephesh is translated alternately as spirit then as soul, and as about two dozen other things as well, such as perfume and wisdom in Psalms. The word is a messy jumble that blurs the distinction between spirit and soul.

And here I see that Christ created all things, visible as well as invisible.

[FONT=&quot]COL 1:16 For by him (Christ) all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, ...[/FONT]

Since soul is invisible and Christ created all invisible things, would you still say that soul was uncreated?

There is much supposition here, is the soul really a “thing”? Things must reside somewhere, but where does the soul reside? What is an “immortal soul” and how is it immortal?

 

[RadMan]

And prior to that the soul did not have a spirit, i.e. the breath of life (spiritus in Latin literally means breath). This does not clearly state that the soul was created as oppose to the soul simply acquiring something. The spirit and body were created, but prior to being a living soul the soul was a pre-incarnate soul.

The word nephesh is translated alternately as spirit then as soul, and as about two dozen other things as well, such as perfume and wisdom in Psalms. The word is a messy jumble that blurs the distinction between spirit and soul.

There is much supposition here, is the soul really a “thing”? Things must reside somewhere, but where does the soul reside? What is an “immortal soul” and how is it immortal?

You think too much. Why do you persist on confusing yourself even more?

 

[Edial]

And prior to that the soul did not have a spirit, i.e. the breath of life (spiritus in Latin literally means breath). This does not clearly state that the soul was created as oppose to the soul simply acquiring something. The spirit and body were created, but prior to being a living soul the soul was a pre-incarnate soul.

The word nephesh is translated alternately as spirit then as soul, and as about two dozen other things as well, such as perfume and wisdom in Psalms. The word is a messy jumble that blurs the distinction between spirit and soul.

The word might be a "messy jumble that blurs the distinction between spirit and soul" ... and that is due to translations into another language.
Other languages cannot grasp the exact distingtion between soul and spirit, since soul and spirit in a person are very much intertwined. Like an analogy of a nervous system would be in a body.

Yet the Bible distinctly separates the 2 ...
Actually the word of God is capable of separating these two ... a type of a divine "surgery".

God sees a distinction between soul and spirit, joints and marrow thought and attotudes of heart.

HEB 4:12 For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. 13 Nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account.

So these are two separate things and in the end they will be separated.

There is much supposition here, is the soul really a “thing”? Things must reside somewhere, but where does the soul reside? What is an “immortal soul” and how is it immortal?

Soul does not need to reside anywhere in the spiritual world. It could and does exist by itself.

Every time we read the Revelation, in Heaven we see souls of men, never spirits of men.

REV 20:4 I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or his image and had not received his mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5 (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years.

It presents the following understanding.

People die on earth. Their souls are brought up. And in Heaven these souls are dressed into white robes.

REV 6:9 When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained. 10 They called out in a loud voice, "How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?" 11 Then each of them was given a white robe, and they were told to wait a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and brothers who were to be killed as they had been was completed.

So souls are indeed "things" that are invisible.

And if they are things that are invisible, Christ created all invisible things.
So it follows that souls were created.
Wouldn't you say?

Thanks,
Ed

 

[LutheranMafia]

The word might be a "messy jumble that blurs the distinction between spirit and soul" ... and that is due to translations into another language.
Other languages cannot grasp the exact distingtion between soul and spirit, since soul and spirit in a person are very much intertwined. Like an analogy of a nervous system would be in a body.

Yet the Bible distinctly separates the 2 ...
Actually the word of God is capable of separating these two ... a type of a divine "surgery".

God sees a distinction between soul and spirit, joints and marrow thought and attotudes of heart.

[FONT=&quot]HEB 4:12 For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. 13 Nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account.[/FONT]

So these are two separate things and in the end they will be separated.


Soul does not need to reside anywhere in the spiritual world. It could and does exist by itself.

The Bible is most certainly 100% correct that the soul is utterly and completely distinct from the spirit and there has never been any confusion in God’s mind between them, these two persons within all of us, but utterly and completely unfathomable to human beings who know nothing real of their own true nature. And so the Bible has not a single further thing to say on this distinction. The Bible does not specifically delineate any of the infinite distinctions between the spirit and the soul in anything but the most circuitous of manners, in fact it is utterly and completely vague about any such distinction, even as it so clearly specifies that such a distinction obviously exists.