Control Vs. Love

[JoeP222w]

Free Will and Theistic Predestination .

Define what you mean by each.

Many forms of understanding exist of these two terms, but one boils down to an option to Love, while another boils down to Control for God’s purpose, desire and good pleasure.

This is a false dichotomy. This, in essence, says that if God controls and determines things than it is not love. This is completely untrue. Does God have the right to do with His creation as He chooses, or does He have to bow down to the presumed sovereignty of man?

 

[Grip Docility]

I don't believe in God predestining some to heaven and others not. I believe in God predestining those who follow Jesus to heaven. Who those will be only God knows, it's fore-known, not fore-chosen.

God didn't send his Son to die for mankind if it wasn't possible for everyone to be saved.

God's will is the big wheel. Our free will is the smaller wheel inside the bigger wheel. Our free will is not independent of God's will.

This is a very well thought out and deeply studied answer.

I appreciate it.

You are also honestly expressing your perspective with clear words of your own expression.

All Love in Jesus Christ to you.

 

[Grip Docility]

Define what you mean by each.



This is a false dichotomy. This, in essence, says that if God controls and determines things than it is not love. This is completely untrue. Does God have the right to do with His creation as He chooses, or does He have to bow down to the presumed sovereignty of man?

God doesn’t have to do anything. But Philippians 2 certainly shows that God is a humble servant leader, instead of a micromanager that disempowers independent decision.

My Opinion.

 

[Grip Docility]

Well my good friend, I have to inform you of something that I hate to talk about on a Christian Forum because it completely fly's in the face of the Nicene Creed and EVERY creed and credo.

There is NO "Holy Spirit"! That is a man made false entity introduced to us by a clown named Tertullian way back in the 2nd century with his trinitas doctrine.

The Apostles NEVER said any such thing nor, was that part of anyone's thinking in the 1st century--not even Jesus Who is God!

The idea handed down to us by these firstlings is "spirituality", "spiritual life", "spiritual death", "spiritual gift". That is nothing more then a bunch of esoteric nonsense!

God is NOT "spiritual" nor, is He "supernatural"! God is preternatural! He exists within the limits of all He has designed. He is not beyond it, He is above it all which makes Him really, really hard to explain! That makes Him preternatural and NOT "supernatural".

The word translated for you as "Spirit" is pneuma which is first the root word pneO + the -ma ending which views that word from the standpoint of is state or effect.

pneuma literally means: breath. The autographed languages of Scripture has many, many words that all deal with breathing in some capacity.

ruwack is the Hebrew word translated as "Spirit" but also means: breath. Specifically, living-breath. Whenever a writer of Scripture quotes an OT verse containing ruwack, they use the word pneuma to refer to living breath. Therefore, pneuma in the NT can refer to living breath or, pneuma-breath.

We MUST ALWAYS understand that the Word of God was given to us from Hebrew, to Aramaic, to Greek, to English and we were never given any authority to take the words backwards using English to explain Hebrew, or Greek thinking skills through words.

Greek is a precision Swiss watch. English is a sundial at night!

pneuma means: intellect given from an exterior source that is not natural to you and is viewed from it's effect on you.

This is in contrast to psuchE-breath which refers to natural breathing or, natural instinctive intellect. For some unknown reason to me, the translator translate psuchE-breath as "soul" and teachers teach us erroneously that man has a "soul" when the Scriptures plainly teach that man is a body with a God given a breath of life with a heart(inner-most being) where we store our interior psuchE breathing intellect and our exterior sourced pneuma breathing intellect.

Hebrews 4:12 tells us that the Word of God is like a sword with separates the good psuchE from the bad, and the good pneuma from the bad.

When Jerome translated the autographed languages of God's Word into Latin, translated both the Hebrew ruwack and Greek pneuma by the Latin word which also means breath which is "spiritus". Now do you see the problem?

So the lifeless English translators decided to transliterate a Latin word instead of giving us an understanding of the simple biblical understand of breathing in and out!

The adjective associated with pneuma is hagion translated by the translators as "Holy". I have absativally NO idea what "Holy" means but, the Hebrew qadash means: separating a class from a class making it special and unique. The Greek word hagion means: pure, undefiled unpolluted making it pure. When we read the NT we must take all Hebrew imported thoughts forward.

Here go's!:

If both the noun and the adjective are anarthrous(no definite article), I may identify the adjective which follows the noun(predicate position) it modifies predicately, as it is a predicate, by using a copula(linking verb) such as -being after the adjective. Examples: hippos purros = [ ]horse fiery-red-being. pneuma hagion = [ ]breath pure-being. iEsous christos = [ ]Jesus anointed-being. Or, I may not as Greek does not need the copula but, our English practically demands it when we translate from Greek to English. Yet absativally, anarthrous or articular nouns; followed by an anarthrous adjective, means that the adjective is in the predicate position(makes an assertion about the subject) and is NEVER attributive (I will get arguments from manipulators).

If an anarthrous adjective precedes an anarthrous noun, then the adjective is in the attributive position. Example: hagion pneuma = [ ]pure breath. If an anarthrous adjective precedes an articular noun then it is a predicate. Example: hagion to pneuma-[ ]pure(-is) thee breath.

If the adjective, whether preceding or following(usually) the noun it modifies, has a definite article: then it is always attributive.

Therefore, you cannot take pneuma hagion = [ ]breath pure-being; invent “Spirit”; switch the word order and turn a predicate adjective into an attributive adjective; then add the definite article turning an anarthrous construction into an articular construction; capitalize it(which a hearer cannot see); completely ignore the neuter gender and translate it as “the Holy Spirit” in any sense of academic honesty.

Someone had to tell you. God chose me.

So when the English bible says "Holy Spirit" it is actually, and literally, referring to the theopnustos(2 Tim 3:16--NIV) God-Breathed Scriptures which will have an effect!

2 Timothy 3:16 16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting(to an upright state) and training in righteousness,(not to dissimilar to Hebrews 4:12)

Case in point:

David himself said in the Holy Spirit(in thee breath, namely--the pure-one, the God-breathed pure Scripture as Mark is about to quote David in the Older Testament--covenants Scripture, Psalm 110:1 i.e., David himself said in the Bible

‘THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD,
“SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND,
UNTIL I PUT YOUR ENEMIES BENEATH YOUR FEET.”’ Mark 12:36 NASB

Sorry, was that too simple for you? Or do you want to talk to me about the "imbued" “endowment”, “enduement”, “induement” of the “Holy Spirit” to the OT saints--ridiculous?

Did David say something in the bible which is the pure breath of God?

hagion is in the neuter gender and so is gramma(something written).

The masculine of hagion is hagios stupidly translated as "saint".

because it is written, " YOU(-all) SHALL BE HOLY(pure, unique), FOR I(God) AM HOLY(pure, unique)." 1 Pet 1:16 NASB (quoting Lev 19:2)

You shall be a saint because I am a saint? PLEASE!

For God has not called us for the purpose of impurity, but in sanctification(hagiasmos-resultant state of being purified, or purification used as the opposite of the previous word “impurity”). 1 Thess 4:7 NASB See how silly?

Hyper-Literal: Yet we(Paul, Silvanus, Timothy) ought to-be-thanking to-thee God always concerning you-all(call-out-ones of Thessalonica) Brethren!, you-all-having-been-agapE-loved under [ ]of-authority, He(God)-preferred you-all, thee God, that from [ ]of-beginning unto deliverance(noun of action), [ ]to-purification(hagiasmos) of-pneuma-breath and-also [ ]to-trust of-truth(noun of action). 2 Thess 2:13

There is not a single verse in the autographed languages of Scripture that allows man to establish a "Trinity" or, a "Holy Spirit"!

Nicene Creed--"We believe in the Holy Spirit" said at the end with nothing to qualify that statement.

"...be filled with the spirit(the pneuma-breath of God--THE GOD-BREATHED SCRITURES) Eph 5:18 so that you can be useful and breathe it out to others Eph 5:19. Breathe in, breathe out--I know you can do it!

What of 1 Thessalonians 5:23?

John 14:16?

Acts 2

I am familiar with the Father-Son Union doctrine and it’s presence in the early church writings that are outside of Canon. You are the first official person I have ever seen write that holds to it.

This has a kind of wow factor to it for me, because you have studied it out so strongly.

I am also intrigued because the Body, Soul and Spirit teaching is the very one that I compass with. You are actually intimately familiar with it as well and understand it’s discussion.

What of Paul saying: Do you not know your body is the temple of God?

I am genuinely curious to understand your Scriptural Understanding, as I have never had the opportunity to discuss this with a real live believer of it!!!!

This is a rare opportunity!

Thank you for having the tenacity and courage to share your spiritual heart on this thread, Sir!

I have no problem learning a doctrine I don’t adhere to, because it helps me understand where fellow Brethren are perceiving from.

I assume you see the Pneuma as sufficient to mark the presence of God Within an individual?

No Ruach HaKodesh? From your perspective?

 

[Anguspure]

Immediately, I biased the debate and know this. However, there are two factions of theology. Free Will and Theistic Predestination .

Many forms of understanding exist of these two terms, but one boils down to an option to Love, while another boils down to Control for God’s purpose, desire and good pleasure.

Which is Correct biblically and why?

It is the perfect middle knowledge of God that allows Him to pre-determine events and circumstances in anticipation of the free will choices that His creatures make, and enables Him to maintain control in so far as He wills it.

 

[Haipule]

Romans 8:29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Romans 8:30 Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.

Ephesians 1:5 having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will,

Ephesians 1:11 In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will,


There is an Adam in all of us that is uncomfortable with, even more concerning predestination. But as Christians we are called to crucify Adam daily in Christ so to speak. The Bible is about Christ, from cover to cover. And He say's;

Matt 25:34 “Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

Ephesians 1:4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love,

There are other verses but the hope here is that we allow Scripture to inform and shape our thoughts, be they transformed as to the mind of Christ. A line from one of Rich Mullins songs (Creed) comes to mind, it's about the truth of Scripture and he say's; "I did not make it, no it is making me".



Agree.



And yet we make choices all the time and we have our preferences. Every time I go through McDonald's drive through, I have to make choices, sometimes those choices are easy, sometimes not so much. Due to my health issues, I can choose food from the menu that will likely not bother my stomach so much, or I can choose food that I do like, but will likely effect my stomach with undesirable results.



Essentially I agree, however, in the day to day process of sanctification we should note in Scripture there are many implications of choice, "be renewed in the Spirit of your mind" (Eph 4:23), "take up his cross daily" (Luke 9:23), "be transformed" (Rom 12:2), "put on the whole armor of God" (Eph 6:11). I agree we should be concerned with the will of God and not our own will and desires, however I would be a fool and liar not to suppose my will and desires do not get in the way or that I do not stumble and fall, like a child learning to crawl, walk, and run.



Nah man, that's just the Eastern Mysticism of Panthestic Hindu-ish denials in making distinctions type of thinking. Evil is just an illusion they say! Guns n' Roses used their Illusion to gain fame and fortune for a time. As an aside, separating sheep from goats is making a distinction just so you know.



I'm in the James and Paul are in agreement camp, where the fellowship is sweet as honey.



I believe Spiritual regeneration must first take place, the dead will and desires resurrected, the heart of stone replaced, the scales removed from the eyes, be brought into the light where deeds are exposed and repentance is a response to changes brought about by the Spirit of God alone.

Romans 8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be.

1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

To know what the Bible truly say's requires spiritual discernment (which the natural man does not receive), and Christ say's;

John 6:63 “It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.

Sorry to bother you but I wish to continue:

Spirit is the worst translation we could have given the Greek word pneuma or the Hebrew word ruwach, second only to “Ghost”. spiritus, transliterated as spirit into English, has done little for us in the understanding of pure pneuma, the pure breath-effect of God through means of study of the God-breathed Scripture.

If we think in terms of “spirit”, as a person, in a modern English sense, then we will naturally also think in terms of being indwelt by “the Spirit”, rather than the pneuma-breath of God making its home in us, through study, as it is revealed in Scripture, or possessed by “the Spirit” rather than to possess it through study, the pneuma-breath of God, as revealed in Scripture, or controlled by “the Spirit” rather than to live a life pneumatikOs, pneumatically(according to God’s pneuma-breath), through study, as revealed in the God-breathed Scripture, or “filled with the Spirit” rather than understanding that the only way to be “filled with the breath” of God is to study it! Fill’er up pastor and with the good stuff! For we cannot run on empty! And not long on “VAPORS”.

Being “possessed”, “indwelt”, “controlled by the Spirit” and “filled with the Spirit”, is rather esoteric compared to understanding it as simply; the pneuma-breath, or breathing of God into us through study, which is something a 7yr old can understand. Although, it is neither a simple thought nor a complex one, it is whatever our capacity to think in terms of God’s pneuma-breath can take us. It is infinite in scope: it has neither beginning nor end. Therefore, the thoughts of pneuma, as well as the rest of the Word of God, which are God-breathed, cannot be reduced entirely into a set of principles. Yet we must, as we all have, start somewhere.

You quoted John 6:63

Side by Side: " [It is--wrong order] the Spirit(pneuma-breath), [who-not in the original] [it-is--correct order] gives life(one-making-live); thee flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you(-all) are(literally, is) [ ]spirit(pneuma-breath) and(-also) are(literally, is) [ ](zOE-)life. John 6:63 NASB

Hyper-Literal(same verse): Thee pneuma-breath, it-is thee one-making-live; thee flesh(feminine) not she-is-profiting no-thing; thee-all messages(neuter) which-all I(Jesus) I-am-speaking to-you-all; it(messages)-is [ ]pneuma-breath and-also it-is [ ]zOE-life(feminine). John 6:63

Parting shot:

What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life-- 1 John 1:1 NASB

 

[fhansen]

Define what you mean by each.



This is a false dichotomy. This, in essence, says that if God controls and determines things than it is not love. This is completely untrue. Does God have the right to do with His creation as He chooses, or does He have to bow down to the presumed sovereignty of man?

He can do whatever He wants, whatever serves His purposes. He can just determine everything, or He can leave some decisions up to his creation. But if the former, He may as well have just stocked heaven with the elect, and hell with the reprobate, at the beginning and avoided all the pain, suffering, death-all the evil-that followed after the Fall. Instead He gave Adam a choice to make, and never stopped working to help humankind make the right choice in spite of that original wrong one.

 

[Haipule]

What of 1 Thessalonians 5:23?

John 14:16?

Acts 2

I am familiar with the Father-Son Union doctrine and it’s presence in the early church writings that are outside of Canon. You are the first official person I have ever seen write that holds to it.

This has a kind of wow factor to it for me, because you have studied it out so strongly.

I am also intrigued because the Body, Soul and Spirit teaching is the very one that I compass with. You are actually intimately familiar with it as well and understand it’s discussion.

What of Paul saying: Do you not know your body is the temple of God?

I am genuinely curious to understand your Scriptural Understanding, as I have never had the opportunity to discuss this with a real live believer of it!!!!

This is a rare opportunity!

Thank you for having the tenacity and courage to share your spiritual heart on this thread, Sir!

I have no problem learning a doctrine I don’t adhere to, because it helps me understand where fellow Brethren are perceiving from.

I assume you see the Pneuma as sufficient to mark the presence of God Within an individual?

No Ruach HaKodesh? From your perspective?

As far as, 1 Thess 5:23

Paul's use of the definite article and the conjunction kai is interesting: "thee pneuma-breath and-also thee psuchE-breath and-also thee body".

The way Paul worded it is to unite all as one unit to be completely and entirely blameless.

As far as John 14 we are NOT going there! I have translated the entire chapter but what you can't see is that the pneuma is neuter and the paraklEtos is masculine which makes it difficult to translate into English.

paraklEtos is first the prefixed preposition para and means: form one place to another place or, from someone to someone. It is untranslatable into English and the translators insistence that it means simply "near" will never fit without manipulating the Scripture.

klEtos means: representative, someone or something that represents another that is not there. It does not refer to a lawyer as we need not more legalists!

paraklEtos means from some place to another place to represent something that is missing. "Comforter" is way out of left field!

So, what Jesus is saying there, is that He would send the paraklEtos(masculine), which is the pneuma-breath(neuter) to represent Him while He is gone.

Jesus is the Living Word and the phenomenal events of Acts 2 means that He kept His promise. Most importantly, the enablement of men to write Scripture!

Now I ask you, is not the subsequent God-Breathed Newer Covenants a representative of the missing from us now, Jesus?

 

[Grip Docility]

As far as, 1 Thess 5:23

Paul's use of the definite article and the conjunction kai is interesting: "thee pneuma-breath and-also thee psuchE-breath and-also thee body".

The way Paul worded it is to unite all as one unit to be completely and entirely blameless.

As far as John 14 we are NOT going there! I have translated the entire chapter but what you can't see is that the pneuma is neuter and the paraklEtos is masculine which makes it difficult to translate into English.

paraklEtos is first the prefixed preposition para and means: form one place to another place or, from someone to someone. It is untranslatable into English and the translators insistence that it means simply "near" will never fit without manipulating the Scripture.

klEtos means: representative, someone or something that represents another that is not there. It does not refer to a lawyer as we need not more legalists!

paraklEtos means from some place to another place to represent something that is missing. "Comforter" is way out of left field!

So, what Jesus is saying there, is that He would send the paraklEtos(masculine), which is the pneuma-breath(neuter) to represent Him while He is gone.

Jesus is the Living Word and the phenomenal events of Acts 2 means that He kept His promise. Most importantly, the enablement of men to write Scripture!

Now I ask you, is not the subsequent God-Breathed Newer Covenants a representative of the missing from us now, Jesus?

I’ll be precise, to answer your question. I believe The very Spirit Of Jesus indwells us and could get there via the Pneuma or the Holy Spirit.

It’s His Physical Presence that indeed is missing, and along those lines, yes, the Epistles and Writings are deeply satisfying, though Psalms has always been my go to medicine.

For all the wonderful things you have taken your time to express, I hope I answered your well expressed question to me, in a way that shows my gratitude for your devoted time and thought expressed in your posts.

 

[Haipule]

What of 1 Thessalonians 5:23?

John 14:16?

Acts 2

I am familiar with the Father-Son Union doctrine and it’s presence in the early church writings that are outside of Canon. You are the first official person I have ever seen write that holds to it.

This has a kind of wow factor to it for me, because you have studied it out so strongly.

I am also intrigued because the Body, Soul and Spirit teaching is the very one that I compass with. You are actually intimately familiar with it as well and understand it’s discussion.

What of Paul saying: Do you not know your body is the temple of God?

I am genuinely curious to understand your Scriptural Understanding, as I have never had the opportunity to discuss this with a real live believer of it!!!!

This is a rare opportunity!

Thank you for having the tenacity and courage to share your spiritual heart on this thread, Sir!

I have no problem learning a doctrine I don’t adhere to, because it helps me understand where fellow Brethren are perceiving from.

I assume you see the Pneuma as sufficient to mark the presence of God Within an individual?

No Ruach HaKodesh? From your perspective?

If we look at the OT through the Greek of the Septuagint we find that animals have a psuchE-breath "soul" but they do not possess a pneuma-breath "spirit". Which is merely stating that your cat has a natural instinctive intellect but it cannot process external information such as, read a book!

 

[Haipule]

I’ll be precise, to answer your question. I believe The very Spirit Of Jesus indwells us and could get there via the Pneuma or the Holy Spirit.

It’s His Physical Presence that indeed is missing, and along those lines, yes, the Epistles and Writings are deeply satisfying, though Psalms has always been my go to medicine.

For all the wonderful things you have taken your time to express, I hope I answered your well expressed question to me, in a way that shows my gratitude for your devoted time and thought expressed in your posts.

Thank you so much kind Sir! I really appreciate your kindness! It is a difficult subject. And your right, it took me years and years to unravel that rat nested reel!

But, I am in(a place of rest) Jesus and Jesus is in(a place of rest) me and we are united in one place without motion(to be technical).


Clearly the pneuma-breath "Spirit" of Jesus is the words He spoke!

It's funny that this would be easier to communicate these simple truths if you were Hawaiian as I could then relate pneuma-breath as ha-breath as breathing is a part of aloha.

 

[Haipule]

What of 1 Thessalonians 5:23?

John 14:16?

Acts 2

I am familiar with the Father-Son Union doctrine and it’s presence in the early church writings that are outside of Canon. You are the first official person I have ever seen write that holds to it.

This has a kind of wow factor to it for me, because you have studied it out so strongly.

I am also intrigued because the Body, Soul and Spirit teaching is the very one that I compass with. You are actually intimately familiar with it as well and understand it’s discussion.

What of Paul saying: Do you not know your body is the temple of God?

I am genuinely curious to understand your Scriptural Understanding, as I have never had the opportunity to discuss this with a real live believer of it!!!!

This is a rare opportunity!

Thank you for having the tenacity and courage to share your spiritual heart on this thread, Sir!

I have no problem learning a doctrine I don’t adhere to, because it helps me understand where fellow Brethren are perceiving from.

I assume you see the Pneuma as sufficient to mark the presence of God Within an individual?

No Ruach HaKodesh? From your perspective?

"I am familiar with the Father-Son Union doctrine and it’s presence in the early church writings that are outside of Canon. You are the first official person I have ever seen write that holds to it."

That is fascinating! I never heard of such a thing and am not all together sure of what you mean.

I DO unite Jesus as God like John the Apostle did, and Thomas did, and Jesus as the Father as Jesus Himself did. The only one's who taught me that are John, Thomas and Jesus.

 

[Grip Docility]

"I am familiar with the Father-Son Union doctrine and it’s presence in the early church writings that are outside of Canon. You are the first official person I have ever seen write that holds to it."

That is fascinating! I never heard of such a thing and am not all together sure of what you mean.

I DO unite Jesus as God like John the Apostle did, and Thomas did, and Jesus as the Father as Jesus Himself did. The only one's who taught me that are John, Thomas and Jesus.

I believe, possibly, Polycarp or Ignatius wrote severely on the Father and Son alone and were actually noted as having rarely touched on the Holy Spirit (Pneuma, from your perspective).

It was one of the big 7 that were super early on and indeed, Tertullian railed against their writings as He practically had a 3 God trinity drawn up that had 3 different bodies and 3 different literal beings. His version is very close to poly theism.

The other writers tried hard to reconcile One essence as 3.

However, one of the 7, and I’m pretty certain it’s one of the 2 I mentioned, focused on the Father and Son and pointed out verses like Romans 8:9.

Judaism would most definitely understand that much more clearly than the Tertullian model which specifically disagrees with Deuteronomy 6:4.

That is a bit of what I was referencing.

 

[GodsGrace101]

Immediately, I biased the debate and know this. However, there are two factions of theology. Free Will and Theistic Predestination .

Many forms of understanding exist of these two terms, but one boils down to an option to Love, while another boils down to Control for God’s purpose, desire and good pleasure.

Which is Correct biblically and why?

Love is correct.

God predestined the method by which we could attain salvation, He did not predestine those that would be saved.

Sometimes we read the term "elect". God's elect are:
1. The nation of Israel. For example, Romans 9 to 11.
2. God's people, us, the saved ones, God elects us, or chooses us (elect means chosen) based on our response to Him. We are chosen if we meet God's conditions.
ALL are welcomed to be saved.
John 3:16
Mark 1:15

God is love.
1 John 4:8

God is mercy.
Luke 6:36

God is just.
Deuteronomy 32:4

 

[Haipule]

I believe, possibly, Polycarp or Ignatius wrote severely on the Father and Son alone and were actually noted as having rarely touched on the Holy Spirit (Pneuma, from your perspective).

It was one of the big 7 that were super early on and indeed, Tertullian railed against their writings as He practically had a 3 God trinity drawn up that had 3 different bodies and 3 different literal beings. His version is very close to poly theism.

The other writers tried hard to reconcile One essence as 3.

However, one of the 7, and I’m pretty certain it’s one of the 2 I mentioned, focused on the Father and Son and pointed out verses like Romans 8:9.

Judaism would most definitely understand that much more clearly than the Tertullian model which specifically disagrees with Deuteronomy 6:4.

That is a bit of what I was referencing.

Yeah, Tertullian's big God, smaller Jesus and even smaller spiritus; that he dubbed the "trinitas", has been reinvented and reinvented ever since and they even gave God an "essence" to justify it that everyone argues about. It's so stupid and unnecessary!

 

[Grip Docility]

Yeah, Tertullian's big God, smaller Jesus and even smaller spiritus; that he dubbed the "trinitas", has been reinvented and reinvented ever since and they even gave God an "essence" to justify it that everyone argues about. It's so stupid and unnecessary!

To be direct, I believe that the Father is the Spirit, The Son is the Body and the Holy Spirit is the Soul- Of YHWH.

However, I find peace anywhere Jesus is recognized as YHWH.

When Jesus is stripped of Deity in an Arian Fashion, I get upset, but have learned to Love all of God’s Humans and have become less of the bully, I used to be.

When Unitarian teaching comes in, I like to expose its error, but simultaneously, I try to recognize that all people see things differently to some level. I’m working on being less of a meany head, specifically there.

Bottom Line, you and I see Jesus as God And Savior, and that Sir is More than enough for me.

And on a direct note of unison, John is also my go to apologist for the Divinity of Jesus Christ.

People also tend to be ignorant to the disciples baptizing in the direct name of Jesus, which is written in scripture. I’m certain you are not ignorant to this and it is quite refreshing.

Did I use too many smiley faces?

 

[Haipule]

To be direct, I believe that the Father is the Spirit, The Son is the Body and the Holy Spirit is the Soul- Of YHWH.

However, I find peace anywhere Jesus is recognized as YHWH.

When Jesus is stripped of Deity in an Arian Fashion, I get upset, but have learned to Love all of God’s Humans and have become less of the bully, I used to be.

When Unitarian teaching comes in, I like to expose its error, but simultaneously, I try to recognize that all people see things differently to some level. I’m working on being less of a meany head, specifically there.

Bottom Line, you and I see Jesus as God And Savior, and that Sir is More than enough for me.

And on a direct note of unison, John is also my go to apologist for the Divinity of Jesus Christ.

People also tend to be ignorant to the disciples baptizing in the direct name of Jesus, which is written in scripture. I’m certain you are not ignorant to this and it is quite refreshing.

Did I use too many smiley faces?

You are nothing but GOOD! I love you because God [the character and nature that is God] He-is.

I'm not saying that I agree with your rocket science that is obviously outside of the context that was written by people God called to write such things truthfully, but, God and His love in you is blatantly obvious!

But since you are God's lover, let me tell you this that, God's love is not your own and it never need be. In fact, that is impossible!

Your personal loves are private to you. But, expressing God's love to others has rules!

agapE-love(Greek) means: to have an active interest in others, up to and including, sexuality. The English could never do that with it's word "love".

The Greek has 4 words translated as "love" but are all distinctive leaving our English word "love" in the dust!

The Greek word philos, which means; fond, and is more inline with the English word "love".

The Hebrew word is chen and means: to breath passionately for, to desire greatly.

When we look at Romans love God with all of... is a quote of the Hebrew OT so must be understood as to desire passionately.

IOW's, do we "love" wisdom(English sense) or, do we desire it passionately(Hebrew sense)?

So, we are called to love others with a love that is God's. Why? Because they are just going to love you back!

NOTHING to me is greater than this! And nothing could be easier because it ain't me! God taught me this!

His such the lover that made us like this!

 

[JoeP222w]

God doesn’t have to do anything. But Philippians 2 certainly shows that God is a humble servant leader, instead of a micromanager that disempowers independent decision.

God is in sovereign control of everything in the universe, from the smallest atom to the largest galaxy. If God is not in control of the smallest minutiae of the universe, than He is not sovereign, He is not omnipotent, He is not in control. God does not "micromanage" as in human, sinful "micromanagement", but He has decree the end and the means. Man does not make a single decision that is outside of God's sovereign decree.

John 1:3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Colossians 1:16-18 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. (17) And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. (18) And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent.

Not my opinion, but what God's word has spoken.

 

[JoeP222w]

He can do whatever He wants, whatever serves His purposes. He can just determine everything, or He can leave some decisions up to his creation.

I do not completely agree. God's creation has no ability to make a decision outside of the sovereign decree of God.

But if the former, He may as well have just stocked heaven with the elect, and hell with the reprobate, at the beginning and avoided all the pain, suffering, death-all the evil-that followed after the Fall.

God determines the ends and the means in which He is glorified.

Genesis 50:20 As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today.

Instead He gave Adam a choice to make, and never stopped working to help humankind make the right choice in spite of that original wrong one.

Yes, He gave Adam a choice, but due to the nature of Adam that God decreed in order to bring Him [God] glory, Adam had no ability to make the right moral choice. Likewise, all of mankind has no ability to make the right moral choice, apart from the work of God's grace.

Ephesians 2:1-10 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins (2) in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— (3) among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. (4) But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, (5) even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— (6) and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, (7) so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. (8) For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, (9) not a result of works, so that no one may boast. (10) For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

 

[RDKirk]

Immediately, I biased the debate and know this. However, there are two factions of theology. Free Will and Theistic Predestination .

Many forms of understanding exist of these two terms, but one boils down to an option to Love, while another boils down to Control for God’s purpose, desire and good pleasure.

Which is Correct biblically and why?

What difference does it make in what you do today for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven?

If you discover one or the other, are you going to become a disbeliever?