God Is a Physical Being

[TedT]

Same as us. They weren't fully holy at the outset. They had to undergo a trial period where they had a good measure of free will. Personally I believe that those angels are fully holy now and thus can no longer sin. And we too will be made fully holy in heaven.

You haven't said that their sinful souls were split into millions of pieces to be spread throughout a universe...why just Adam?

 

[TedT]

The church has for 2,000 years translated the Third Person's title as "Holy Spirit" but that's exactly what I've refuted.

Oh I know this happens because the same thing happened in the story of the garden when `rm is translated as naked for Adam and Eve yet translated cunning in evil for the serpent...the same word! The implication they were sinful when sown into the garden is glossed over because 'everyone knew' they were a new creation here on earth.

The vowels that force the different readings of this word were added only after the Masoretic changes, c600-900 CE(?).

But in your case...I think you've been led astray.

 

[JAL]

What a great paragraph!

I'm a mono-lapsarian (we, you and me, not just Adam, sinned first totally on our own by our own free will) and monergist, saved by GOD alone from the consequences of our choice to sin.

That's weird. After thumping us endlessly about the primacy of free will, you now speak of - monergism? I'm confused.

 

[JAL]

You haven't said that their sinful souls were split into millions of pieces to be spread throughout a universe...why just Adam?

Universe? Not the whole universe. Adam was distributed only among human beings, as far as I know.

In my opinion fallen angels were redistributed as well - amongst all the creatures of the earth. Those creatures suffer quite a bit after all. Since God is good, it is not likely that He would allow innocent souls to suffer. This is not to say that creatures are "evil" - they are currently neutral, effectively, because their bodies and brains do not foster conscience. But they originally were evil demons in my opinion. This is another example of how my metaphysics alone handles the Problem of Evil (i.e. the allegation of excess/unnecessary suffering) effectively.

 

[JAL]

@Daniel Marsh, @TedT

At post 368, I provided one proof that 'Holy Spirit' is an exegetically impossible translation. In case you missed it, there was a second proof indicated earlier in the thread. Here is that 2nd proof again.

The TITLES of God do not change. For example, if we translate His titles as Father, Son, and Holy Breath in one passage, in the parallel passages we cannot translate those same three words as 'Grandmother, Cousin, and Holy Terror'. Obviously. Thus a simple litmus test for a possible English title is whether it works well in ALL passages. Note that 'Holy Breath' works fine in all passages. What about 'Holy Spirit' ? In some cases it doesn't seem to work! In those cases the translators had recourse to Breath! Some examples:

"By the blast of your nostrils, the waters piled up...you blew with your breath, and the sea covered them" (Ex 15).

'He will overthrow the lawless one by the breath of his mouth' (2 Th 2:8).

"By the word of the LORD were the heavens made, their starry host by the breath of his mouth" (Psalm 33).

"The channels of the sea appeared, and the foundations of the world were exposed, at Your rebuke, O LORD, at the blast of the breath of Your nostrils" (Psalm 18).

 

[TedT]

That's weird. After thumping us endlessly about the primacy of free will, you now speak of - monergism? I'm confused.

You are still applying free will to sinners - I do not. Monergism is salvation only by GOD since no sinner has a free will until rebirth in Christ's spirit which breaks our enslaving addicting to evil and restores our free will. A re-reading of what I wrote in this light will explain it.

 

[TedT]

In my opinion fallen angels were redistributed as well - amongst all the creatures of the earth. Those creatures suffer quite a bit after all. Since God is good, it is not likely that He would allow innocent souls to suffer. This is not to say that creatures are "evil"...

Ahhh, thanks.

Of course animals are evil. They just were not quite as evil as the serpent who was crafty above or more than the other animals, evil lite so to speak, Gen 3:1.

Plus they were cursed for their evil, Gen 3:14, just not as much as the serpent was cursed.

As well they were destroyed in the flood with mankind for their violence, Gen 5-6. Why two of each were saved is the question.

I do agree that they are animated by being demonic angels flung into the earth but I follow the orthodox implications that they are animated by their own sinful spirit, not a split-off of soul parts from another sinner.

 

[JAL]

You are still applying free will to sinners .

As I explained, my system is flexible enough to allow for either a monergistic salvation or a synergestic one, depending on one's theological predilections.

 

[JAL]

You are still applying free will to sinners - I do not. Monergism is salvation only by GOD since no sinner has a free will until rebirth in Christ's spirit which breaks our enslaving addicting to evil and restores our free will. A re-reading of what I wrote in this light will explain it.

I still don't get it. As I recall, you were insistent that monergistically coercing us into loving God would only make us Stepford wives. You now seem to be changing your tune.

 

[JAL]

When someone hands you ANY non-fiction book, including the Bible, you should assume, by default, that it documents natural facts devoid of magic, sorcery, and superstition. Such supernatural nonsense is of no use to most non-fiction writers. Historically the theologians failed us by falling in love with Plato's supernatural understanding of God without a clear biblical basis. The Bible itself never refers to God as a sorcerer, wizard, or magician of any kind. He is simply King of kings and Lord of lords, and everything He does can be explained in wholly natural terms, whether healing the sick with His own hands, or parting the Red Sea by His own Breath/Wind, or molding a lump of clay into the planet Earth.

 

[topher694]

I always find it endearing when someone steps out and creates their own religion.

 

[JAL]

I always find it endearing when someone steps out and creates their own religion.

Tell me about it. That's precisely how I feel.

 

[topher694]

Tell me about it. That's precisely how I feel.

Have you picked out a name yet?

 

[JAL]

Have you picked out a name yet?

How about Magical Immaterial Spirit.

 

[topher694]

How about Magical Immaterial Spirit.

No silly, I mean for your new religion. I was thinking: Jalism

 

[JAL]

No silly, I mean for your new religion. I was thinking: Jalism

Oh my religion. I call it "Biblical Christianity".

 

[topher694]

Oh my religion. I call it "Biblical Christianity".

Yeah, but no one else calls what you are saying that, so time for a new name! Congrats!

 

[Daniel Marsh]

(Sigh). The whole point of this thread is to be a corrective on metaphysics including poor Bible-translations. You've chosen to disregard the evidence presented on this thread.

And yet, you can not find translations that reads, "Holy Breath", I posted the Greek, and your misreading of the text is not supported by Greek Translators.

"
Receive ye the Holy Ghost (λαβετε πνευμα αγιον — labete pneuma hagion). Second aorist (ingressive) active imperative of λαμβανω — lambanō Note absence of article here (πνευμα αγιον — pneuma hagion) though το πνευμα το αγιον — to pneuma to hagion in John 14:26 (NAS) John 14:26. No real distinction is to be observed, for Holy Spirit is treated as a proper name with or without the article." John 20 - Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament - Bible Commentaries - StudyLight.org

Do you know of anywhere "pneuma hagion" is used for anything but the Holy Spirit anywhere else in the NT? The Holy Spirit is a person, not just a breath.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

I have seen this first fallacy used by someone:

"1. Basic Meaning Fallacy The first fallacy is an assumption that each word has a basic meaning that exists in every context in which it is used.14 A. The root of each word is considered to be the bearer of its basic meaning, which is evident in every word built on that ..."
https://www.mcmaster.ca/mjtm/documents/MJTM_12.1_BaxterFallacies_001.pdf

This below relates to your misuse of breath for spirit in John 20:22

"
The One Meaning Fallacy:

This fallacy occurs when one concludes that a word means only one thing everywhere and anywhere. Often, it is argued that one specific Greek or Hebrew word should always be translated by the same English word."
Word-Study Fallacies

 

[JAL]

Do you know of anywhere "pneuma hagion" is used for anything but the Holy Spirit anywhere else in the NT? The Holy Spirit is a person, not just a breath.

Correct. The Holy Breath is the Third Person of the Trinity.
When you care to post something other than a strawman, let me know.