Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Another fallacious argument.Make things up? Sort of like the theory of adding a created human soul to the trinity - a claim nowhere mentioned in Scripture? That kind of thing?
Thus in the orthodox view, the Son of God is:Here lies the specific answer to the question: as to Jesus’ divine nature, He is unchanging. As to His human nature, He is changeable.
Fallacious? Where in that statement did you deny that a created human soul was placed in Christ's body?Another fallacious argument.
The Son has always been One of the Trinity, pre Incarnation and post Incarnation. He is now forever the Godman, the 2nd Person of the Trinity who remains fully God, fully man. He has always been and still is a Divine Person.
I'm 100% biblical and 100% orthodox with my above statement.
hope this helps !!!
Yet another declined opportunity. At this rate, the second hurdle of 1050 posts is right around the corner.truly pathetic................
Me too ——————————————No, I have given you just one reason for not answering it.
I draw the line when people start lying about me so don`t expect me to put up with that.
From one of your copy-and-paste jobs:
Thus in the orthodox view, the Son of God is:
(1) The unchanging changing God.
You said:(2) The omniscient ignorant God
You said:(3) The created uncreated God
You said:(4) The untemptible temptible God
You said:(5) The impassible God who suffered on the cross
You said:(6) The tireless fatigueable God.
I believe God does not change in some ways and in other ways He does change.
So this would be accurate. This is why I believe in Partial Immutability.
Yes, in one sense this is true, too. The Scriptures appear to imply that the Father and the Holy Spirit appear to always be Omniscient, but yet on the other hand, we know that Jesus grew in wisdom. Based on the fact that Jesus was said in Scripture to have power, and that Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever, this most likely means that the Son of God suppressed His divine attribute of Omniscience during His earthly ministry so as to be like a man (Note: When I say suppressed, this is like when a person may suppress a memory, or when a person may suppress their eyesight by putting on a blindfold).
Yeah, I am going to have to agree with you on this one. God was not both uncreated and also created. God has always existed and He never was created at another point in time.
I agree whole heartedly that God cannot be tempted.
But I would prefer not to go into details about it here on this forum, though.
Well, I think a better example is Christ weeping; For to feel pain is a natural response of having a human body. But yes, this one is highly illogical.
Both of these are true. This is an issue of the Son of God being manifested in a human body that can be tired while upon this Earth. This is not a contradiction. God as spirit without a human body cannot ever be tired, but as a human He can be tired.
there you go again from the "human: standpoint ie perspective, reasoning, understanding etc..........In part orthoodoxy's philosophical Doctrine of Divine Simplicity (DDS) is what created this pickle in the first place, according to which God is defined as an immaterial substance indivisible into parts. Not only has this assumption created undue complication for the Incarnation, it doesn't even make for a real Trinity. Remember that Sytematic Theology textbook I mentioned a couple of times already - probably used in every seminary in the world? Here's what it admitted about the (orthodox) Trinity:
[It is] logically absurd from the human standpoint.
When the very proponents of a doctrine admit their position to be logically absurd, it's time to wake up and smell the coffee.
Anyway, the point is that if the Son is one indivisible person, it doesn't make sense to classify Him as both ignorant and omniscient simultaneously. This problem is caused by DDS, as already noted.
No you are missing the point of the six objections. 2 natures is the claim that the Son, in each of the six cases, was both polar opposites simultaneously. I gave an example earlier on this thread:
(1) My friend Mike is a math-genius. He knows all math.
(2) At the same time, he is math-ignorant, he doesn't know any math.
You said:This contradiction resolves if the created human soul remained a person separate and distinct from the Son of God.
For it is no contradiction to say:
(1) The Son of God remained omniscient
(2) Meanwhile an entirely different person, a created human soul, remained ignorant.
That would resolve all six contradictions - but it would also mean that the Son of God wasn't the one who atoned. One of us created humans atoned, in that case.
Another fallacious argument.
The Son has always been One of the Trinity, pre Incarnation and post Incarnation. He is now forever the Godman, the 2nd Person of the Trinity who remains fully God, fully man. He has always been and still is a Divine Person.
I'm 100% biblical and 100% orthodox with my above statement.
hope this helps !!!
the nature of that which is created in this universe is that it's constantly and still being created. Is God's Creative Energy that he used to create - created? God's creativity and creation are two sides of the same coin.God has always existed and He never was created at another point in time.
A coin has two sides but it's one coin. A pole that has opposites is still one pole.2 natures is the claim that the Son, in each of the six cases, was both polar opposites simultaneously
Total hypocrisy. You adore any list of reasons (cf your copy-and-paste jobs) that you THINK can be cited in support of YOUR position but dismiss any opposing arguments as "human reasoning". Convenient for you, isn't it?there you go again from the "human: standpoint ie perspective, reasoning, understanding etc..........
If this passage justifies a bunch of unresolved logical contradictions, it could be used to justify ANY theological claim. That doesn't make sense. Further, the passage is referring to mysteries. As most scholars agree, a biblical "mystery" isn't something rationally self-contradictory, it's just something hidden until revealed persuasively by the Spirit.The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.
That doesn't rebut the six contradictions. For one thing:A coin has two sides but it's one coin. A pole that has opposites is still one pole.
Right. I never give any reasons for my position. All I do is whine. Ok guy. Whatever.let the whining begin .......
its groundhog day once again.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?