What About Progressive Sanctification?

[Jesus is YHWH]

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?

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 !!!

 

[JAL]

From one of your copy-and-paste jobs:

Here lies the specific answer to the question: as to Jesus’ divine nature, He is unchanging. As to His human nature, He is changeable.

Thus in the orthodox view, the Son of God is:
(1) The unchanging changing God.
(2) The omniscient ignorant God
(3) The created uncreated God
(4) The untemptible temptible God
(5) The impassible God who suffered on the cross
(6) The tireless fatigueable God.

@RickReads: I told you my definition of a win. A win is when I've identified self-contradictory, irreconcilable propositions in the thinking of those who dissent with me. In this case I have pinpointed six of them. So yes, to use your words, I'll "chalk it up as a win."

 

[JAL]

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 !!!

Fallacious? Where in that statement did you deny that a created human soul was placed in Christ's body?

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

truly pathetic................

 

[JAL]

@Jesus is YHWH
Sad when you hold to a view that is so embarrassing that you often prefer to "talk around it" instead of openly confess it.

 

[JAL]

truly pathetic................

Yet another declined opportunity. At this rate, the second hurdle of 1050 posts is right around the corner.

 

[Psalm 27]

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.

Me too ——————————————

 

[Bible Highlighter]

From one of your copy-and-paste jobs:

Thus in the orthodox view, the Son of God is:
(1) The unchanging changing 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.

(2) The omniscient ignorant God

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).

(3) The created uncreated God

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.

(4) The untemptible temptible God

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.

(5) The impassible God who suffered on the cross

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.

(6) The tireless fatigueable God.

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.

 

[JAL]

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.

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.

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.

 

[JAL]

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.

 

[JAL]

And I could continue on, enumerating several more contradictions that I mentioned on my other threads, but not yet mentioned here...

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

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.

there you go again from the "human: standpoint ie perspective, reasoning, understanding etc..........

1 Corinthians 2:
We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. 7 No, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.

these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit.

The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. 11 For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12 What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us. 13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words. 14 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. 15 The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments, 16 for,

“Who has known the mind of the Lord
so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ.


1-You see once again Scripture validates my position and rejects your appeal to authority.

2-God is Spirit, God is a Spiritual Being, Scripture is spiritual and understood by Gods Spirit.

3- The things of concerning God are foolishness to the human mind

4- Only those born of the Spirit can understand the things of the Spirit and believers have the mind of Christ.

5-I rest my case.

hope this helps !!!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

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.

“For who in the heaven can be compared unto the Lord? who among the sons of the mighty can be likened unto the Lord?” (Psalms 89:6).

“Hast thou an arm like God? or canst thou thunder with a voice like him?” (Job 40:9).

“And he said, To morrow. And he said, Be it according to thy word: that thou mayest know that there is none like unto the LORD our God.” (Exodus 8:10).

“For I will at this time send all my plagues upon thine heart, and upon thy servants, and upon thy people; that thou mayest know that there is none like me in all the earth.” (Exodus 9:14).

“To whom then will ye liken God? or what likeness will ye compare unto him?” (Isaiah 40:18).

In other words, Mike is not God whereby he is a Trinity exactly like God. It is not a contradiction to say that the Father and the Holy Spirit have Omniscience while the Son of God (or the Living Word) suppressed His power of Omniscience during His earthly ministry.

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.

Unless the forum rules and guidelines have changed, last I checked, such a discussion can lead to being banned from talking in the Christian section of these forums. So I think it is best to pick and choose your battles if you believe it is wrong for the Lord Jesus to have a human soul.

Anyways, the Lord is unchanging in certain things (like His holiness) does not mean that the Lord cannot change in other ways (like with the change of the Incarnation, the New Covenant, etc.). But yes. I get what you are saying. The label for the doctrine is wrong. Just saying God is immutable would not be accurate. The doctrine should be called Immutable Righteousness, or Immutatable Love, or Immutable Holiness; Such labels would be more in line with what Scripture says.

 

[garee]

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 !!!

yes the Son of God has always been continually without beginning of Spirt life or end thereof. Without mother and father a human creation .God is not a man

A proper understanding between the Son of God, the eternal not seen and the Son of man the temporal seen must be made.

Confusing the unseen things of God(eternal faith) with those of men the temporal corrupted is shown as something that offends eternal things of God who is not a man . (Mathew 16)

Three is used through out the bible to indicate the end of the matter. Two is used to represent the unseen witness of God working in the Son of man, Jesus the chief apostle sent by the father sent with words of the fathers will not of his own self or own will . . . .

Mathew16: 22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

In that passage the apostle Jesus received by inspiration from heaven the word of the lord, our father. By it our heavenly father forgave Peter of his blasphemy against the son of man, Jesus. And rebuked the father of lies the spirit of error, the spirit of the antichrist, another teacher.

Our father commanded the spirit of lies to get behind the unseen things of God or walk by faith and not behind Peter as one of the many antichrists under the influence of the god of this world which as today many antichrists influenced by the father of lies. The one spirit that works in the many antichrists .(the deceived)

When the Son of man. Jesus left or disappeared out of sight it took away that temporal forgiveness . The one time propmised demonstration (Isaiah 53) of the father and Son working as one was over.

God is Spirit. God is Light. God is Love. Again he is not a man and neither has he set a fleshly man as a infallible teacher as a umpire between the two God and man.

One is our teacher and Father in heaven . Its who Jesus learned from. The Son of man did not come to do his own will of the flesh but was strengthened by the fathers will that worked in Jesus to both will and do the good pleasure of the unseen Holy Father

In that way God the Holy Spirit is seen working with two attributes .Jesus said the father and I are one working together. No father no son No son no father.

God is Spirit and is made up of two human attributes, a Father and a Son . Two working as one in mutual submission and perfect harmony to one another. .

The father in a greater position provides the power to strengthen the loving Son in order to finish the work of two.

The peace of God that surpasses our understanding as he gives us their understanding of faith

 

[Noxot]

God has always existed and He never was created at another point in time.

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.

2 natures is the claim that the Son, in each of the six cases, was both polar opposites simultaneously

A coin has two sides but it's one coin. A pole that has opposites is still one pole.

 

[JAL]

there you go again from the "human: standpoint ie perspective, reasoning, understanding etc..........

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?

For example post 850 refutes your whole position - it refutes the "immutable holiness" central to traditional Christology - by virtue of this definition of merit:

"Merit is a status achieved by freely choosing to labor/suffer for a righteous cause over an extended period of time".

Contrary to your lies, your copy-and-paste jobs did not address that definition of merit, for example did not provide an alternative definition.

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.

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.

Even if you had some esoteric revelation from the Spirit that, in your mind, confirmed the hypostatic union, a theology forum wouldn't be the place to boast of your "elite insight". Theology deals in arguments, not in mysticism.

Shame on you. By appealing to the universal definition of merit at post 850, I have demonstrated that the church has robbed God of 99.9999999% of the glory for the last 2000 years. But instead of taking heed, you have chosen to stick to orthodoxy's (antiquated, outmoded) exercises in human reasoning such as DDS (Doctrine of Divine Simplicity). As admitted in the Catholic Encyclopedia, the church's understanding of God (DDS) was based on Greek philosophy because the church fathers put the Greek philosophers on a par with Scripture. Greek philosophy was presumed to have equal authority to Scripture.

YOU are the one contaminated with hollow and deceptive philosophy - I myself have categorically rejected every tenet of DDS.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

let the whining begin .......

its groundhog day once again.

 

[JAL]

A coin has two sides but it's one coin. A pole that has opposites is still one pole.

That doesn't rebut the six contradictions. For one thing:
(1) Your statement is not claiming that the coin has 2 natures. A contradiction would look like this:
(A) This coin is physical.
(B) This coin is non-physical. That's because it has a 2nd nature, a non-physical one.

Rather your statement is referring to a piece of matter divisible into parts.
(1) One part has a face drawn on it.
(2) The other part has a different face drawn on it.

And thus
(1) That's not a contradiction.
(2) It's also not an option for those who hold to DDS. DDS claims that God is an immaterial substance indivisible into parts. This doesn't make for a coherent theory of the Trinity, and it likewise cripples our options in terms of a viable theory of the Incarnation.

 

[JAL]

let the whining begin .......

its groundhog day once again.

Right. I never give any reasons for my position. All I do is whine. Ok guy. Whatever.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

I'm after Scripture and Its TRUTH, not human opinion, reasoning, understanding etc...............

if you want that then read Ecclesiastes as I'm not the least bit interested in things under the sun, under heaven.