Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Yourpost is obtuse. You know what I meant. “Same mind” is the mind of acceptance of the diversity of human beings. “Same mind” means that we agree to disagree in the name of preserving and building relationships.
It deals with what exactly is the relationship between God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit, which gets rather complicated when using the scriptures because they seem to vacillate on this. Things got so hot and heavy over this in the 4th and 5th centuries, that in order to try and keep the Church from splitting into pieces, a compromise was reached that really doesn't tie this together things together all that well that got built into the Nicene Creed to solve the problem-- sorta.
An example is when Jesus is asked when the end of times will be, and he answers that he doesn't know but only the Father does. And yet he says at another time that he and the Father are one and that he can forgive sins.
Well, I tend to agree with you, but that's just me. To someone else, I'm tempted to say "Whatever floats your boat"-- but I don't because it sounds sarcastic.
Yes that's a good example of His human mind and yet He was one with the mind of God in Spirit. Another thing is that Jesus said I am the way, the truth and the life. Yet, the holy Spirit is called the Spirit of truth. (John 15:26) Showing Jesus' Oneness with the holy Spirit. Jesus is the truth and the Spirit is the Spirit of the truth.
But those who said that Jesus' flesh was only illusion were denounced in 2 John 1:7. I think the problem is Jesus as the bread of Life gave His flesh for the world. (John 6:51) So whoever says Jesus' flesh was only illusion is doing away with the work of Christ on the cross.
These are your takes, and I have no problem with them other than I have no clue if they're correct.
If it weren't you'd have a quartet, not a trinity, but in any case, Revelation opens the way for seven spirits of God, Revelation 1:4,so I think really we should at least be talking, at least, about a nonet with God. And then there is the Council of God, Kings 22:19-23 so that would make a dectet, which, as men have ten toes and ten fingers and are said to be made in the image of God, it would seem to be an altogether better synposis of divine power.
Oh good! I'd hate to go through life brainless. Although, I must admit sometimes it feels that way!
Or could it be that God is God and Jesus is Jesus? Two unique persons, like every other father and son.If it weren't you'd have a quartet, not a trinity, but in any case, Revelation opens the way for seven spirits of God, Revelation 1:4,so I think really we should at least be talking, at least, about a nonet with God. And then there is the Council of God, Kings 22:19-23 so that would make a dectet, which, as men have ten toes and ten fingers and are said to be made in the image of God, it would seem to be an altogether better synposis of divine power.
I really didn't know you meant that the same mind means to accept whatever anybody thinks as truth. I truly thought it meant we should all have the same mind, just like it says.
Are we? Are we fundamentally “other” than God, as human beings? Or do we possess the image of God and the spirit of God? We are certainly not “unique” to our parents; we contain their DNA.
No. Jesus is no longer Jesus as he has been exalted to the right hand of God. He bears a name that only he himself knows. Revelation 19:12.
You’ll note that I’ve used the word “valid” when speaking of varied interpretations. It’s not a free-for-all.
Why should you believe me?These are your takes, and I have no problem with them other than I have no clue if they're correct.
There is truth to what you're saying. There are many figures of speech hardly known any more and even words that are now very obscure. But, I'm sure you know it's all meant to draw us to God. He's the whole point of the scriptures. (John 5:39)
Well the words Ruwach and Pneuma are translatable as essentially the same thing. In Hebrew wind; by resemblance breath or in Greek a current of air, ie breath (blast) or a breeze. The Septuagint can help. It was translated by Jews before Christ; so they had no bias in either direction. Either favoring Judaism or Christianity. So it helps shed light on ancient Hebrew. Koine Greek is a bit less obscure in many ways.
The Bible interprets itself. It does not rely on linguistic, historic, anthropological, theological and ecclesiastical authorities. In fact, the theological and ecclesiastical authorities in particular have made the book all but incomprehensible. They are the ones who use words like incarnation, trinity, same substance, and other words that are actually not found in the Bible. They must be read into it, i.e. eisegisis.
No. The Bible does not interpret itself. Never has; never was intended to. It must rely on all those things, otherwise, it simply can’t be read, because we wouldn’t know what we were reading. It’s obvious that those who eschew these authorities don’t know what they’re reading, for they read literalistically.
If I'm part of the body of Christ, why aren't my beliefs true? Aren't I part of the grand committee God so desperately needs to make himself known?
I’m not saying they’re not. But Christianity isn’t “your” faith — it’s “our” faith. The faith was spread communally; the Bible was written, compiled, edited, canonized and translated communally; the stories were told communally, before they were written down; the faith is manifested communally in ekklesia, and doctrine is formulated and accepted communally.