The Unitarian Problem

[Redemptionsong]

Wrong, if Jesus believed what He was saying then He is not lying, just misled.


Not if that law where itself the product of false prophets. There is nothing inherently worthy of death in being a false prophet.


No the scriptures where not written by eyewitnesses.

wrong again.

So, you think Jesus was misled.

Paul said something interesting. Romans 8:38,39. 'For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.'

The Spirit that led Jesus Christ was the Spirit of love. Can this kind of love really mislead anyone? Even if it results in death, can it be the wrong way to lead life?

 

[danieldemol]

So, you think Jesus was misled.

Paul said something interesting. Romans 8:38,39. 'For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.'

The Spirit that led Jesus Christ was the Spirit of love. Can this kind of love really mislead anyone? Even if it results in death, can it be the wrong way to lead life?

You can have the spirit of love without believing in the resurrection, so I don't see the spirit of love as leading one to believe in resurrection.

Having said that there is nothing wrong even in believing in resurrection if that's your thing. I just don't see it as a scientifically factual idea mainly because it is not repeatable.

 

[Redemptionsong]

You can have the spirit of love without believing in the resurrection, so I don't see the spirit of love as leading one to believe in resurrection.

Having said that there is nothing wrong even in believing in resurrection if that's your thing. I just don't see it as a scientifically factual idea mainly because it is not repeatable.

The resurrection is connected to the crucifixion, and the crucifixion to sin. How can anyone claim to know God's love without also acknowledging that sin separates a person from the holiness and love of God?

Are we not all sinners in need of cleansing?

 

[shunyadragon]

Maybe you can provide your definition of what it means to be a Christian?

Those that claim to be Christian based on their interpretation and understanding of the Bible.

If it's impossible to define what it means to be a Christian,

It is not impossible to define the claim to be a Christian simply a sabove.

. . . .then there is no such thing as true doctrine. .

Considering the many diverse conflicting churches and divisions of Christianity what you state above is likely true.

Yet, along with many others, I believe scripture provides that true doctrine

True, but many Christians that do not interpret and understand the Bible the way you do believe their belief is the true doctrine.

 

[shunyadragon]

I don't believe the one God wants conflict.

True, but humans have a degree of free will, and of course, many disagree.

I believe every conclusion we reach should be a conclusion reached through the Spirit of love. One God, and one truth.

Many who do not agree with your interpretation and understanding of scripture also 'believe 'every conclusion we reach should be a conclusion reached through the Spirit of love. One God, and one truth.'

 

[74x12]

I understand that 'in him [Jesus] dwelleth all the fulness of Godhead bodily'. This tells us clearly that there's a distinction to be made between the vessel [Jesus the man] and the Godhead [Father, Word and Holy Spirit].

Yes there is a distinction between the flesh and Spirit. But He's still God in the world. Just as you have a body, soul and spirit. So He did the same thing. You do agree you're more than just your physical body?

To confirm this distinction, look at Acts 10:38:
'How God [Gk. Theos] anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him'.

Yes, the distinction between flesh and spirit.

If I now change the name Jesus to God, we have the following rendition of Acts 10:38:
'How God anointed God with the Holy Ghost [God] and with power: who [God] went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with God'.

Does this really make sense?

Well does John 1:1 make sense? "the Word was with God and the Word was God" ... God is with God?

The answer is yes it does make sense but it's not easily to understood.

 

[danieldemol]

The resurrection is connected to the crucifixion, and the crucifixion to sin. How can anyone claim to know God's love without also acknowledging that sin separates a person from the holiness and love of God?

Are we not all sinners in need of cleansing?

No we are not all sinners in need of cleansing imo.

I don't feel separated from God in the slightest.

For me the fall of man from the garden of Eden is all mythological as physical death is older than sin and humans altogether as attested by the fossil record.

Therefore for me Jesus only sets an example by living a virtuous life and thereby saving Himself. It is up to us to live a virtuous life and in doing so save ourselves.

 

[Redemptionsong]

True, but humans have a degree of free will, and of course, many disagree.



Many who do not agree with your interpretation and understanding of scripture also 'believe 'every conclusion we reach should be a conclusion reached through the Spirit of love. One God, and one truth.'

Ultimately, it is not about my interpretation, or yours, but about scripture interpreting scripture. If the God of truth gave every man freedom to decide his own doctrine then we would have chaos. That's why I believe God has woven a tapestry of truth that cannot be broken [John 10:35]. Once we start to entertain subjectivism, as you appear to have done, we have no Truth.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Yes there is a distinction between the flesh and Spirit. But He's still God in the world. Just as you have a body, soul and spirit. So He did the same thing. You do agree you're more than just your physical body?

Yes, the distinction between flesh and spirit.



Well does John 1:1 make sense? "the Word was with God and the Word was God" ... God is with God?

The answer is yes it does make sense but it's not easily to understood.

John 1:1 makes perfect sense because God is Spirit and the Word is Spirit. John 1:1 is talking about God, not Jesus of Nazareth. To my understanding, Jesus of Nazareth, from his birth to his baptism, was flesh and blood man without the anointing of the Holy Spirit. If Jesus had the anointing from birth, then Jesus was the Christ, the anointed One, from birth. Was Jesus anointed Christ at his birth? If he was, then why was it necessary to anoint him again at 30?

Acts 10:38 says God anointed Jesus of Nazareth. It doesn't say that the Father anointed Jesus, the Son. It also says, 'God was with him'. It doesn't say, 'the Father was with him'. [Don't misunderstand me here; the Father was in Jesus, as the Son, after baptism. But God did not come to Jesus until baptism had taken place.]

 

[Redemptionsong]

No we are not all sinners in need of cleansing imo.

I don't feel separated from God in the slightest.

For me the fall of man from the garden of Eden is all mythological as physical death is older than sin and humans altogether as attested by the fossil record.

Therefore for me Jesus only sets an example by living a virtuous life and thereby saving Himself. It is up to us to live a virtuous life and in doing so save ourselves.

Well, your opinion goes against one of the principal themes of the Bible.

Romans 3:23. 'For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;'

1 John 1:8-10. 'If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.'

Your righteousness will never be the righteousness of God.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Well, your opinion goes against one of the principal themes of the Bible.

Romans 3:23. 'For all have sinned, and come short of the Glory of God;'

1 John 1:8-10. 'If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.'

Your righteousness will never be the righteousness of God.

If sin is every thing that is not perfection, then we are all very serious sinners indeed.

Freedom from sin and a sinless life, can be no more than a target of perfection which is always unachievable.

Forgiveness of sin, either accepts us as the sinners that we are, in this world,
or is only obtainable and realised in the next.
we can never be free of sin in this world because we are never perfect.

 

[Redemptionsong]

If sin is every thing that is not perfection, then we are all very serious sinners indeed.

Freedom from sin and a sinless life, can be no more than a target of perfection which is always unachievable.

Forgiveness of sin, either accepts us as the sinners that we are, in this world,
or is only obtainable and realised in the next.
we can never be free of sin in this world because we are never perfect.

Now, you hit the nail on the head! We cannot be sinless by our own efforts. Which is why we require the righteousness of God within our hearts. This is the Holy Spirit. It comes from the Son, and from the Father alone.

Only when we walk by the Holy Spirit can we walk in Spirit and truth.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Now, you hit the nail on the head! We cannot be sinless by our own efforts. Which is why we require the righteousness of God within our hearts. This is the Holy Spirit. It comes from the Son, and from the Father alone.

Only when we walk by the Holy Spirit can we walk in Spirit and truth.

I am of the opinion like the orthodox church that the the original text of the Creed is correct. and the the adding of the Filioque by the Catholic church is false doctrine.
The Holy Spirit is of God Alone, and dwells in, guides and comforts everyone. though few listen, or chose to hear.

 

[shunyadragon]

Ultimately, it is not about my interpretation, or yours, but about scripture interpreting scripture. If the God of truth gave every man freedom to decide his own doctrine then we would have chaos.

Actually given the hundreds of diverse and conflicting interpretations and understanding of scripture caos is an appropriate description.

That's why I believe God has woven a tapestry of truth that cannot be broken [John 10:35]. Once we start to entertain subjectivism, as you appear to have done, we have no Truth.

You believe? The facts do not support the 'truth you believe in' cannot be broken, because of the diverse conflicting divided nature of Christianity.

 

[Redemptionsong]

I am of the opinion like the orthodox church that the the original text of the Creed is correct. and the the adding of the Filioque by the Catholic church is false doctrine.
The Holy Spirit is of God Alone, and dwells in, guides and comforts everyone. though few listen, or chose to hear.

The Holy Spirit must come through Christ, but Christ is a stumbling block for many.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Actually given the hundreds of diverse and conflicting interpretations and understanding of scripture caos is an appropriate description.




You believe? The facts do not support the 'truth you believe in' cannot be broken, because of the diverse conflicting divided nature of Christianity.

You don't have to agree with what I believe, but Jesus said 'the scripture cannot be broken'. If you disagree with Jesus, then make a close study of the scriptures and take the issue up with Him!

The Holy Spirit is the guide into truth, but it's clear, even from the discussions on RF, that many who call themselves Christians do not know what it means to be 'born again' [John 3:7]. Many Christians are actually living under law, following religion. Living under law is not the Gospel of grace.

 

[shunyadragon]

You don't have to agree with what I believe, but Jesus said 'the scripture cannot be broken'. If you disagree with Jesus, then make a close study of the scriptures and take the issue up with Him!

The Holy Spirit is the guide into truth, but it's clear, even from the discussions on RF, that many who call themselves Christians do not know what it means to be 'born again' [John 3:7]. Many Christians are actually living under law, following religion. Living under law is not the Gospel of grace.

It is not a matter of I believing as you do. Every different diverse conflicting belief in Christianity believes the same as you do about their belief..

 

[Redemptionsong]

It is not a matter of I believing as you do. Every different diverse conflicting belief in Christianity believes the same as you do about their belief..

That's just not true. I know, even when I differ in understanding over a theological issue that what unites me with other believers in Christ is sharing the same Spirit. That's why Jesus says it's essential that a person be born again of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The Holy Spirit must come through Christ, but Christ is a stumbling block for many.

As this thread is about the Unitarian view. they and I would not agree with your interpretation, as Jesus is not God. God and Jesus are separate beings.

Even very many creedal Christian Churches would agree that the Holy spirit comes from God alone.
the Filioque introduction. is what split the Eastern and Western churches and still does.
It was an addition to the creed of Nicene that was unauthorised. It is with out biblical authority.

The Anglican church like others has made the decision, and is in the process of removing the Filioque from the Liturgy, and returning to the original Nicene Creed, in line with the continuing Orthodox belief.

The Original collection of books into what we understand as the Bible, was also made at Nicene and was authorise by a slim minority of votes, those against and abstainers actually were a majority.
To day the various Christian churches have from 66 to 81 authorised books in their Canon.
There is no such thing as a single universal Bible.
Your Church might share a Different Bible than many other Churches. and may interpret it differently

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

That's just not true. I know, even when I differ in understanding over a theological issue that what unites me with other believers in Christ is sharing the same Spirit. That's why Jesus says it's essential that a person be born again of the Holy Spirit.

The problem with that statement. is not every one interprets and understand that passage the same way.
it is after all not literal in meaning. it has a meaning more of being changed by the word and spirit of God.
the concept of becoming permanently sinless or "Saved" is a travesty.