What is a God?

[setarcos]

God did not make the world in six revolutions of the planet Earth.

Like I said...I don't believe it is as simple as a one to one relationship from how we perceive time to how time was presented in the genesis event.

There is plenty of scientific evidence to show ages of development and change in the universe let alone a single planet.

Science is for man not for God. Considering that God is a supernatural being one might consider why insist on scientific evidence showing how God created? God "spoke" and it was. Scientific evidence of duration in relation to man says nothing about duration in relation to God.

This nonsense about six EARTH days is only brought by people who hold a strict reading of scriptures from Moses. It is no wonder that they can only keep saying it took God six planet EARTH revolvements to create all. Prove if they cannot in any way shape or form.

I wouldn't simply call it nonsense. It merits discussion. If you call a six day creation scenario nonsense you can equally consider a supernatural supreme being nonsense. After all it is far from self evident itself and demands discussion and contemplation.
As far as six days go, consider this....measurement of duration is for man not God. Gods creative act happened in one simultaneous action. Creation wasn't and then it was. Past, present, and future. Therefore, supernaturally speaking, its as nonsensical to say that creation is x many years old as is indicated in scientific discovery as it is to say that God created in x many days. To God, the duration was instantaneously built into the creation. God did wind up the universe and then set it spinning on its own. Scripture says God sustains all creation and he sustains the instant moment of apparent duration as well.
I think we get the questions wrong. We know what duration means according to mans understanding and then we attempt to apply that meaning to the act of creation. Instead we should be asking what does duration mean when we apply it to the creative act of God?

In any case, what the hell does it matter!!!

Its matters because we are dwelling on the contemplation of the word of God. And that is a good thing is it not?

 

[setarcos]

Either Jesus Christ is perfectly good, or he is not perfectly good.

Which is it to be?

Somewhat depends on what you think it means to be perfectly good.
Scripture indicates that Christ was spiritually a perfect man. Which is a good thing.

 

[setarcos]

If angels do not sin, why did a third of the angels fall from heaven?

To sin is to do what is defined by God as contrary to what God has deemed good.
Why couldn't the angels sin?

 

[setarcos]

Do you believe that Jesus Christ was perfectly good?

Yes, by definition Jesus did nothing contrary to Gods will. Therefore Jesus was perfectly good. Now get to the catch.

 

[Soapy]

I'm saying that angels are not perfectly good. Had they been perfectly good, Jesus would have included them in his answer, but he didn't. Jesus said, 'none is good, save one, that is, God'.

So what’s your problem.

Are you just justifying with the scriptures - the scriptures that we all agree with anyway?

 

[Redemptionsong]

Yes, by definition Jesus did nothing contrary to Gods will. Therefore Jesus was perfectly good. Now get to the catch.

The catch exists only for those that hold that Jesus Christ is unworthy of worship.

If God is not in Christ, then there is no reconciliation for the world.

 

[Soapy]

Yes, by definition Jesus did nothing contrary to Gods will. Therefore Jesus was perfectly good. Now get to the catch.

If you notice he talks counter to even his own arguments.

I said that angels CAN SIN…

He cut off the part where I said that JESUS CAN SIN…

He cut off the part where I said that GOD CSNNOT SIN…

He cut off the part where I said that was the difference!

He’s taking his “Devil’s Advocate” role a little to much as his own role!!!

 

[Soapy]

The catch exists only for those that hold that Jesus Christ is unworthy of worship.

If God is not in Christ, then there is no reconciliation for the world.

That’s inverse claim. No one ever made a claim that Jesus was unworthy of worship because no scriptural claim was ever made that Jesus should - or worse, must be - worshipped.

The Bible makes it clear that only the one true God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, YHWH by name, must be worshipped!

It is safe to say that worshipping the one true God excludes everyone else - yes, even Jesus Christ!

And is it not clear enough where in Jesus states that the only true God was his Father?

You are living dangerously with your devils advocate role!

There’s a saying in the games world that if you, as a wizard, change yourself into another firm, you can get permanently stuck in that form. You need to be careful you don’t permanently get stuck as a Devil and Satan in their definitions!

 

[Redemptionsong]

If you notice he talks counter to even his own arguments.

I said that angels CAN SIN…

He cut off the part where I said that JESUS CAN SIN…

He cut off the part where I said that GOD CSNNOT SIN…

He cut off the part where I said that was the difference!

He’s taking his “Devil’s Advocate” role a little to much as his own role!!!

Not at all.

The Christian position is that Jesus Christ, on earth, was fully man and fully God.

You deny that Jesus Christ was fully God.

The result of holding such a belief, a form of Arianism, means that Jesus Christ is not Lord.

Then, as is usual when discussing Unitarianism, we have the whole topic of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Redemptionsong]

That’s inverse claim. No one ever made a claim that Jesus was unworthy of worship because no scriptural claim was ever made that Jesus should - or worse, must be - worshipped.

The Bible makes it clear that only the one true God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, YHWH by name, must be worshipped!

It is safe to say that worshipping the one true God excludes everyone else - yes, even Jesus Christ!

And is it not clear enough where in Jesus states that the only true God was his Father?

You are living dangerously with your devils advocate role!

There’s a saying in the games world that if you, as a wizard, change yourself into another firm, you can get permanently stuck in that form. You need to be careful you don’t permanently get stuck as a Devil and Satan in their definitions!

If Jesus Christ is given dominion over everything in heaven, and on earth, how is it that he is not worshipped?

Once again, l'm happy to use scripture to support my case.

Philippians 2:10. 'That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;'

The risen Lord is worshipped in heaven, in earth, and under the earth.

 

[Audie]

Fair enough.

Why do you find that surprising? Even the scriptures record such things happening while Christ still walked the earth. People tend to forget that there are really relatively few things that Jesus said we must do to be saved.
That is ...to my knowledge, 1) Believe in him. His purpose, his reason for being...to give salvation to mankind. Place your trust in him.
2) Accept what he offers
3) Be absolutely sincere, not perfect mind you but sincere (probably the most important thing)
The rest of the details are simply testaments to who you are as a person.


I imagine you pretty close to the truth here. Scripture records even Satan using what is good to evil purpose. Like I said though...what you get out of the bible and how you use it is a testimony to who you are as a person not an assurance of salvation or damnation. That is where placing your trust in God comes in.


Sadly, many are called but few shall enter. The only thing you absolutely must be true to is God (that means sincerity in seeking out and fulfilling his will) and by extension true to yourself. His will be done etc. Scripture warned of wolves among the sheep, false prophets, and those leading astray.
They were, are, and will always be among us until God sees fit to end their existence.

It doesnt surprise me. Its just one of several ressons i dont believe any of it.

The scriptural warnings were written by men,
who predicted the obvious. A tinge of self serving there.

As for the few teachings attributed to
Jesus, I was surprised when i was around Christians and learned that what is to me basic
folk wisdom that we are raised with, is elsewhere presented as having come from a single source man- god.

 

[Audie]

Sure it is. As a concept the definition #1 from the dictionary you quoted seems a good starting point for rationalizing from. I'm also considering here what has been termed the God of the philosophers. Somewhat distinct from the specific Christian conception.


You will noticed this is a less common definition though no less legitimately used term.
Even the Greeks...Aristotle, Plato, Socrates...started to argue against multiple Gods and began formally discussing what it means to be a God.
This is why I said we must define our terms. And agree on how they are used and applied before we can discuss their rational coherence. When you considered Christianity being called monotheistic as weird I was under the impression that you may have misunderstood the use of the term God, and gods in its belief system.


Modern philosophical rationalization concerning the term God has little to do with a specific Church.
I don't understand what your saying here.


I hardly think you are a "dimbulb". I apologize if I gave you that impression. I was just trying to understand the relationship of your reply as answer to what was previously said.


You may not have but I certainly did. The God I was discussing is a sentient being. As I understand the term, any being called a God which is not sentient in its action is a false god. Even the Greek gods of Love and War for instance - while those terms are generally understood not to be descriptions of sentience - were sentient in their purpose and action. Any "thing" that acts according to its nature but is not sentient is not a God.


Again, while we are are ignorant in many things and I may have implied you were ignorant of Christian beliefs I did not mean to imply you were generally stupid. For all I know, you may be ignorant in some things I am not but generally smarter than I am overall.
When I said dive in...I meant for you to really go deep into the belief before commenting on what you believe as fact. Because you know Christianity mentions many gods just skims the surface of what that means within Christian belief.

Well hey...thanks for correcting my grammar. I hadn't realized I misused the possessive. Hopefully you knew what I meant but if your after points or something good catch.


No, they are not. Reread Merriam's definition #1. There can only be one being whose nature fulfills supremacy in perfection.


Well that is why I'm here. Not to insist but to rationalize with you. Hopefully you don't find that weird.

From an ASIAN pov, Christians dont get to
define the parameters of universal concept.
If rationalizing philosophers decide that some
supernatural beings are not " gods" its no more
than semantics, equivocation to say Christianity
is mono, but those other religions similarly
comppsed are about false ...gods.
Recognized, as such, by ye almighty himself
" worship no other..."

Of course my kitchen god is not sentient.
Its a painting. Like one of Jesus.

I suppose some would feel that they are being watched, if such is in the house.

Someone gave me kitchen god, a dubious gift
Sort of like a white elephant, as he is not helpful, just watches like a spy. So they say.

Im not sure why I like him, maybe coz nobody else does.

Sorry my mood was off when I responded earlier. It was late after a stressful,day,
and and. You seem nice, i dont intend to be rude. Im just good at it.

 

[DNB]

Who is a fool? One who believes without evidence or one who rejects for what evidence is not available?
And you are correct in saying that only a fool will be impressed by the tales of prophets / sons / messengers / manifestations / mahdis without seeing any evidence for them, a wise person will never be impressed.

Did you, Aupmanyav, miss the point?
The point was that the evidence that you are looking for lacks wisdom - discretion reveals the hearts of men.
The fool is the one who doesn't recognize the signs - he analysis the finger, but not to where the finger is pointing.

 

[DNB]

DNB, sorry to be so public against you on certain matters but I need you to know and for others to see the truth.

Jesus Christ IS to be honoured the same as the Father.

He is to also be both Glorified and Praised just as the Father is Glorified and Praised.

Why should this be shocking to learn? Are we not to be scholars of scriptures? Do we not read, understand, and express the truth of scriptures (where it has not been altered by trinitarian translators!)

Consider these verses:

• “Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him.“ (John 5:22-23)
  
• ‘Jesus answered, "If I glorify Myself, My glory means nothing. The One who glorifies Me is My Father, of whom you say 'He is our God.'”’(John 8:54)
• “In a loud voice they were saying: “Worthy is the Lamb, who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and praise!” (Rev 5:12)
  
• “All the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures. They fell down on their faces before the throne and worshiped God, saying: “Amen! Praise and glory and wisdom and thanks and honor and power and strength be to our God for ever and ever. Amen!” (Rev 7:11-12)

We see in these verses that both YHWH and Jesus Christ are to be:

1. Praised
2. Honored
3. Glorified

in the same amount and manner as each other. THIS IS NOT WORSHIP!!

Indeed, ONLY YHWH is to receive WORSHIP!

Praise, Honor, and Glory is worthy of ANYONE who does great deeds. But we are to WORSHIP only the one immortal God: YHWH.

I'm sorry Soapy, now I am lost as to what your Christology is? Are you a modalist?
Yes Christ is to be worshipped - because he lived a perfect life even unto death, and it was for this reason that God exalted him to His right-hand side. And I will worship any man who loved God with all his heart, mind, and soul. So, yes, you and I believe that Jesus is worthy of worship, but I must emphatically state that he is NEVER to be worshipped with the same amount of reverence as the the one and only creator of all things, God the Father
I know that you concluded above that there is a .similitude of honour, reverence and exaltation that both the Father and son are to receive on a mutual level, but only the Father is to receive worship. I don't believe that this is a semantical issue. We can find passages that speak of Jesus' disciple worshipping him.

As soon as the Magi laid eyes on the infant Christ, “they bowed down and worshiped Him” (Matthew 2:11).

Just after Jesus amazed the disciples by walking on water, “those who were in the boat worshiped him, saying, ‘Truly you are the Son of God’” (Matthew 14:33). Two more memorable examples of Jesus accepting worship occurred just after His resurrection. Some of the women (Matthew 28:8-9; Mark 16:1; Luke 24:10) were on their way to tell the disciples of the resurrection when Jesus met them on their way. When they realized it was He, they “came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him” (Matthew 28:9).

Worship is not reserved for God, David was worshipped also

1 Chronicles 29:20
And David said to all the congregation, Now bless the LORD your God. And all the congregation blessed the LORD God of their fathers, and bowed down their heads, and worshipped the LORD, and the king.

But, we never worship a man, on the same grounds that we worship the Father. We are to give honour where honour is due, thus, many entities are due honour, as is God. Buit we differentiate our reverence between a holy God and His creation, by what we ascribe to each. If David was a man after God's own heart, then he's worthy of praise, as was Noah, Abraham and Moses.

 

[DNB]

I hope you are both honourable enough to remain aboard your sinking ships! A captain should not abandon boat, even when they do see a torpedo coming!

I hope that you are honourable and wise enough to abandon a failed effort, once the waves become too overwhelming.

 

[DNB]

There’s a lot to say about the second part of your post . The first part I hear and agree in principle that Jesus is a full human Being endowed with the spirit of God.

In the second part - No, I do not agree and it is convoluted: You say that the Son was always in the mind of God from before creation therefore he was in effect already created in effect….

But then you insist that this in-effect created son created all things…. Are you sure you got that right?

Isn’t it that the to-be-created son was DESTINED to inherit what the Father created: a Physical world ruled by a physical ruler - as he is a Spirit ruler over a spirit realm?

Consider this verse:

• “You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they were created and have their being.” (Rev 4:11)

Are you suggesting that this verse is incorrect and that it was not, as the verse states, our Lord and God (YHWH) who created all things?

Can I draw your attention to the fact that it is types such as Trinitarians who disingenuously makes such
claims that the verse speak of ‘Lord and God’ as being Jesus Christ!

Which draws my questions as before of:

• ‘What then did the Creator (Father) do during the supposed creation by the Son?’
• ‘Since the Son only does what he sees the Father doing - what did the Father create before the Son created likewise?’

Sorry Soapy, i'm not sure what I said that may be construed as though I believe that Jesus created anything - besides maybe some cabinets or a shed (as a carpenter).
There is only one Creator in the entire universe, and that is God the Father. He is the only deity, the only immortal and divine, the only transcendent, the only sovereign and supreme of all beings.
Jesus was born between 6-4 bc, and died somewhere between 27-30 ad. He is mortal and fallible, human and impotent as far as having a creator status is concerned.

 

[DNB]

Luke 18:19. 'And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God'.

John 10:11. 'l am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep'.

What say you? Is Jesus Christ not the good shepherd?

Very different contexts.
Redemptionsong, you are trying to build an esoteric and incomprehensible doctrine all based on inferences. Horrible hermeneutics.
If you want to prove the doctrine of the trinity in a responsible and competent manner, then show us the texts that have either the words 'trinity', 'triune', incarnate, hypostatic union, 'God the son', two natures, three in one, 'God the holy spirit', god-man, ...
And this, in at least 10 separate passages.

Then, we can maybe begin to have a serious discussion on such a contradictory and implausible doctrine..

 

[DNB]

I don't believe this is correct. Moses himself said a thousand years is like a day to God. At the very least this may indicate that when God dictated (inspired?) Moses's writings concerning creation time may have been a variable in its exactitude or even hard to conceive of as concerns its subject. Would Moses have thought in millennia as periods of activity or in daily activities as most relatable to man? Modern science even has trouble defining what time is exactly. And some current theories indicate that with the expansion/creation of space of the "big bang" time is also being created/expanding(accelerating?). In any case I believe the duration Moses dictated had more to do with his apprehension of these events than the timing of each creative period of God.

An omnipotent and transcendent Being barely requires 6 days to create anything. He only took 6 days in order to set an example of structure and organization in the universe, that all creation testifies to. But more importantly, it emphasizes the need to earn attendance in God's Kingdom - we must work more than we rest, in order to attain to God's rest. And with this principle in mind, man is to follow the same pattern in his daily living, and expect hardship and fatigue for the majority of our lives.

Outside of that, God could've created the entire universe in a split second.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The fool is the one who doesn't recognize the signs - he analysis the finger, but not to where the finger is pointing.

What signs, DNB?

 

[Redemptionsong]

Very different contexts.
Redemptionsong, you are trying to build an esoteric and incomprehensible doctrine all based on inferences. Horrible hermeneutics.
If you want to prove the doctrine of the trinity in a responsible and competent manner, then show us the texts that have either the words 'trinity', 'triune', incarnate, hypostatic union, 'God the son', two natures, three in one, 'God the holy spirit', god-man, ...
And this, in at least 10 separate passages.

Then, we can maybe begin to have a serious discussion on such a contradictory and implausible doctrine..

You claim to believe the scriptures, but when faced with references that demonstrate your error and inconsistency, you go 'walkabout'.

Making comments like, 'Very different contexts' is a meaningless excuse. If you believe that the context changes the meaning of the words, then explain why there's a change in meaning!

Here's a very simple question.

Do you believe that the shepherd of Psalm 23 is God? Is the word 'shepherd' a reference to YHWH?