The Temple Sanctuary

[RabbiKnife]

Let’s talk about Jesus

Is he a created being?

If he is God, has he always been God or did he at some point become God?

Let’s stop the dance

[JoshuaStone7]

Let’s talk about Jesus

Is he a created being?

If he is God, has he always been God or did he at some point become God?

Let’s stop the dance

I have already started the discussion in the thread Who is God? Feel free to join in there, and I'll share with you everything...

Joshua

[RabbiKnife]

No need to deflect

Simple questions

What do you say?

[JoshuaStone7]

No need to deflect

Simple questions

What do you say?

Dude, you know how complex this subject is, and you just expect me to explain in a single post? (facepalm)

I've already told you I believe Jesus was created, but I've also told you I believe in His Deity, and that He is God.

The best place to start is John chapter 1. If you'd like feel free to go to that thread because I believe this thread on The Temple Sanctuary is pretty full with this subject as it is.

Joshua

[RabbiKnife]

So how do you believe a created being became God?

[Athanasius]

Amen... See, we are not so far apart after all, are we?

Joshua

Doctrinally? In many ways probably not, and in others, significantly. There's no value judgment either way.

But it cannot be understated that our views of Jesus are mutually exclusive: we're either both wrong, or one is right and the other is wrong. This extends to our understanding of God at a foundational level, then into how God operates in the world, and so on. It impacts on Jesus' question: "who do you say that I am?" There's nothing trivial about this. 10 feet is for most people an impassable chasm. 10 feet is nothing.

Of course, this presumably places me in the category of 'false believer' according to your schema. So, there's quite a lot to be said.

Anyway, engagement with a position or an argument is just that, and too many people take that engagement as a personal criticism.

[JoshuaStone7]

So how do you believe a created being became God?

Coronation

[RabbiKnife]

Ok so after this coronation, how many Gods are there?

Is one more powerful than the other?

[JoshuaStone7]

But it cannot be understated that our views of Jesus are mutually exclusive: we're either both wrong, or one is right, and the other is wrong. This extends to our understanding of God at a foundational level, then into how God operates in the world, and so on. It impacts on Jesus' question: "who do you say that I am?" There's nothing trivial about this. 10 feet is for most people an impassable chasm. 10 feet is nothing.

We agree on everything about Jesus, who He was, who He is, our faith in Him. Whether He had a beginning or not causes a huge separation? Do you know that many Trinitarians believe that Jesus' personality was created when He came to the earth (just as one believes here)? That description is no different than what I have said, in my opinion... I believe the personality of Christ was created, but before He came to earth. And that is such a huge difference? It's a huge difference because the doctrine of the Trinity requires it, not the Bible.

Of course, this presumably places me in the category of 'false believer' according to your schema. So, there's quite a lot to be said.

I have already said the Trinity is not a salvational subject, and I'm not someone to judge anyone's salvation. I've already called you a brother/friend through our common belief in Christ. I'm not sure where you're getting that; you are a Christian as far as I'm concerned.

Anyway, engagement with a position or an argument is just that, and too many people take that engagement as a personal criticism.

Let's engage on the text, not our intentions and how we put things.

What do you say?

Joshua

[JoshuaStone7]

Ok so after this coronation, how many Gods are there?

Is one more powerful than the other?

I answered that very question in the other thread. Why do you insist on discussing it here?

[RabbiKnife]

Humor me

[Athanasius]

We agree on everything about Jesus, who He was, who He is, our faith in Him. Whether He had a beginning or not causes a huge separation?

We don't agree on everything, though. To suggest as much is to risk glossing over substantial theological disagreements.

The letter 'i' is a chasm.
Is Jesus eternal, or created? That's a chasm, too.
Is Jesus God by nature, or just by title (if there is such a thing as a god by title)? There's another chasm.

Who do we say that Jesus is? Who did Jesus say He was? God incarnate, or a deified man with a royal title? These are significantly different conceptions of Jesus Himself, how God operates, and the nature of divinity. Doctrinally, I see no bridging of the two. Here Hegel will forever remain dissatisified.

If you think the different working outs of these two views aren't significant then I'm not sure that you've thought them through to their end. Or maybe you have, and you prefer to fall back on faith, not doctrine? I think that's probably fine in theory, so long as we understand the vastly different conceptions we arrive at, at the end.

But as I said, that's not a value judgment. It's an acknowledgement of the vastly different working outs of each theological position.

Do you know that many Trinitarians believe that Jesus' personality was created when He came to the earth (just as one believes here)? That description is no different than what I have said, in my opinion... I believe the personality of Christ was created, but before He came to earth. And that is such a huge difference? It's a huge difference because the doctrine of the Trinity requires it, not the Bible.

It's a 'huge difference' because of the metaphysics and ontology of either view. There's nothing special about Trinitarianism specifically that necessitates a 'huge difference'. That same difference is present in your view as well.

Your view on the nature and person of Jesus is different.

I have already said the Trinity is not a salvational subject, and I'm not someone to judge anyone's salvation. I've already called you a brother/friend through our common belief in Christ. I'm not sure where you're getting that; you are a Christian as far as I'm concerned.

What is a 'false believer' in your view, if not someone who thinks a man by nature is God by nature? That is, by anyone's standard, a significant theological error. Not mere heterodoxy, either.

Let's engage on the text, not our intentions and how we put things.

What do you say?

Joshua

I say I've been doing that, but you've been taking it as a personal criticism.