Protestantism

» pink101 - Articulating the Unimaginable

In response to Articulating the Unimaginable posted by BrianTubbs:
.
I can be as cordial as anyone.
.
There is a distinct aire of discord in these threads. But, there are also persons here who provide insight and perspective to ideas and questions. If it weren't for the latter, I would be long gone.
.
Have you ever wondered why we don't have increased participation?
.
There is no need for the discord.
.
To pass it off as Ann Coulter is to give it support.
.

-- posted by pink101

» _Boanerges_ - Articulating the Unimaginable

In response to Articulating the Unimaginable posted by pink101:

Have you ever wondered why we don't have increased participation?

Actually Phil. we had lots of Christians here, and some of them were topic editors.... We know what Suite did to those people, which every single one of them left after Suite sent them packing. The reason why people are not here is because they do not want to waste their time arguing over silly nonsense, nor are they interested in childish behavior. That is why at least 10 people I know of have not returned. A quick check in the archives will reveal that many were here, but now are not. To imply they left because of 'me' is a bogus claim, and I don't really believe Brian (or anyone for that matter) will buy such nonsense... But - I can't speak for him or them. even though I can offer an 'educated guess' (based on empirical fact). So.. try not to point fingers at people - and instead = try to simply engage the topic of conversation...

To which, you have not revealed anything.. Frankly, I too am a little lost in your premise. I do not see how Jesus being a man on earth confuses the atonement. The atonement was the requirement from God to forgive sin. Only Jesus was able to fulfill such a position. Jesus was 100% human and 100% God. Yet, the Bible is clear that he set aside his glory when coming to this time and space.

I think you're having difficulty in understanding this simple concept because you cannot visualize yourself as three persons, and being one the same in all cases.

I think you should be a little objective in this effort.

Obviously you were a little 4' child who did not know much - know a full grown adult - and you know more. Yet you have not changed anything, only your knowledge and size. You are still you.. and yet you were once the other.. So this is not hard to visualize. Jesus was a human walking this earth at one time, therefore, he could not have been God the Father on earth at the same time. No more than you can show us your soul, apart from your physical, even though both exist... You cannot show us your mind as well.. You can only reveal to others what is "in your mind" but - you cannot show us your thoughts, etc.. etc.. Yet, you are all three of these yourself..... and so am I!.... and so is Brian, and BJ.. and...

-- posted by _Boanerges_

» pink101 - 7:43 E.D.L.S.T.

.

-- posted by pink101

» pink101 - Articulating the Unimaginable

In response to Articulating the Unimaginable posted by _Boanerges_:
.
Frankly, I too am a little lost in your premise. I do not see how Jesus being a man on earth confuses the atonement. The atonement was the requirement from God to forgive sin. Only Jesus was able to fulfill such a position. Jesus was 100% human and 100% God. Yet, the Bible is clear that he set aside his glory when coming to this time and space.
.
Okay, maybe I'm missing some understanding here. This part of your statement is the first comment directly to the point made by any one so far.
.
I'm thinking of the Atonement as being at one with God. Perhaps I am wrong?
.

-- posted by pink101

» _Boanerges_ - Atonement

In response to Articulating the Unimaginable posted by pink101:

"the doctrine concerning the reconciliation of God and humankind, esp. as accomplished through the life, suffering, and death of Christ."
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/A...

...and mankind... hence, son of man....
So.. Jesus was a man.. and Jesus is God.. Therefore, only GOD paid the price for the atonement, as no human could...

Now.. that is Agape love... ey?....

-- posted by _Boanerges_

» pink101 - Atonement

In response to Atonement posted by _Boanerges_:
.
I am trying to say that I may have misunderstood the application of the idea of Atonement in that my impression is that it means being at one with God. And that it comes about just as Jesus taught before he was crucified.
.
Please respond to my point by answering this question. Does Jesus teach that a human being can be one with God. Yes or no would be sufficient.
.
Anyone?
.
Now it would be great if we could stay on subject until we get this question fleshed out and on the table--so that every one understands it.
.
Please.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - One with God

In response to Atonement posted by pink101:

Pink, NOW I get it.

You ask if the doctrine of the Atonement holds out the promise that a person can be "one with God." The short answer is 'No.'

The longer answer is...

The Atonement means that Jesus has died to 'atone' or pay the penalty for our sins, thus making a way of RECONCILIATION with God. In that sense, we can be united in fellowship with God. Thus, I suppose you could use the phrase "one with God" in that kind of a sense. But not in any literal way.

I can see where you're coming from, now, though. If one were to understand the reconciliation of the Atonement as allowing for a spiritual or metaphysical union of some kind with God - that WOULD 'obfuscate' or confuse the doctrine of the Trinity.

I'm tracking with you now.

» pink101 - One with God

In response to One with God posted by BrianTubbs:
.
Brian answers with, "You ask if the doctrine of the Atonement holds out the promise that a person can be 'one with God.' The short answer is 'No.'"
.
In my long years of experience, I see this question as a central--if not the central most--issue in Christian doctrinology.
.
Before there is a rush to knock me down for daring to make such an outlandish statement, it might be worthwhile to consider the comment for what it says.
.

-- posted by pink101

» pink101 - One with God

In response to One with God posted by pink101:

,
Interesting that this thread fits in with the Nicene Creed thread.
.

-- posted by pink101

» _Boanerges_ - One with God

In response to One with God posted by BrianTubbs:

If one were to understand the reconciliation of the Atonement as allowing for a spiritual or metaphysical union of some kind with God - that WOULD 'obfuscate' or confuse the doctrine of the Trinity.

Yes it would. But it would not be a Christian doctrine. It would only be another view of God mixed with Christian doctrine. No wonder it would be confusing. The Atonement is not up for grabs to be interpreted by some other faith systems. It resides within the Christian doctrine and should be 'deconstructed' according to the Christian doctrine.

Otherwise, all we have is a confusing mix of religions based upon personal ideas and beliefs... Fortunately, for the true Christian, these answers and the questions, have been resolved 2000 yrs ago when the canon of Scriptures were closed.

All Biblical scriptures are closed - meaning - no more to be added to or taken from.. The NT makes this clear. To argue otherwise is futile and a waste of time.

Now then, if someone does not understand what atonement means in the Christian faith, that is a different question and subject discussion.

-- posted by _Boanerges_