Christ was fully human. Christians agree. Jesus was one person with two natures. He was fully human (including a created human body and soul) and fully God, eternal and immutable. Christians do not believe that the body was just a shell that God controlled like a robot. God was incarnate in Jesus (which also had a human soul and will, obedient, but not overwhelmed, by God). The divine and the human existed as one person, but unmixed.Then with that human soul and body Jesus was a human! l have human soul and body and l think my soul can conduct with God any way. And all people have a soul and body. What was different for Jesus?
When we speak God create the wave of sound so it can be heard. So God can create sound in any way for human to hear. That sound is not part of God anymore but His creation. God create soul but souls are not part of God but His creation. Our seeing is from God but it is not part of attribution. lt is creation and manifestation of attribution. Eternal essence of God is never in time.
Time is small circle and eternity is big circle which surround all times. So there is no need to say the big circle can be both inside and external but it is always external.
Erikaspirit16;13717529]Other people have answered you, but I’ll give my own answer.
Examples of Apostolic Oral Sacred Tradition are revealed in faith and practice unchanged in the Catholic Church.“Oral tradition” for the most part refers to what was generally accepted by the Church in the 1st century.
Apostolic faith in Mary sinless life and that God blessed her full of grace, from original sin, is an Apostolic faith that is never questioned… Luke records God revealing that "ALL AGES WILL CALL MARY BLESSED. Thus her Immaculate Conception never needs to reach the level of doctrine (binding on all the faithful). Until Communism was convincing the world that God does not intervene with the human race. The Immaculate Conception defeated this new man made ideology that rejects God and proclaims God does not exist.But it does go beyond that–a couple example are the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary. These were proclaimed as doctrines in the 19th c., but up until then I suppose you could have called them “oral traditions.” In other words, there was a consensus in the Church that these things were true, but no explicit Biblical language you could find to back them up. (In other words, there is no Gospel passage that says “Mary was conceived without sin; she was the only person to be born without the stain of original sin.”)
The Church does not necessarily decides what is Oral Tradition and what is not, this is very debatable. What the Church uses to defend and protect divine revelation and the apostolic faith from changing. The Church uses Oral Sacred Apostolic Tradition and Sacred Scripture with the mind of Christ and the divine keys God places in the Church’s hands to bind and loose upon the whole Earth.As someone else pointed out, that’s the role of the Church (Pope, general councils, bishops). The Church decides what is authentic tradition and what is not. It’s not secret, it’s all in Church documents like the documents of Vatican II or the Catechism. All you have to do is read it.
I agree with you commentary.Another way to answer your question is that the Epistles and Gospels are the result of oral tradition. They were based on oral tradition. Yes, there were documents that came before the Gospels we have now (Q, the L source, the M source, etc.) but they also depended on oral tradition. Jesus did not write a handbook before he died. His teachings were in the memories of his disciples.
Prophet Muhammad said “my heart is always with God”. So did heart of Muhammad compound with God? It is not important if you verify Muhammad or not as a prophet but just think He was. God was with Jesus but that was not in way of incarnation as you think. Heart of human is a mirror for manifestation of God and heart of Jesus was very bright. God manifested through heart(that is not flesh part of body whcih support blood circulation but a moral sense which support moral life of human as flesh heart support material life) of Jesus very clearly but that was not transform of divinity to mortal. That was approaching of mortal to divine through manifestation.Christ was fully human. Christians agree. Jesus was one person with two natures. He was fully human (including a created human body and soul) and fully God, eternal and immutable. Christians do not believe that the body was just a shell that God controlled like a robot. God was incarnate in Jesus (which also had a human soul and will, obedient, but not overwhelmed, by God). The divine and the human existed as one person, but unmixed.
Yes he was.God was with Jesus but that was not in way of incarnation as you think.
64-Say, “O People of the Scripture, come to a word that is equitable between us and you - that we will not worship except Allah and not associate anything with Him and not take one another as lords instead of Allah .” But if they turn away, then say, "Bear witness that we are Muslims [submitting to Him]."Al-Imran(3)Yes he was.
Sorry, seems like we’re not really discussing anymore.
Jesus is the new Torah. Jesus is greater than the Temple. Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath. Jesus forgives sins. Jesus and the Father are one. Jesus was in the beginning with God and was God and through him and for him all things were made. Jesus taught the law as the authority. Jesus had mastery of storms and seas. Jesus was the true light that became flesh. Jesus repeatedly declared himself to be I AM, the name by which God declared himself to Moses. Jesus declared himself to be the bringer of cosmic judgment. Jesus is Lord.
Jesus64-Say, “O People of the Scripture, come to a word that is equitable between us and you - that we will not worship except Allah and not associate anything with Him and not take one another as lords instead of Allah .” But if they turn away, then say, "Bear witness that we are Muslims [submitting to Him]."Al-Imran(3)
Yes I think I did.
4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord: Deuteronomy 6.Jesus
John 10:30
Come Holy Spirit fill the hearts of those who truly seek TRUTH with TRUTH who is Jesus Christ personified Amen.
- The Father and I are one.”
31
The Jews again picked up rocks to stone him.
32
Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from my Father. For which of these are you trying to stone me?”
33
The Jews answered him, “We are not stoning you for a good work but for blasphemy. You, a man, **are making yourself God.” **
34- Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law,** ‘I said,** “You are gods”’?
35
If it calls them gods to whom the word of God came, and scripture cannot be set aside,
36
can you say that the one whom the Father has consecrated* and sent into the world blasphemes because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?
37
If I do not perform my Father’s works, do not believe me;
38
but if I perform them, even if you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may realize [and understand] that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.”
Yes, God is one. God is three persons in one divine being, simple in composition, having no parts.4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord: Deuteronomy 6.
(35 Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the Lord he is God; there is none else beside him.
39 Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the Lord he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else. Deuteronomy 4.)
(10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.
11 I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour.
12 I have declared, and have saved, and I have shewed, when there was no strange god among you: therefore ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, that I am God.
13 Yea, before the day was I am he; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand: I will work, and who shall let it? Isaiah 43)
(18 For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else.
22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else. Isaiah 45)
(29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:
32 And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: Mark 12)
19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. John 5
…
Your scripture say God is one but yo do not believe in your own book.
Why did God not convey about three persons in one personality into OT? And yet there is no any statement about three persons in one person into NT! Conversely it stressed very seriously that God is one but just one and merely one and unique and unrivalled and no god except God … Are those not clear enough? Is there any any requirement to establish a new faith through Holy Tradition!Yes, God is one. God is three persons in one divine being, simple in composition, having no parts.
Should we make a separate topic for this discussion? We’ve moved away from sacred tradition and scripture.
How ironic; Your faith tradition described from your book (Quran), that the Christian Trinity consists of the Father, Son and the Virgin Mary. Your book never describes the correct Trinity of persons. How can the Quran be so far off as to misunderstand the Christian Trinity? When the Christian Trinity divine revelation long existed before Muhammad was ever born.4
Your scripture say God is one but yo do not believe in your own book.
God did not reveal the Trinity in the OT, because God did not send the Holy Spirit yet. But now we discern that God does mysteriously reveal the Trinity in the OT.hasantas;13733911]Why did God not convey about three persons in one personality into OT?
This is one of the main reasons I have not converted to Islam. Women. As you say, there are “convenient” (but not true) explanations of wife beating. You are doing exactly what Muslims do all the time, which is to pick only the hadith and verses of the Qur’an they like, and ignore all the hadith and verses that say the opposite. At least be fair: give all of the verses and hadith, and let people decide for themselves.Yes … There are very convenient explanation of all those issues. Let’s start with beating wifes.
beating wife is not an issue which is exist in hadiths. Conversely Muhammad had never beat His wifes. In hadith prophet Muhammad advise to behave very well for wifes. And prophet Muhammad advised not to beat wifes. Just in a Hadith it is said that the most propitious of you is whom behave good for wife. Beating wife is in Qur’an:
34-Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband’s] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand. An-Nisa(4)
There is truthful interpretation of that verse.
You are just making me angry. If men can have 4 wives, why can’t women have 4 husbands? If the number of women is reduced compared to the number of men, why not allow them to marry more than one husband? (This is your argument reversed.) And if you want to prevent adultery, why is 1 man marrying 4 women better than 1 women marrying 4 men? And when you say Muhammad’s marriages were not because of lust, how do you know? You know perfectly well that Muhammad was not restricted to 4 wives like other men–the Qur’an said he could have more! If it wasn’t lust, why did he have sex with them?having multiple wives is not in hadiths but in Qur’an. And Qur’an did not say make wives from one to four but reduce numbers of wives to 4. Having multiple wives was custom and tradition of people before Islam and exist in previous religion. For instance David and Solomon had multpile wives. The multiple wives was in all cultures before Islam. As much I know there is no a prohibition in Bible for multply wives.
verses about multply wives:
3-And if you fear that you will not deal justly with the orphan girls, then marry those that please you of [other] women, two or three or four. But if you fear that you will not be just, then [marry only] one or those your right hand possesses. That is more suitable that you may not incline [to injustice]. An-Nisa
129-And you will never be able to be equal [in feeling] between wives, even if you should strive [to do so]. So do not incline completely [toward one] and leave another hanging. And if you amend [your affairs] and fear Allah - then indeed, Allah is ever Forgiving and Merciful.
If you notice in vesres Qur’an do not advise multiple wives but tell about difficulties of it. Why did not Qur’an ban multiple wives? There should be many reasons. By wars sometimes the number of men reduce so to prevent corruption and women God allowed. And some men do not make do with one woman so to prevent from adultery God allowed such men to have multiple wives. etc. But Qur’an advise to have one wife. Allah know the dispositon of human best.
Muhammad did not allowe His son-in-law(Ali) to have another wife beside His daughter. That demonstrate that Muhammad did not wish multiple wives. The case for Him is different which concerned Islam in some ways. Just one thing His marriages were not because of lust.
The Church did not write the Bible - the Holy Spirit inspired the writers and then the letters and gospels were compiled with God’s guidance.Why did God not convey about three persons in one personality into OT? And yet there is no any statement about three persons in one person into NT! Conversely it stressed very seriously that God is one but just one and merely one and unique and unrivalled and no god except God … Are those not clear enough? Is there any any requirement to establish a new faith through Holy Tradition!
Sacred Tradition may(!?) transcend or be equal Bible because Bible was compiled by Church! And also that is strange. Church wrote Bible so only Church could interpret truely! Church may had hold interpretations of revelation but Church is not the just one to interpret Gospels. It is not reliable to assert that Church hold the true faith through tradition. That means Church is baseless for doctrines.
Here is the first indication that God is 3 persons in one:Why did God not convey about three persons in one personality into OT? And yet there is no any statement about three persons in one person into NT! Conversely it stressed very seriously that God is one but just one and merely one and unique and unrivalled and no god except God … Are those not clear enough? Is there any any requirement to establish a new faith through Holy Tradition!
Sacred Tradition may(!?) transcend or be equal Bible because Bible was compiled by Church! And also that is strange. Church wrote Bible so only Church could interpret truely! Church may had hold interpretations of revelation but Church is not the just one to interpret Gospels. It is not reliable to assert that Church hold the true faith through tradition. That means Church is baseless for doctrines.
I know no any valid hadith about beating woman and if you know then quote and do not be afraid. What I know is that Muhammad always advise not to beat women.This is one of the main reasons I have not converted to Islam. Women. As you say, there are “convenient” (but not true) explanations of wife beating. You are doing exactly what Muslims do all the time, which is to pick only the hadith and verses of the Qur’an they like, and ignore all the hadith and verses that say the opposite. At least be fair: give all of the verses and hadith, and let people decide for themselves.
In fact, I’m sure you know that there are many hadith about beating your wives–I’m not going to quote them all, because I’m sure you know them. Ayesha herself said Muhammad beat her. Abu Baker beat Ayesha. Ayesha said the believing women (Muslims) were in the worst position of any women at all. And there are other hadith where people came to Muhammad to ask his advice about beating their wives, and he always thought it was a great idea.
I am not interest in coverting any one. And you can hold your religion but not with doctrines. I do not know how old you are and my intend is not to patronize or insult but just to tell fact of Islam.You are just making me angry. If men can have 4 wives, why can’t women have 4 husbands? If the number of women is reduced compared to the number of men, why not allow them to marry more than one husband? (This is your argument reversed.) And if you want to prevent adultery, why is 1 man marrying 4 women better than 1 women marrying 4 men? And when you say Muhammad’s marriages were not because of lust, how do you know? You know perfectly well that Muhammad was not restricted to 4 wives like other men–the Qur’an said he could have more! If it wasn’t lust, why did he have sex with them?
Please don’t patronize me. I am young, but I’m not an idiot. Your comments are just insulting.
It had benefits for David and Solomon and Jacop!I wonder why the ‘order of life’ always seems to benefit old men?
Most of the world is no longer living in the Bronze Age.It had benefits for David and Solomon and Jacop!