Muslims and Christ Divinity

[IgnatianPhilo]

You have absolutely attacked Christianity in that you suggest Christianity is wrong in believing a trinity and then seek to correct us as to the meaning of our ancient creeds (although the orthodox church has not used the athanasian creed historically it is still an important part of western Christian history) and the scripture. Lets get that straight first and foremost we are all attacking each other’s view points and each other’s religions. We don’t need to pretend otherwise.

Now I want to define the trinity for you and sugges that it never needed your concept of “marifah” to be defined. The trinity was defined at Nicea and Constantinople and the fathers inbetween, before and after. The trinity is this;

There is One God.

This God’s oneness, what makes him the one God, is predicated on his essence that is his “ousia,” what he consists of, for lack of a better word, divinity or divine essence of God.

This God is all powerful, all knowing, omnipresent, perfect, simple, all good, all loving.

Now God the father is the head and fount of all divinity, he has always existed, he will always exist. The son is begotten of the father before all ages and there was never a time when he did not exist. The son is of the exact same essence as God the father (homouousian, he is not merely like him in substance (homoiousian), he is definitely not different from him in substance (Heteroousian). Then there is the Holy Spirit who is of the same essence of the father and who proceeds from the father and is sent by the son.

These three persons are one in substance and are all the one God while retaining and individual identity which is unique to their own person. It was not the father who became incarnate, rather it was the son and it is not the son sending himself when he says he will send the spirit, nor is it the father speaking to him when he announces from heaven “This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased.”

That is the most basic idea of the trinity. You can’t explain what has already been explained. You can only redefine it, like the bahai do to Christian concepts and I don’t accept it from them and I won’t accept it from you. The trinity has a meaning historically and you cannot simply reinvent a new way to speak about it, that will merely confuse people.

Now I tried reading the supposed definition of marifah and I find three different uses within the first paragraph.

1. Skill or talent.
2. A state of belonging to a certain group (or person) who knows (something)
3. Knowing God by one’s conscience

Now this is too vague to have any meaningful use in our discussions. I do not know this word or this concept and so I suggest you use English to convey what you mean. If you mean a rank or station, say that for I have no idea what you mean when you say marifah.

Now insofar as the word is concerned, the Logos I do not view it as some sort of abstraction as you seem to. The word is real and it exists and it has power. The Logos is the being responsible for creation, through which God created heaven and earth according to the gospel of John. He was with God and was God and without him nothing was made that was made. The Logos at one point became man and we beheld his glory as one uniquely born of God thus indicating the logos is personal, a person, Jesus Christ.

 

[GaryTaylor]

You have absolutely attacked Christianity in that you suggest Christianity is wrong in believing a trinity and then seek to correct us as to the meaning of our ancient creeds (although the orthodox church has not used the athanasian creed historically it is still an important part of western Christian history) and the scripture. Lets get that straight first and foremost we are all attacking each other’s view points and each other’s religions. We don’t need to pretend otherwise.

Now I want to define the trinity for you and sugges that it never needed your concept of “marifah” to be defined. The trinity was defined at Nicea and Constantinople and the fathers inbetween, before and after. The trinity is this;

There is One God.

This God’s oneness, what makes him the one God, is predicated on his essence that is his “ousia,” what he consists of, for lack of a better word, divinity or divine essence of God.

This God is all powerful, all knowing, omnipresent, perfect, simple, all good, all loving.

Now God the father is the head and fount of all divinity, he has always existed, he will always exist. The son is begotten of the father before all ages and there was never a time when he did not exist. The son is of the exact same essence as God the father (homouousian, he is not merely like him in substance (homoiousian), he is definitely not different from him in substance (Heteroousian). Then there is the Holy Spirit who is of the same essence of the father and who proceeds from the father and is sent by the son.

These three persons are one in substance and are all the one God while retaining and individual identity which is unique to their own person. It was not the father who became incarnate, rather it was the son and it is not the son sending himself when he says he will send the spirit, nor is it the father speaking to him when he announces from heaven “This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased.”

That is the most basic idea of the trinity. You can’t explain what has already been explained. You can only redefine it, like the bahai do to Christian concepts and I don’t accept it from them and I won’t accept it from you. The trinity has a meaning historically and you cannot simply reinvent a new way to speak about it, that will merely confuse people.

Now I tried reading the supposed definition of marifah and I find three different uses within the first paragraph.

1. Skill or talent.
2. A state of belonging to a certain group (or person) who knows (something)
3. Knowing God by one’s conscience

Now this is too vague to have any meaningful use in our discussions. I do not know this word or this concept and so I suggest you use English to convey what you mean. If you mean a rank or station, say that for I have no idea what you mean when you say marifah.

Now insofar as the word is concerned, the Logos I do not view it as some sort of abstraction as you seem to. The word is real and it exists and it has power. The Logos is the being responsible for creation, through which God created heaven and earth according to the gospel of John. He was with God and was God and without him nothing was made that was made. The Logos at one point became man and we beheld his glory as one uniquely born of God thus indicating the logos is personal, a person, Jesus Christ.

I think too that arguing the Trinity from Scripture comes right to the same dilemma which occurred at the Council of Nicaea The Scripture alone were not adequate, because both Arians and those who confessed that Jesus was coeternal with the Father, used various proof-texts to no avail. A statement of faith was deemed necessary thus the Creed. Then of course the continued history.

Though your right the approach is similar to Baha’l. Sufis also scan scriptures of other religions thus Krishna and prophets of Allah, their God Alimghty.

 

[Tom_Baum]

AspiringSoul

You asked, “Can you describe God the Father? and what did he look like?”

I met God the Father, I did not see Him.

I met God the Father in my heart, it was that He gradually let Himself be known, in that I knew something good was happening but I did not know what, at a point I just knew that it was God the Father, I have no idea how I knew, I just knew.

I can describe God the Father as a Being of Love, in the instant that I met Him, I knew that what I learned in 2nd grade, that God Is Love, was/is quite literal.

Before meeting God the Father, there was no way that I could conceive of a Being being Love, I still can’t conceive of a Being being Love but I know it to be true.

I refer to God the Father as Father and Dad and I use male pronouns when speaking of Him but God is neither a Male, a Female nor an It, even tho God-Incarnate was/is a Male, but we do have to use human language when we speak or write about God.

 

[AspiringSoul]

You have absolutely attacked Christianity in that you suggest Christianity is wrong in believing a trinity and then seek to correct us as to the meaning of our ancient creeds (although the orthodox church has not used the athanasian…

I’ve made it clear I believe in the trinity but you’ve instead insisted i’ve rejected it?

99% of what you wrote was irrelevant as you’re not telling me anything I’m not aware of and it’s based on your weak assumptions, misinterpretations etc.

Let me Repear

I believe in the trinity

earlier when I said this, i was questioned why, a muslim would accept the trinity, which is ‘rejected in the Quran’ but the reason is because the Trinity is not based on conceptual knowledge. Conceptual knowledge can only take us so far…ie God is 1. That’s simple monothiesm and it’s based on duality ie Creator-Creation.

There are 2 branches of knowledge

conceptual knowledge
inner mystical knowledge (this is what Marifah means).

The truth of the trinity cannot be understood through conceptual knowledge alone as it can easily be misinterpreted.

The trinity was based on inner mystical knowledge of the greater realities of God-head. Actually the entire religion of Christianity in it’s origins, the entire new testament…was built on Marifah…the inner mystical knowledge.

***God’s Wisdom Revealed by the Spirit
**
6 We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. 7 No, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 However, as it is written:

“What no eye has seen,
what no ear has heard,
and what no human mind has conceived”**—
the things God has prepared for those who love him—

10 these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit.

The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. 11 For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12 What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us. 13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words.[c] 14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit. 15 The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments, 16 for,

“Who has known the mind of the Lord
so as to instruct him?”[d]

But we have the mind of Christ.**

your appalling attempt to ‘debate’ me is just based on nothing but conjecture, of words, terms etc.

i’ve embraced the deeper reality.

I believe the trinity pertains to the 3 ontological ‘faces’ (so to speak) of God’s manifestations.

*The Son is God’s Eternal Expression. *
From the perspective of conceptual knowledge it isn’t ‘God’ yet from the perspective of Marifah…it is God.

How? quite simple because marifah doesn’t allow concepts to get in the way, it eliminates concepts and only allows room for God.

when it comes to the conceptual perspective i say
The Son is a prism/glass (ie it is God’s Eternal Expression) through which God is manifesting His attributes, it represents the Macrocosm of all existence…and the Holy Spirit is the Microcosm of the Son.

Marifah would eliminate the ‘mirror’ or ‘reflection’ or ‘prism’ ‘glass’ etc all out of the equation…what would remain is ‘The Light’

so how is this an attack against Christianity?*

 

[AspiringSoul]

AspiringSoul

You asked, “Can you describe God the Father? and what did he look like?”

I met God the Father, I did not see Him.

I met God the Father in my heart, it was that He gradually let Himself be known, in that I knew something good was happening but I did not know what, at a point I just knew that it was God the Father, I have no idea how I knew, I just knew.

I can describe God the Father as a Being of Love, in the instant that I met Him, I knew that what I learned in 2nd grade, that God Is Love, was/is quite literal.

Before meeting God the Father, there was no way that I could conceive of a Being being Love, I still can’t conceive of a Being being Love but I know it to be true.

I refer to God the Father as Father and Dad and I use male pronouns when speaking of Him but God is neither a Male, a Female nor an It, even tho God-Incarnate was/is a Male, but we do have to use human language when we speak or write about God.

again this is a perfect example of the problem of conceptual knowledge vs mystical knowledge

people can talk about love
but experiencing it is the real thing.

 

[AspiringSoul]

I think too that arguing the Trinity from Scripture comes right to the same dilemma which occurred at the Council of Nicaea The Scripture alone were not adequate, because both Arians and those who confessed that Jesus was coeternal with the Father, used various proof-texts to no avail. A statement of faith was deemed necessary thus the Creed. Then of course the continued history.

Though your right the approach is similar to Baha’l. Sufis also scan scriptures of other religions thus Krishna and prophets of Allah, their God Alimghty.

exactly it cannot be proven through conceptual knowledge, nor would it even make sense
ie the second you say ‘someone else existed eternally with God’ you open up a can of worms…it goes against monothiesm.

The trinity goes beyond as it relates to the manifestations of God which can only be witnessed inwardly.

ie if you held up a Rock in your hand and said ‘i see God in this rock’ it would be a statement of kufr in islam.

However if you could genuinely perceive God, in the Rock…you’re on your way to marifah.

not many Christians will know about krishna or rama, or understand what Brahman, Vishnu and Brahma are and how they relate to the trinity ether.

Sufism connects them all quite easily however.

These concepts are universal. The coming of the Word of God was certainly a universal belief and prophecied in different religions in their own way. The magians (Zoroastrians) were aware of the coming of The Word. The fact The Word was a Greek concept entering judaism says it all really.

 

[Tom_Baum]

AspiringSoul

You wrote, “The serpent, has always represented our sinful, carnal nature. What Jesus did was he sacrificed this part of himself (ie through the crucifixion). what’s the point telling me i’m wrong here?”

Actually, this seems to be another difference, since Christianity teaches that Jesus had a human nature, in that He was True God and True Man, but that His human nature was without sin so He did not have a “sinful, carnal nature” to sacrifice.

Christianity teaches that He took the sin and sins of humanity upon Himself, Himself being True Man and True God.

You also wrote, “The crucifixion and ressurection is a symbol of Jesus overcoming ‘death’ by sacrificing his desires for the sake of God.”

If this is what you believe, that is fine but it points out the big difference, to put it mildly, between what you say and what Christianity says.

Christianity says that Jesus took humanity’s sins upon Himself, does islam say that or anything even close to that?

Christianity says that Jesus Is God, not a spokesperson for God, not a reflection of God but God in the Flesh, is this an islamic teaching also or just a Christian teaching?

You then wrote, “If anyone asks me to reconcile between Christianity and Islam I can easily do that and have done”

Actually, you haven’t even come close since there is no reconciling islam and Christianity.

Jesus Is either God-Incarnate or He isn’t, there is no middle ground, Christianity teaches that Jesus Is God in the Flesh and islam teaches that he isn’t, it is that simple.

 

[AspiringSoul]

AspiringSoul

You wrote, “The serpent, has always represented our sinful, carnal nature. What Jesus did was he sacrificed this part of himself (ie through the crucifixion). what’s the point telling me i’m wrong here?”

Actually, this seems to be another difference, since Christianity teaches that Jesus had a human nature, in that He was True God and True Man, but that His human nature was without sin so He did not have a “sinful, carnal nature” to sacrifice.

Christianity teaches that He took the sin and sins of humanity upon Himself, Himself being True Man and True God.

You also wrote, “The crucifixion and ressurection is a symbol of Jesus overcoming ‘death’ by sacrificing his desires for the sake of God.”

If this is what you believe, that is fine but it points out the big difference, to put it mildly, between what you say and what Christianity says.

Christianity says that Jesus took humanity’s sins upon Himself, does islam say that or anything even close to that?

Christianity says that Jesus Is God, not a spokesperson for God, not a reflection of God but God in the Flesh, is this an islamic teaching also or just a Christian teaching?

You then wrote, “If anyone asks me to reconcile between Christianity and Islam I can easily do that and have done”

Actually, you haven’t even come close since there is no reconciling islam and Christianity.

Jesus Is either God-Incarnate or He isn’t, there is no middle ground, Christianity teaches that Jesus Is God in the Flesh and islam teaches that he isn’t, it is that simple.

about the ‘sinful nature’
The accountability of sin is not the same as the nature of sin (the flesh). A baby is pure, even though tit possesses a carnal soul. Jesus was infallible but he certainly had a carnal soul which he overcame.

In islam, it’s usually called The Nafs. The process of inner purification begins with the transformation of the nafs.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tazkiah

As for
*Christianity teaches that He took the sin and sins of humanity upon Himself, Himself being True Man and True God.
Yet the world keeps on sinning and those who follow the Beast are cast into hell.

It seems you just parrot religious teachings without knowing what they actually mean.

What the crucifixion was, was a powerful symbol/illustration that’s why Paul said
*Romans 6
6 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6 For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with,[a] that we should no longer be slaves to sin— 7 because anyone who has died has been set free from sin.*

your last points are still limited because what you’ve said can only be realised inwardly and not theoretically.
this point will probably go way over your head anyway.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

I think too that arguing the Trinity from Scripture comes right to the same dilemma which occurred at the Council of Nicaea The Scripture alone were not adequate, because both Arians and those who confessed that Jesus was coeternal with the Father, used various proof-texts to no avail. A statement of faith was deemed necessary thus the Creed. Then of course the continued history.

Though your right the approach is similar to Baha’l. Sufis also scan scriptures of other religions thus Krishna and prophets of Allah, their God Alimghty.

Of course there was need for a creed and I am not a sola scripturist arguing for scripture alone, what I am saying however is our trinitarian doctrine can be seen and demonstrated from the scriptures.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

By trinity aspiring you do not mean trinity in the sense it has been used all throughout history to denote a belief in One God in three persons. You have made that clear enough. You can say you believe in trinity but you will never confess the Nicene constantinopolitan creed and I showed you how badly you have butchered the Athanasian creed in an attempt to get it to cohere with your theology (whatever your theology is). So while the trinity is a mystery which will never be comprehended it is a theological concept which can be understood. I liken it to eternity, our minds will never grasp(comprehend) how eternity works (without begining and without end) yet we understand that it is true because if there was not something eternal then there would be nothing. The fathers of the church didn’t argue nonsense, they were arguing for an articulated viewpoint which their opponents, homoiousians and Heterouosians vehemently dissagreed with. The trinity is the means

You say the “Trinity” is one God exisitng in three ontological faces. Yet you do not believe the Jesus who walked and talked and breathed is the creator of everything as trinitarian christians do believe. We believe the son was incarnate, that he became (or adopted) man(hood). That he was always God. That he was always personal, that the Christ is merely a state of the son, that Jesus is the name of the son given to him when he was born on earth, that the son is the word of God. You seem to think of all of these as totally different entities which puts you outside of the mainstream Trinitarian theology.

Now I can appreciate mysticism, it exists in orthodoxy as well (read the Philokalia) but even within the orthodox church we have our definitions on theology of the trinity. Its very important that if we are going to talk to each other about who God is we don’t speak past each other, hence why I am insistent on having our terms defined. I am not convinced we believe in the same thing. I am convinced you have hijacked the word trinity just like the bahai and other non orthodox groups have to make it mean whatever you want. Trinity is not just a word you can ascribe whatever meaning you want, language should not be used in such an irresponsible way, this will only cause confusion in the end and that should not be either of our goals.

What is a face of God? To me that brings to mind an image of God changing personality something akin to the ancient heresy where God was believed to shift from the the father to the son and to the spirit but never be all three at the same time. After reading your mystical explanation I have learnt nothing. Mysticism belongs to those within the religion and to those outside it makes little sense, hence why I would never argue from an orthodox mystical tradition to convince you (a non orthodox) of anything.

 

[AspiringSoul]

*Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation; that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess; that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Essence of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Essence of his Mother, born in the world. Perfect God; and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the Father as touching his Manhood.
Essence of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Essence of his Mother, born in the world
*

which was pretty much my point

I’m not too familiar with all the christian issues you’ve mentioned nor do I care

As for ontological faces

Face
the surface of a thing, especially one that is presented to the view or has a particular function, in particular:.

Ontology
the branch of metaphysics dealing with the nature of being.

in other words
I believe God is Eternally and Absolutely manifest on 3 levels…

The Father (The Absolute essence)
The Son (the image, the macrocosm)
The Holy spirit (the reflection, the microcosm)

Plus this view is echoed here

Ie The Son
The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created; but begotten

i call it the Eternal Expression of the Absolute Essence

*The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten; but proceeding
*

Btw, do you really think i specifically came here in order to mirror my views with yours? ie that mine must match yours to the letter?

I do not consider my true Self to be my physical body or the person i am on this earth.
i am a Spirit…this body and all else associated with it is my personality.

likewise there is Jesus the flesh-man, personality, etc…and then there is the real Jesus, the higher archetypal reality.

normally when christians talk about Jesus as God, they’re talking about the man who walked the earth

and saying he is an incarnation is silly
the concept of incarnations is rejected in the true Abrahimic faiths…it was an innovation of the romans

manifest is more appropriate ie i beleive The Word manifested in the physical man-personality that was Jesus Christ the son of Mary.

Btw what is your point exactly? what is it you’re trying to get across? all you’re telling me is how wrong i am or telling me how i’ve attacked Christianity

i do not consider your beliefs to be an accurate reflection of the new testament either.

Jesus the physical man, personality was the Servant of God. A Prophet…a person who worshipped God.

The Son of God does not Worship God since He is God.

The Son of Mary…different story.

This is my view…

you don’t like my view, don’t consider it christianity.

so what? *

 

[PRmerger]

I think too that arguing the Trinity from Scripture comes right to the same dilemma which occurred at the Council of Nicaea The Scripture alone were not adequate, because both Arians and those who confessed that Jesus was coeternal with the Father, used various proof-texts to no avail.

Here! Here! More trenchant words were never spoken on this thread!

 

[PRmerger]

exactly it cannot be proven through conceptual knowledge, nor would it even make sense
ie the second you say ‘someone else existed eternally with God’ you open up a can of worms…it goes against monothiesm.

Annnnd that is why we have a Church to serve as the lens to assist us in our gaze.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I’ll show you a good example from Scripture of the Trinity. Read book one.

thriceholy.net/Texts/augustinef.html

Now if you read prior to book one above you’ll see “where” much of what you are contending with comes from. For example with the Incarnation …

“The Manifestations of God are also not seen as an incarnation of God, but are instead understood to be like a perfect mirror reflecting the attributes of God onto this material world”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarnation

Its not Baha’l thinking…its Augustine’s and butchered. “understood to be like a perfect mirror reflecting the attributes of God onto this material world” this is elaborated on above by Augustine.

So what you are dealing with is not simply scripture but the compilation of both Tradition/Sacred Scripture.

Not an easy argument from scripture. Add to this the early centuries and you can see the work. Its a developed doctrine which always existed. Isn’t Rome a blessing???

I think AspiringSoul made some very good points. He caught you twice, I see above with the Incarnation also.

Its a good lesson which I believe to be true, the Gospels are indeed the word of God. Who is it that has the authority to interpret? You could not arrive at the continuity without the Church in this area Trinity-Original Sin-Fall-Incarnation-Nature of Jesus Christ.

Its not evident?

 

[Tom_Baum]

As for
*Christianity teaches that He took the sin and sins of humanity upon Himself, Himself being True Man and True God.
Yet the world keeps on sinning and those who follow the Beast are cast into hell.

It seems you just parrot religious teachings without knowing what they actually mean.

What the crucifixion was, was a powerful symbol/illustration that’s why Paul said
*Romans 6
6 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6 For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with,[a] that we should no longer be slaves to sin— 7 because anyone who has died has been set free from sin.*

your last points are still limited because what you’ve said can only be realised inwardly and not theoretically.
this point will probably go way over your head anyway.

Yes, we all sin, but since Jesus took on ALL sin, we answer to Him, not satan and no one is cast into hell, those that go to hell will come to realize that they put themself there and that they built it themself.

Jesus went to hell, everyone’s hell, and in doing this, “won” the “keys”, so to speak, of the netherworld, not just everyone’s hell but also spiritual death.

There is plenty that I don’t know and there is plenty that probably goes over my head but I don’t need to be a “know-it-all”, I am just here to tell the whole world that Jesus is the Saviour of ALL and that God’s reconciliation with humanity thru the “work” of the Incarnation will be Total, as in, ultimately, for everyone.

The crucifixion was NOT “a powerful symbol/illustration” but was a reality of God becoming One of us and dying for ALL of us.

The crucifixion was not a pretend or an almost torture and death but was what we, humanity, did to God-Incarnate and it was God-Incarnate who willingly did this for ALL of us.

Jesus, God-Incarnate, went to hell and He went to spiritual death, it wasn’t just a “symbol/illustration” but reality.

When Jesus cried out, “My God, My God why have Thou forsaken Me?”, this “reality” predicted many years before, became true as Jesus said this on the cross.

It was God going beyond despair, going beyond the darkest of evil to emcompass and defeat all evil and darkness yet experiencing all of this in the process of defeating it.

It was not merely a physical thing going on at the cross, not even close.

As I have said in other places, I do not need to know all of the details, actually only God knows all of the details, I am here to say that it is not a half-baked, so to speak, reconciliation but is a total, complete and all encompassing, one could say catholic, reconciliation between God and all of creation with includes humanity.

 

[AspiringSoul]

Yes, we all sin, but since Jesus took on ALL sin, we answer to Him, not satan and no one is cast into hell, those that go to hell will come to realize that they put themself there and that they built it themself.

Jesus went to hell, everyone’s hell, and in doing this, “won” the “keys”, so to speak, of the netherworld, not just everyone’s hell but also spiritual death.

There is plenty that I don’t know and there is plenty that probably goes over my head but I don’t need to be a “know-it-all”, I am just here to tell the whole world that Jesus is the Saviour of ALL and that God’s reconciliation with humanity thru the “work” of the Incarnation will be Total, as in, ultimately, for everyone.

The crucifixion was NOT “a powerful symbol/illustration” but was a reality of God becoming One of us and dying for ALL of us.

The crucifixion was not a pretend or an almost torture and death but was what we, humanity, did to God-Incarnate and it was God-Incarnate who willingly did this for ALL of us.

Jesus, God-Incarnate, went to hell and He went to spiritual death, it wasn’t just a “symbol/illustration” but reality.

When Jesus cried out, “My God, My God why have Thou forsaken Me?”, this “reality” predicted many years before, became true as Jesus said this on the cross.

It was God going beyond despair, going beyond the darkest of evil to emcompass and defeat all evil and darkness yet experiencing all of this in the process of defeating it.

It was not merely a physical thing going on at the cross, not even close.

As I have said in other places, I do not need to know all of the details, actually only God knows all of the details, I am here to say that it is not a half-baked, so to speak, reconciliation but is a total, complete and all encompassing, one could say catholic, reconciliation between God and all of creation with includes humanity.

quite simply, i’ll never ever believe ‘God died’

I believe the flesh nature of Jesus Christ ie the Son of Man…died on the cross…but his faith never died…therefore he defeated the power of death.

of course i expect yet another nonsensical response to this.

 

[Tom_Baum]

A simple “job” to proclaim a simple message from a simple person is what God chose me for, as it is written, “I will send the simple to confound the wise”.

God’s Plan is catholic, as in small “c” catholic, which means universal.

God did what God did, in the Incarnation, for ALL.

It doesn’t matter what anyone’s beliefs or non-beliefs are, God looks at the person, the whole person.

 

[Tom_Baum]

quite simply, i’ll never ever believe ‘God died’

I believe the flesh nature of Jesus Christ ie the Son of Man…died on the cross…but his faith never died…therefore he defeated the power of death.

of course i expect yet another nonsensical response to this.

There is physical death and there is spiritual death.

Not to worry, you will meet God one day.

 

[Kliska]

Revelation 2:8 "And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write: The first and the last, who was dead, and has come to life, says this:

Who is talking?

Revelation 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

Revelation 1:11 Saying,** I am Alpha and Omega**, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea. 12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; 13 And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle. 14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; 15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. 16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength. 17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last: 18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

 

[GaryTaylor]

There is physical death and there is spiritual death.

Not to worry, you will meet God one day.

The Quran states Jesus was raised “alive” (“Peace on me the day I was born, and the day I die, and the day I shall be raised alive! Such was Jesus, son of Mary [this is] a statement of the truth concerning which they doubt,” (Surah 19, Maryam, Mary: 33,34).).