God is 1 vs God is 3

[Muffled]

You're acting as if grace were, somehow, a different "thing" than reconciliation. Reconciliation became possible specifically because of God's act of becoming one of us, because we could not, ourselves, become Divine. Jesus is not a "messenger." Angels are "messengers." Jesus didn't come to tell us about God's grace; Jesus came to be God's grace.

I beleive the two are different. I find that God provides for me by His grace not because I need to be reconciled but simply because I already am reconciled. However I do believe reconciliation comes by God's grace and our acceptance of it. (It takes two to agree)

I fail to see the logic in this. Can you draw me a word picture?

I beleive this is illogical because when God delivers a message to an angel to give to us, He acts as a messenger or do you think angels act independantly of God.

I beleive it is both.

 

[sojourner]

Grace is identified as God's love and mercy toward humanity, given unconditionally. It is manifest in the process of salvation. God loved humanity so much that God sent God's Son to enter fully into the human condition. The event wherein God becomes one of isthe ultimate act of reconciliation. Reconciliation means: "the act of making compatible," broadly speaking. The thought is that humanity is separated from God by sin. Therefore, reconciliation is necessary -- that is, we must be reunited with God. Since we are unable to do that on our own -- that is, since we are not the effectors of salvation, it then becomes necessary for God to initiate that process. God did that be reuniting us to God's Self by becoming one of us. Jesus, as fully God, yet fully human, represents that reunification of God and humanity.

Have you ever heard "Don't shoot the messenger?" The messenger is not the message. Jesus is not the messenger.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Grace is identified as God's love and mercy toward humanity, given unconditionally. It is manifest in the process of salvation. God loved humanity so much that God sent God's Son to enter fully into the human condition. The event wherein God becomes one of isthe ultimate act of reconciliation. Reconciliation means: "the act of making compatible," broadly speaking. The thought is that humanity is separated from God by sin. Therefore, reconciliation is necessary -- that is, we must be reunited with God. Since we are unable to do that on our own -- that is, since we are not the effectors of salvation, it then becomes necessary for God to initiate that process. God did that be reuniting us to God's Self by becoming one of us. Jesus, as fully God, yet fully human, represents that reunification of God and humanity.

Have you ever heard "Don't shoot the messenger?" The messenger is not the message. Jesus is not the messenger.

But in short Yahweh will throw us into hell for eternity for no accepting his son even though it cannot be logically explain and is a total mystery. God gave us rationality and that rationality is what stops us from accepting Christianity and other religions. So god is the creator of confusion at the same time?
God also sent his Jewish son to a small speck of the world and left every other nation out of the loop and cast them into hell despite the fact they could have never heard of Jesus? Yahweh also needed to send his son (not himself) in a cowardly fashion to be tortured and die on a cross to save humanity to display his love. Yet if you view it differently you will say Jesus is god himself and that god came down and killed himself just he could save us? Save us from what? God created the Devil so why would he not just cut Shaytaan's breath right where he is? So Yahweh is doing all of this to forgive himself somehow? Is Yahweh this powerless that he cannot stop Shaytaan's ham'sat and put an end to his domain? Despite this he lets Christians slaughter millions in the past centuries and demands eternal torture for all non-believers who find the obvious faults in this approach.

If Yahweh is so powerful and so loving couldn't he have just revealed himself to all of mankind in such a fashion it proves his greatness?

The events of Jesus sound like a man who died because he committed acts of heresy and when he died his followers tried reviving his name by saying it was his plan to die and be resurrected and ironically nobody saw him but the followers and he ascended into heaven shortly.

When you look at it in a logical viewpoint it sounds cultish. I don't mean to bash your religion although I disagree with the New Testament and its authenticity. I believe in god and Yahweh is a powerful name for god but I find no correlation between OT and NT. The founding books of the Taurat do not even add up to the rest of Christianity.
I have always held Christianity and Catholicism as separate faiths unto each other and unto Judaism. The Judeo-Christian connection for me is an utter myth since they depart on the essential aspects of god.

I know Muslims will probably enjoy me saying this but, I find Islam to be closer to Judaism then Christianity without breaking the original theology. But then again I am an ex-Muslim so probably just my dwindling iman speaking

 

[InformedIgnorance]

You're acting as if grace were, somehow, a different "thing" than reconciliation. Reconciliation became possible specifically because of God's act of becoming one of us, because we could not, ourselves, become Divine. Jesus is not a "messenger." Angels are "messengers." Jesus didn't come to tell us about God's grace; Jesus came to be God's grace.

Could you explain to me how salvation is dependent on god becoming human? I ask because this is the first time I have heard someone suggest that salvation is dependant on this, why would god need to become human in order for people to receive grace are you suggesting god was unable to reconcile humanity without becoming a human? I should also point out that saying he became the reconciliation between ourselves and god would suggest he was not god (but rather the reconciliation itself), or otherwise that god can become the reconciliation between himself and us - thus not needing jesus to become the reconciliation in the first place.

Is there some reason, a non-Divine Jesus, selected and anointed by god could not act as god's instrument in this?

 

[sojourner]

Could you explain to me how salvation is dependent on god becoming human?

Happy to! Salvation=reunification with God. Since we can't can't do that ourselves, God has to do it for us. In other words, we can't become God, so God became human.

Is there some reason, a non-Divine Jesus, selected and anointed by god could not act as god's instrument in this?

Yes. Humans are incapable of becoming Divine.

 

[sojourner]

But in short Yahweh will throw us into hell for eternity for no accepting his son even though it cannot be logically explain and is a total mystery. God gave us rationality and that rationality is what stops us from accepting Christianity and other religions. So god is the creator of confusion at the same time?
God also sent his Jewish son to a small speck of the world and left every other nation out of the loop and cast them into hell despite the fact they could have never heard of Jesus? Yahweh also needed to send his son (not himself) in a cowardly fashion to be tortured and die on a cross to save humanity to display his love. Yet if you view it differently you will say Jesus is god himself and that god came down and killed himself just he could save us? Save us from what? God created the Devil so why would he not just cut Shaytaan's breath right where he is? So Yahweh is doing all of this to forgive himself somehow? Is Yahweh this powerless that he cannot stop Shaytaan's ham'sat and put an end to his domain? Despite this he lets Christians slaughter millions in the past centuries and demands eternal torture for all non-believers who find the obvious faults in this approach.

If Yahweh is so powerful and so loving couldn't he have just revealed himself to all of mankind in such a fashion it proves his greatness?

The events of Jesus sound like a man who died because he committed acts of heresy and when he died his followers tried reviving his name by saying it was his plan to die and be resurrected and ironically nobody saw him but the followers and he ascended into heaven shortly.

When you look at it in a logical viewpoint it sounds cultish. I don't mean to bash your religion although I disagree with the New Testament and its authenticity. I believe in god and Yahweh is a powerful name for god but I find no correlation between OT and NT. The founding books of the Taurat do not even add up to the rest of Christianity.
I have always held Christianity and Catholicism as separate faiths unto each other and unto Judaism. The Judeo-Christian connection for me is an utter myth since they depart on the essential aspects of god.

I know Muslims will probably enjoy me saying this but, I find Islam to be closer to Judaism then Christianity without breaking the original theology. But then again I am an ex-Muslim so probably just my dwindling iman speaking

I'm afraid I see decaffeinated coffee in your future.

 

[Sha'irullah]

I'm afraid I see decaffeinated coffee in your future.

Decaffeinated coffee is like playing Rush and Roulette without a bullet in the chamber. Takes the thrill out of the experience

But obviously you are straying away from the topic but I will accept your words regardless. I am not one for debates and shy away from them usually but I make exceptions on occasion. The primary reason for my disliking of debates is that I have nothing to prove except that which is proven already.

 

[Shermana]

Decaffeinated coffee is like playing Rush and Roulette without a bullet in the chamber. Takes the thrill out of the experience

But obviously you are straying away from the topic but I will accept your words regardless. I am not one for debates and shy away from them usually but I make exceptions on occasion. The primary reason for my disliking of debates is that I have nothing to prove except that which is proven already.

I don't see the point of decaffeinated coffee. Maybe Decaffeinated tea if you're looking for the herbal benefits, but I read that they don't transfer that well with the Caffeine. If anything, I think Caffeine is actually good for the body, but only in Organic tea and coffee (then again I only advocate Organic anything when it comes to food). It's not good in extreme doses however, and especially not so with certain other substances.

Perhaps decaffeinated coffee is not good for those in a debate who like to dismiss and dodge other people's points and questions since it may leave them too tired and listless to bring themselves to actually wanting to address people's points in debate. Might be useful though for those who get too out of control and upset when they find their points have been demolished or holes have been poked that they can't answer to. But for those like yourself who may have something to contribute and don't just want to handwave and brush off claims, Caffeine would definitely have use as well.

 

[Sha'irullah]

I don't see the point of decaffeinated coffee. Maybe Decaffeinated tea if you're looking for the herbal benefits, but I read that they don't transfer that well with the Caffeine. If anything, I think Caffeine is actually good for the body, but only in Organic coffee (then again I only advocate Organic anything when it comes to food).

Perhaps decaffeinated coffee is not good for those in a debate who like to dismiss and dodge other people's points and questions since it may leave them too tired and listless to bring themselves to actually wanting to address people's points in debate. But for those like yourself who may have something to contribute and don't just want to handwave and brush off claims, Caffeine would definitely have use as well.

I have desired to always start my own school of deistic thought, a religion of sorts based on rationality and personal interpretation. One of the sins I shall create is consumptions of decaffeinated coffee and using the phrase "you know what I mean". call me crazy.....which I probably am.

I actually was drinking a giant goblet of coffee (I drink my coffee from a giant goblet, do not judge me) when I wrote all of my posts. This is why I always re-edit my posts because of my frantic motions and thinking which leads to constant errors. But if I don't drink coffee I begin speaking in Elizabethan. Consuming constant amounts of herbal tea and coffee is just my thing so I am always buzzed or moderately inebriated on weekends. I am so saintly aren't I?

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Happy to! Salvation=reunification with God. Since we can't can't do that ourselves, God has to do it for us. In other words, we can't become God, so God became human.

I understand the argument we cannot become god (in the christian domain) however I am more asking why does reunification require that one party become the same as the other party? Why would god need to become human to offer us salvation (or for that matter a human need to become god)? Why would god need to become human - given that most (not all) conceptualisations of the abhramaic god assert that he is all powerful (or at least extremely close to it), certainly in such a case, the ability to offer salvation without becoming human should be within his capacity, wouldn't it?

<Currently half way through his large skim caramel cappuccino

Edit:

*Post Removed*

And thus infinite?

Actually your comment reminds me of the character "O" (o) from the RPG planescape torment (which badly needs a full 3d remake), a letter of the divine alphabet... awesome game with some really intriguing metaphysical models implied in different parts of the gaming experience.

<Now finished cappuccino... need more caffine

 

[sojourner]

Decaffeinated coffee is like playing Rush and Roulette without a bullet in the chamber. Takes the thrill out of the experience

But obviously you are straying away from the topic but I will accept your words regardless. I am not one for debates and shy away from them usually but I make exceptions on occasion. The primary reason for my disliking of debates is that I have nothing to prove except that which is proven already.

Problem is, nothing you said in your last post has been "proven." hence, my comment.

 

[sojourner]

I understand the argument we cannot become god (in the christian domain) however I am more asking why does reunification require that one party become the same as the other party? Why would god need to become human to offer us salvation (or for that matter a human need to become god)? Why would god need to become human - given that most (not all) conceptualisations of the abhramaic god assert that he is all powerful (or at least extremely close to it), certainly in such a case, the ability to offer salvation without becoming human should be within his capacity, wouldn't it?

Salvation is not "offered." Salvation is accomplished.

 

[RGA1459]

How can Jesus(pbuh) be fully human and fully god that is the same as saying that something can be unlimited and limited that the same time it makes no sense.

Let us say that God were water. You can take water from it's source (the vast ocean, limitless) and put it in a jar (water taking the form of its container). Is the water (or spirit, in this case) in the jar not the same as the water that it was brought from? Then to drink of that water would in turn give you connection to divinity, through loving wisdom of Christ. It seems kind of like transubstantiation in a way.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Let us say that God were water. You can take water from it's source (the vast ocean, limitless) and put it in a jar (water taking the form of its container). Is the water (or spirit, in this case) in the jar not the same as the water that it was brought from? Then to drink of that water would in turn give you connection to divinity, through loving wisdom of Christ. It seems kind of like transubstantiation in a way.

The difference here is that water does not pray to itself and water does not hold a diminutive title. God had a son, a son is not equal to the father. This is different from saying god was incarnated in human form. But Christian theologians will contend each other to the validity of this notion. Part of Jesus would surely be divine since his power came from god but what makes him god? If he is the son of god then he is automatically not god.
The aqua analogy was perfect except that it does not have any coincidence to the nature of family lineage. Nobody recognizes a similitude of any sort between father and son.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

You're scenario assumes that salvation is something that can be "obtained." In other words, we have to "do something" in order to "get it." That's not how salvation works. Grace isn't "won," it's given. No human being can impart grace. Only God can impart grace.

Salvation is not "offered." Salvation is accomplished.

... So which is it supposed to be? I am trying to understand but your current post is a complete reversal of your older post.

 

[Shermana]

... So which is it supposed to be? I am trying to understand but your current post is a complete reversal of your older post.

I'll take a crack here.

Salvation was "accomplished" at the cross and no one "obtains" it because everyone gets saved simply by this act of "salvation" regardless of what they do or believe (which has yet to be explained why God must be in the flesh to do so instead of sending an agent), basically rendering 99.9999% of everything the NT teaches unnecessary.

 

[dawny0826]

its refreshing to see a muslim looking into the bible to see what it says.




There have always been christian groups throughout the ages who have rejected the churches trinity teaching for that reason. Scripture should form the basis of their teachings, but they have preferred to base their teachings on writings outside the bible which is why they have many non biblical teachings and practices.

I'm a Trinitarian and the trinitarian concept is found in scripture. We simply interpret that scripture differently.

 

[Shermana]

I'm a Trinitarian and the trinitarian concept is found in scripture. We simply interpret that scripture differently.

Personally I think that the way most all Trinitarians interpret scripture is far closer to Modalism, those like Goodspeed and Moffatt if anything have a closer "Trinitarian" interpretation.

Also, the question of how exactly to "interpret" the Scripture is an entire can of worms involving Grammatical difficulties and context issues, which entire threads have been about.

 

[dawny0826]

Personally I think that the way most all Trinitarians interpret scripture is far closer to Modalism, those like Goodspeed and Moffatt if anything have a closer "Trinitarian" interpretation.

Also, the question of how exactly to "interpret" the Scripture is an entire can of worms involving Grammatical difficulties and context issues, which entire threads have been about.

That's nice.

 

[sojourner]

... So which is it supposed to be? I am trying to understand but your current post is a complete reversal of your older post.

No it isn't. Grace was imparted to humanity by God in the Jesus Event. Humanity was reconciled the moment God became Incarnate. Therefore, salvation is not offered, it is effected. I honestly don't see how you can have a problem with that, unless you're deliberately nit picking language out of context.