I'm a Unificationist, ask me questions!

[javajo]

No we believe that since he restored the marriage blessing we don't need another coming.

What about Paul's teaching that it is better if one is able, not to get married so they may do the Lord's work?

The Holy Trinity wasn't even a part of Christianity for hundreds of years and many Christians don't believe that Christ was God.

Absolutely false! Christ's deity and the Trinity were taught as early as 50 A.D. Early Christian faith on Trinity, deity of Christ, personality of the Holy Spirit

 

[James Humphreys]

What about Paul's teaching that it is better if one is able, not to get married so they may do the Lord's work?


Absolutely false! Christ's deity and the Trinity were taught as early as 50 A.D. Early Christian faith on Trinity, deity of Christ, personality of the Holy Spirit

(To the 1st part) Indications are that Paul and many other early Christians were expecting a quick return of Jesus and a consummation of God's Will, even during their lifetimes. Paul felt that in those circumstances a celibate life, for those able to bear it, might allow a more complete dedication to God's Will in a situation in which the old order of things was about to be overturned anyway. But was he uplifting celibacy as God's eternal ideal for humans? I don't think so.


Consider Malachi 2:15 (NIV 1984) Has not the Lord made them one? In flesh and spirit they are his. And why one? Because he was seeking godly offspring

(To the 2nd part) Clearly many Christians were grappling with the issue of Jesus' divinity for centuries before the councils of the 4th century. The conclusion that Jesus must be God himself was growing in influence, but was far from universal. But in 50 AD seeking to understand how Jesus related to the divine was just in its early infancy. Jesus was the promised Messiah, their Savior and Lord, through whom they had experienced God's love and power. I believe that was enough for most at that time.

 

[javajo]

I'll tell you a secret. Jesus is God.

 

[Shermana]

A god.

 

[javajo]

Polytheism, oh, my.

 

[Mark2020]

A god.

Someone surely insists on closing their eyes and ears.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/religious-debates/121296-john-1-1-anarthrous-theos-big.html

(Matthew 13:15 [KJV]) For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

 

[James Humphreys]

I'll tell you a secret. Jesus is God.

Who is Jesus, from a Unificationist perspective? He is:
1)the temple of God, as we are all meant to become temples of God (1 Cor. 3:16)
2)Perfect, as God is perfect, as we are also meant to be perfect (Mt. 5:48)
3)One with God, as we all should become one with God and Jesus (John 14:20)

There is a close association between God and Jesus in so many ways:heart, perfection, action, yet qualities that we are called to realize as well.

Jesus is a man, but a man without sin (1 Peter 2:22), unlike us, who were born, in a sense, as children of Satan (John 8:44). As a sinless man, he stands in the position of the True Adam (1 Cor. 15:22 and 15:45), whereas we are all all fallen Adam (and Eve). Being born without sin, and never giving in to Satan's temptations (unlike Adam and Eve, who gave in) he was qualified to stand as the anointed Messiah, waited for by the Jews, but who in reality came to save all humankind.

 

[Spirited]

thats a far fetched interpretation of that passage my friend. i could also come up with a ridiculous interpretation for your verse, but i dont feel like playing games to justify myself in front of strangers on a virtual forum..so while your interpretation is good enough for you to hold your stance in an open debate. the real question is. do you yourself believe that interpretation to be reasonable? i doubt it. and this is where the issue lays.

That's what people do on debate forums -.-'

how do you eplain the numerous times god uses plural pronouns for himself??

Genesis 1:26 , "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness...."
Genesis 3:22 , "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil."

im sure you will have another ridiculous excuse, or shall i say "interpretation" for that one too.

Oh I didn't see this till now. What you are saying is actually kind of silly if you really examine it yourself. Even if there were multiple intangible beings involved in creation, in what way could we determine them to be separate if their boundaries and their existence cannot be quantified or distinguished from one another and they share an identical will.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, but we don't describe it the same way that conventional Christians do. We consider the Holy Spirit to be the feminine aspect of God and that God is a dichotomous being, as suggested by the "our" statement. I see no reason to believe that Christ was God incarnate, yet many reasons to believe he was the first perfect man, as God intended Adam and Eve to be in Genesis.

Another consideration is that "our" and "us", have different meanings and uses in some languages. For example, in Korean - the language that we use in our church and one of closer genus to Hebrew/Aramaic than English - you would say, "I'm going to our house now", even if the person you were speaking to did not live with you. The direct translation for "my" (&#51228 is seldom ever used; people will almost always use "our", (우&#47532 in it's place.

If you can't accept my dichotomous God argument - which is extremely similar to the Christian idea of a Holy Spirit, accept we call the Holy Spirit part of God as they call Jesus part of God - you can at least accept my explanation of differences in language, especially over 4,000+ years.

 

[zuluniner]

as i said before, in a public setting anyone can justify their beliefs in anything, right down to differing interpretations/versions of said beliefs.

this is why we have so many religions and denominations within. the question is, do you feel truly satisfied and accomplished within your beliefs?

not for anyone else to see or judge. but to yourself. do you honestly believe that your specific version is the actual truth? do you honestly feel a

sense of purpose, pride, achievement or satisfaction in submitting to, serving, praising, worshipping another being for all eternity? especially

when the very existence of this being is at best "unknown", "unseen" "imaginary" ???? what is it you are drawing a sense of satisfaction from in

your life??? slavery??? i just cant wrap my mind around this notion. it is hopeless, depressing and self deprecating? like a nasty case of stockholm syndrome.

terror. under your fictional belief your whole outlook on life is reduced to either submitting to an egomanical dictator's petty desires for eternity,

or refusing to submit,and suffering eternal torture at his/her/its "hands" for ALL ETERNITY. no end in sight. this is the ultimate definition

of torture. you cant even escape through death....it would be bad enough if this were actual truth, but the fact that its pure fiction and you

freely choose to believe this junk and dedicate your life to this invention of a belief is far worse...... sorry. but i pity you.

 

[Spirited]

as i said before, in a public setting anyone can justify their beliefs in anything, right down to differing interpretations/versions of said beliefs.

this is why we have so many religions and denominations within. the question is, do you feel truly satisfied and accomplished within your beliefs?

not for anyone else to see or judge. but to yourself. do you honestly believe that your specific version is the actual truth? do you honestly feel a

sense of purpose, pride, achievement or satisfaction in submitting to, serving, praising, worshipping another being for all eternity? especially

when the very existence of this being is at best "unknown", "unseen" "imaginary" ???? what is it you are drawing a sense of satisfaction from in

your life??? slavery??? i just cant wrap my mind around this notion. it is hopeless, depressing and self deprecating? like a nasty case of stockholm syndrome.

terror. under your fictional belief your whole outlook on life is reduced to either submitting to an egomanical dictator's petty desires for eternity,

or refusing to submit,and suffering eternal torture at his/her/its "hands" for ALL ETERNITY. no end in sight. this is the ultimate definition

of torture. you cant even escape through death....it would be bad enough if this were actual truth, but the fact that its pure fiction and you

freely choose to believe this junk and dedicate your life to this invention of a belief is far worse...... sorry. but i pity you.

Yikes, you need to ask questions to me rather than spew this incorrect opinion. None of what you are saying is the truth, except that I believe in God. I respect Rev. Moon, and I really love him and follow his teachings, but I'm no slave. Free thinking is what brought me to this religion and if I had significant reason beyond doubt to leave I would. I am no more bound to him than any self-made Christian is to Christ. I also don't plan on worshiping him lol, not here and not in eternity.

Ask more questions about what we believe. We don't believe Christ is God, so we certainly wouldn't believe Reverend Moon is good and he doesn't claim to be. Everything I "believe" about him, is actually founded on what I've seen him do. God is hardly unknown to believers either, I don't know where this notion comes from. Most people who are genuinely devout believers in God have had personal experiences with feeling his presence or something similar. Just because it's not scientifically quantifiable doesn't mean that people don't feel it.