God didn't think it robbery to be equal to Himself
- Thread starter Shubee
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I quote:
Another insight to the representational status of the Son and how the Son may be compared to the Father may be seen in the mathematical discipline called set theory. It is well known and easy to prove that infinities come in different sizes. (In transfinite arithmetic, the size of an infinite set is denoted by a special rank called a cardinal number). By analogy, the Father would rank like the set of all sets. (This object is so incomprehensible that all the rules of logic break down). Jesus could easily be infinite, not equal to the Father, and have an understandable rank like one of the infinite cardinal numbers.
Another insight to the representational status of the Son and how the Son may be compared to the Father may be seen in the mathematical discipline called set theory. It is well known and easy to prove that infinities come in different sizes. (In transfinite arithmetic, the size of an infinite set is denoted by a special rank called a cardinal number). By analogy, the Father would rank like the set of all sets. (This object is so incomprehensible that all the rules of logic break down). Jesus could easily be infinite, not equal to the Father, and have an understandable rank like one of the infinite cardinal numbers.
E
All mathematicians understand this stuff. It's actually quite elementary.
Georg Cantor
Georg Cantor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Here are some important excerpts:
Cantor's theory of transfinite numbers was originally regarded as so counter-intuitive—even shocking—that it encountered resistance from mathematical contemporaries such as Leopold Kronecker and Henri Poincaré and later from Hermann Weyl and L. E. J. Brouwer, while Ludwig Wittgenstein raised philosophical objections. Some Christian theologians (particularly neo-Scholastics) saw Cantor's work as a challenge to the uniqueness of the absolute infinity in the nature of God, on one occasion equating the theory of transfinite numbers with pantheism. The objections to his work were occasionally fierce: Poincaré referred to Cantor's ideas as a "grave disease" infecting the discipline of mathematics, and Kronecker's public opposition and personal attacks included describing Cantor as a "scientific charlatan", a "renegade" and a "corrupter of youth." Writing decades after Cantor's death, Wittgenstein lamented that mathematics is "ridden through and through with the pernicious idioms of set theory," which he dismissed as "utter nonsense" that is "laughable" and "wrong".
To Cantor, his mathematical views were intrinsically linked to their philosophical and theological implications—he identified the Absolute Infinite with God, and he considered his work on transfinite numbers to have been directly communicated to him by God, who had chosen Cantor to reveal them to the world.
The harsh criticism has been matched by international accolades. In 1904, the Royal Society awarded Cantor its Sylvester Medal, the highest honor it can confer. David Hilbert defended transfinite arithmetic from its critics by famously declaring: "No one shall expel us from the Paradise that Cantor has created."
Millerites were the first to recognize Cantor's revelations as being relevant in their expositions on Christ's rank in the Godhead.
Georg Cantor
Georg Cantor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Here are some important excerpts:
Cantor's theory of transfinite numbers was originally regarded as so counter-intuitive—even shocking—that it encountered resistance from mathematical contemporaries such as Leopold Kronecker and Henri Poincaré and later from Hermann Weyl and L. E. J. Brouwer, while Ludwig Wittgenstein raised philosophical objections. Some Christian theologians (particularly neo-Scholastics) saw Cantor's work as a challenge to the uniqueness of the absolute infinity in the nature of God, on one occasion equating the theory of transfinite numbers with pantheism. The objections to his work were occasionally fierce: Poincaré referred to Cantor's ideas as a "grave disease" infecting the discipline of mathematics, and Kronecker's public opposition and personal attacks included describing Cantor as a "scientific charlatan", a "renegade" and a "corrupter of youth." Writing decades after Cantor's death, Wittgenstein lamented that mathematics is "ridden through and through with the pernicious idioms of set theory," which he dismissed as "utter nonsense" that is "laughable" and "wrong".
To Cantor, his mathematical views were intrinsically linked to their philosophical and theological implications—he identified the Absolute Infinite with God, and he considered his work on transfinite numbers to have been directly communicated to him by God, who had chosen Cantor to reveal them to the world.
The harsh criticism has been matched by international accolades. In 1904, the Royal Society awarded Cantor its Sylvester Medal, the highest honor it can confer. David Hilbert defended transfinite arithmetic from its critics by famously declaring: "No one shall expel us from the Paradise that Cantor has created."
Millerites were the first to recognize Cantor's revelations as being relevant in their expositions on Christ's rank in the Godhead.
You will have a hard time making that square with these Scriptures:
Matthew 7:20-23 (HCSB)
[SUP]20 [/SUP] So you’ll recognize them by their fruit.
[SUP]21 [/SUP] “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord!’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but ⌊only⌋ the one who does the will of My Father in heaven.
[SUP]22 [/SUP] On that day many will say to Me, ‘Lord, Lord, didn’t we prophesy in Your name, drive out demons in Your name, and do many miracles in Your name?’
[SUP]23 [/SUP] Then I will announce to them, ‘I never knew you! Depart from Me, you lawbreakers!’
So what do you think, is knowing who He is enough?
But don't even the Demons know who He is?
Or is knowing HIM intimately in the heart submitting to Him as Lord (which means Master), the formula that you overlooked?
John 1:12-13 (HCSB)
[SUP]12 [/SUP] But to all who did receive Him, He gave them the right to be children of God, to those who believe in His name,
[SUP]13 [/SUP] who were born, not of blood, or of the will of the flesh, or of the will of man, but of God.
John 3:5-7 (NKJV)
[SUP]5 [/SUP] Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
[SUP]6 [/SUP] That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
[SUP]7 [/SUP] Do not marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born again.'
Received Him as what though?
Colossians 2:6 (NIV)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live in Him,
Romans 10:9 (NASB)
[SUP]9 [/SUP] that if you confess {not just profess} with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;
It is actually a declaration of righteousness imputed to us on the basis of Christ's righteousness attended with the giving of the Holy Spirit/new birth...
Galatians 3:1-2 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
Galatians 3:1-2 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
Millerites make no apologies in their teachings contrasting saving faith versus dead faith. The same can be said about their revelation on The Three Angels' Messages Versus The Three Demons' Messages.
I
This passage is simply understood. The translation must by all means employ a dynamic equivalent that comes through a little better in modern English. The idea is that for Christ to be called God took nothing away (robbed nothing) from the idea and person of who God was. In other words if you were to superimpose one upon the other there would be no detail unmatched or lost. This is not a hard concept. It means Christ is God and in being so is God in no way other than the Father. They are truly ONE. Any quibbling about this is done by people who refuse to recognize the truth when it is right in front of them.
I've noticed that you approve of the spirit of the old hermit. You must have noticed how angry he got when I said,
"Fantasy is no basis for the definition of words. My dictionary is how words are used in the Bible and, secondarily, in other ancient Greek or Hebrew texts. That's obviously not good enough for you.
"It's funny how you have been pretending to translate Philippians 2:6 without expressing a single intelligent thought on the meaning of words."
Clearly, the major contradiction of Scripture that I'm accused of is letting the Bible define its own doctrine.
"Fantasy is no basis for the definition of words. My dictionary is how words are used in the Bible and, secondarily, in other ancient Greek or Hebrew texts. That's obviously not good enough for you.
"It's funny how you have been pretending to translate Philippians 2:6 without expressing a single intelligent thought on the meaning of words."
Clearly, the major contradiction of Scripture that I'm accused of is letting the Bible define its own doctrine.