POLL: The Deity of Christ

  • 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.

The Deity of Christ?


  • Total voters
    61
  • Poll closed .
S

senzi

Guest
I would add, the most we know of ex nihilo concerning this subject is I believe Christs statement that he had glory with the father before the creation of the world
 
P

purgedconscience

Guest
You are thinking about this in limited terms.
Actually, I'm not.

What we are dealing with is the use of anthropomorphic terms in connection to God. Since God is spirit and not man then terms like bosom are meant to express a quality of relationship, not a literal part of the body.
I agree and that was pretty much my point. In other words, Elin, unless I'm misunderstanding her, was saying that she believes that Christ originally came from within the Father's bosom or that He was somehow eternally begotten which, again, is a self-refuting heresy. That which is eternal can never be generated or begotten in that sense of the word. Seeing how she believes that Christ originally somehow mystically was generated from within the Father's bosom or that He somehow eternally was generated from within God Himself which sounds like what the Jehovah's Witnesses believe, by the way, that Christ is some sort of begotten God, I was merely asking her if she also believes that Christ has now returned to the same place. In other words, she is the one who seems to be ignoring the type of anthropomorphic terminology that you just mentioned.
 

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
614
113
70
Alabama
Actually, I'm not.

I agree and that was pretty much my point. In other words, Elin, unless I'm misunderstanding her, was saying that she believes that Christ originally came from within the Father's bosom or that He was somehow eternally begotten which, again, is a self-refuting heresy. That which is eternal can never be generated or begotten in that sense of the word. Seeing how she believes that Christ originally somehow mystically was generated from within the Father's bosom or that He somehow eternally was generated from within God Himself which sounds like what the Jehovah's Witnesses believe, by the way, that Christ is some sort of begotten God, I was merely asking her if she also believes that Christ has now returned to the same place. In other words, she is the one who seems to be ignoring the type of anthropomorphic terminology that you just mentioned.
Sorry I misunderstood and I agree. This is a concept that must be understood as relational rather than locative.
 
P

purgedconscience

Guest
Sorry I misunderstood and I agree. This is a concept that must be understood as relational rather than locative.
No need to apologize, but thanks just the same.

I haven't yet had the chance to read your earlier post that you referenced. I need to run some errands, but I will try my best to read it before the day is through.
 

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
614
113
70
Alabama
No need to apologize, but thanks just the same.

I haven't yet had the chance to read your earlier post that you referenced. I need to run some errands, but I will try my best to read it before the day is through.
If you want get a more complete picture of our conversation you may also want to go back to page 23 post #454 - God and the finite mind. it may take you a few days to catch up but I think you will appreciate the read.
 
S

senzi

Guest
Perhaps some day on another thread you can explain to me just how you think the H.S operates. For now I have enough work to do.
The Holy Spirit works by convicting the individual of what they must do/believe to be saved. He convicts them of their sin and draws them to Christ.
Once they have come the Holy Spirit will-if the individual is willing to learn from Him lead them into truth that will bring them to live an ever holier life. I do not believe the Holy Spirit leads us to make extra biblical demands of others, or for instance to spend much time trying to work out what happened ex nihilo. Such things may stir the academic mind of man but are not important to true Christianity. If they were, the bible which is God breathed would go into them in detail
 
Last edited by a moderator:

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
614
113
70
Alabama
The Holy Spirit works by convicting the individual of what they must do/believe to be saved. He convicts them of their sin and draws them to Christ.
Once they have come the Holy Spirit will-if the individual is willing to learn from Him lead them into truth that will bring them to live an ever holier life. I do not believe the Holy Spirit leafs us to Mae extra biblical demands of others, or for instance to spend much time trying to work out what happened ex nihilo. Such things may stir the academic mind of man but are not important to true Christianity. If they were, the bible which is God breathed would go into them.
You are confusing one's growing in understanding of scripture which is a revealed mandate that is to be attained through study, not inspiration, and a simple academic exorcize. What I have noticed about this kind of thinking is that those who feel threatened by concepts they do not understand or ideas that do not fit into their narrow mold of reasoning from the biblical text tend to immediately try to discredit the other person by challenging academics, marginalizing their level of education, attacking their level of intelligence, and then claiming that their own view is the correct one because the H.S has led them to this view even when it stands diametrically opposed to the language of scripture. All this is, is an attempt to assign credibility to ideas, theories, or concepts that scripture clearly will not support. This is what is otherwise known as an ad-homonym argument. Anyone who makes the claim that the H.S is directing them to accept something as truth that stands contrary to the written text is simply lying in attempt to establish credibility for themselves by extending credit for their ideas to the H.S. Don't blame what you believe on the H.S.
 
Last edited:
S

senzi

Guest
You are confusing one's growing in understanding of scripture which is a revealed mandate that is to be attained through study, not inspiration, and a simple academic exorcize. What I have noticed about this kind of thinking is that those who feel threatened by concepts they do not understand or ideas that do not fit into their narrow mold of reasoning from the biblical text tend to immediately try to discredit the other person by challenging academics, marginalizing their level of education, attacking their level of intelligence, and then claiming that their own view is the correct one because the H.S has led them to this view even when it stands diametrically opposed to the language of scripture. All this is, is an attempt to assign credibility to ideas, theories, or concepts that scripture clearly will not support. This is what is otherwise known as an ad-homonym argument. Anyone who makes the claim that the H.S is directing them to accept something as truth that stands contrary to the written text is simply lying in attempt to establish credibility by extending credit for their ideas to the H.S. Don't blame what you believe on the H.S.
What does the NT go into in greatest detail? Accepting Christ into your life as Lord and saviour and living an ever more holy life. That therefore is of the most overriding importance in the christian faith. The bible does not delve into ex nihilo, nor many of the demands made by some to inherit eternal life

I couldn't agree more. Anyone who claims the Holy spirit is leading them to believe something contrary to the plainly written word is lying
I have chatted to many academically gifted people. For example. Some understand when Paul speaks of the christian not being under law and dying to the law, he means the whole law in this respect, including the Ten commandments. Other academically minded people refuse to accept Paul is including the ten commandments in his words. Therefore those who do not understand Paul is speaking of the whole law do not fail to understand because they are academically minded, but because they lean on that understanding to learn of the spiritual, rather than fully leaning on the holy spirit
 
Last edited by a moderator:

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
614
113
70
Alabama
What does the NT go into in greatest detail? Accepting Christ into your life as Lord and saviour and living an ever more holy life. That therefore is of the most overriding importance in the christian faith.

I couldn't agree more. Anyone who claims the Holy spirit is leading them to believe something contrary to the plainly written word is lying
I have chatted to many academically gifted people. For example. Some understand when Paul speaks of the christian not being under law and dying to the law, he means the whole law in this respect, including the Ten commandments. Other academically minded people refuse to accept Paul is including the ten commandments in his words. Therefore those who do not understand Paul is speaking of the whole law do not fail to understand because they are academically minded, but because they lean on that understanding to learn of the spiritual, rather than fully leaning on the holy spirit
I do not care about all of this. What I am saying is that I am getting tired of seeing you try to discredit someone's education, intelligence, or higher level of understand of something simply because you do not understand what they are talking about and then claiming that you get your understanding directly from the H.S when what you believe bears absolutely no resemblance to how scripture represents the nature of God.
 
S

senzi

Guest
I do not care about all of this. What I am saying is that I am getting tired of seeing you try to discredit someone's education, intelligence, or higher level of understand of something simply because you do not understand what they are talking about and then claiming that you get your understanding directly from the H.S when what you believe bears absolutely no resemblance to how scripture represents the nature of God.
I do not attack a person for having a great academic mind, but when such a person leans on that mind in order to understand the spiritual it is of no use. In truth they often end up contradicting the plainly written word with their great studying of it. Which is probably why some on websites such as these make demands unto salvation that hardly any ministers make from the pulpits, nor would most of their congregations
I repeat, anyone God accepts instantly sees Christ as God requires them to, for the Holy spirit gives them such conviction. Otherwise they could not be saved
 

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
614
113
70
Alabama
I do not attack a person having a great academic mind, but when such a person leads on that mind in order to understand the spiritual it is of no use. In truth they often end up contradicting the plainly written word with their great studying of it. Which maybe why some on websites such as these make demands unto salvation that hardly any ministers make from the pulpits, bot would most of their congregations
I repeat, anyone God accepts instantly sees Christ as God requires them to, for the Holy spirit gives them such conviction. Otherwise they could not be saved
I have said all I intend to say on this.
 
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
Disposing of Elin's red-herring first ....

if the Messiah was to be born in the tribe of Judah "according to the flesh" but you reckon Joseph was not his earthly father, then surely Joseph's lineage is totally irrelevant.
Not according God's reckoning of genealogy.
In which case one wonders why whoever wrote Matthew (nobody knows for sure) even included that lineage.

Unless ... the mystery writer believed that Joseph was Yeshua's father because
the whole Virgin Birth story was not invented until long after he wrote his version ?
(Well, to make Yeshua a god, they had to give him this virgin-born status to compete with all the other man-gods of the day.)
You are ignorant in the matters you discuss.
Originally Posted by Elin

Joseph, his legal father and, therefore, father-of-record was from the line of Solomon, the kingly line.
Another insightful and illuminating contribution. Insults are almost as helpful as threats.
If my views are dead wrong - and they might well be - why not just address them as Valiant tried to do.
Who knows, you might convince me.

Physician, heal thy self-righteous self.
 
Last edited:
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
Elin said:
Eternal generation is a self-refuting lie.

That which is eternal can never be generated.
Okay. . .continuing, ongoing generation, never not generating the Son.
The Nicene Creed, no matter how popular, is wrong in this point if we're to believe scripture and I choose to do just that.
It's not "popular, it's historically orthodox.

Surely you are aware Jesus said that
he came forth out of God (Jn 8:42),
he came forth from the Father (Jn 16:27),
he came forth out of the Father (Jn 16:28),
he came forth from the Father (you--Jn 17:8).

The Greek verb for "came forth from/out of" is exelthon.
It means "to proceed, to emanate (flow out, issue from as a source, as light issues from the sun),
to come out or go out of, to go forth."

See 1Co 14:36--"Did the word of God go forth from, originate with you?"
See Mt 2:6 (where different form, exeleusetai, is used)--"Out of thee will come forth a governor."
See Mt 15:18 (where a third form, like go, went and gone, is used, exerchontai)--"Out of the heart comes forth evil thoughts."

When "proceed, emanate, come out, go out, go forth" is used with ek, which means "out from within,"
as in Jn 8:42, 16:28 above, it means "to proceed out from within, to emanate out from within, to come out from within, to go forth out from within," an emerging from within, an origin, and used by John in this sense, without exception, 336 times.

It is the meaning of being in the Father's bosom.
 
Last edited:
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
Elin said:
senzi said:
No God does not want glory from the head, but the heart.
And yet God made the head and its functions just as he made the heart,
both of which are natural, and both of which can glorify him
(1Co 10:31). . .

Scriptural basis?
From your replies you obviously cannot discern the difference between the spiritual and the natural, which may be why many choose to discuss subjects that have little or no bearing on their Christianity, but are great exercise for the academic brain
Non-responsive. . .
 
Last edited:

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
614
113
70
Alabama
It's not "popular, it's historically .
I would like you to tell me what one thing all of these definitions have in common.

Definition of orthodoxy
1. of, relating to, or conforming to the approved form of any doctrine, philosophy, ideology, etc.
2. of, relating to, or conforming to beliefs, attitudes, or modes of conduct that are generally approved.
3. customary or conventional, as a means or method; established.
4. sound or correct in opinion or doctrine, especially theological or religious doctrine.
5. conforming to the Christian faith as represented in the creeds of the early church.
6. (initial capital letter) of, relating to, or designating the Eastern Church, especially the Greek Orthodox Church.
7. (initial capital letter) of, relating to, or characteristic of Orthodox Jews or Orthodox Judaism.
 
Mar 21, 2015
643
4
0
You are ignorant in the matters you discuss
Physician, heal thy self-righteous self.
If my views are dead wrong - and they might well be - why not just address them as Valiant tried to do.
Who knows, you might convince me.
Hmmmm - which of the above quotes comes over as more "ignorant" and/or "self-righteous" ?
 
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
Elin said:
I'm not ready to toss historical Christian orthodoxy.
Yet you're apparently more than ready to toss the Divine revelation of what Psalm 2 verse 7 is all about as was revealed to the Apostle Paul by the Holy Spirit and recorded for us in our Holy Bibles in the 13th chapter of the book of Acts.

Again, not a wise choice at all.
Assumes you're understanding is correct, which is based on what you think the meaning of "today" is in Ps 2:7, which, in the context of the whole counsel of God, is shown to be otherwise.
 
Last edited:

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
614
113
70
Alabama
Assumes you're understanding is correct, which is based on what you think the meaning of "today" is in Ps 2:7,
which, in the context of the whole counsel of God, is shown otherwise.
Elin, To what day does Paul assign the fulfillment of "today"? It is in the text. I do not understand why you keep ignoring Pau's inspired explanation of this Psalm.
 
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
Does it also conjure up images of Christ having returned within the Father's bosom? In other words, since you hold to the self-refuting lie that Christ was somehow eternally generated in that He allegedly eternally came forth from within the Father's bosom, then you must equally believe that such is where Christ returned to.
Your finite thinking does not apply to the infinite.

It's nonsense. Please reject it and stick to what the scriptures teach regardless of whether or not such teachings are considered to be orthodoxy by some.
The Scriptures teach that the Son proceeds (present tense of eternity) from the Father.

Your understanding of Ac 13:33 does not agree with the whole counsel of God.

Christ is presently seated at the right hand of the Father. He's not within His bosom.
Agreed. . .
 
Last edited:
P

purgedconscience

Guest
Elin, To what day does Paul assign the fulfillment of "today"? It is in the text. I do not understand why you keep ignoring Pau's inspired explanation of this Psalm.
I understand why she keeps on doing it and I suppose that you probably do as well. She chooses her own beliefs over scripture. It's really that simple.