Can Christians agree on this?

[Lovette]

I know you said the Creator is unknowable, which obviously is not correct, because Creation reveals God's power and nature (Rom. 1:20).

That is why I said the NT reveals the Lord of the universe is neither dictatorial nor distant/incomprehensible, although we cannot comprehend the infinite God completely. However, we can do so sufficiently in order to achieve the type of relationship
God desires to have with humanity (John 14:9-25), because God desires communion. He is revealed most fully via Jesus.

Let us not loop, Lovette.

His creation at best is a piece of work bearing his finger prints, whatever you think you know through that is still trying to put him in a box. Plus, we're living in an artificial environment without much real exposure to true nature, so the authenticity of such creation is in question, you get the gist.

And yes, just as you can learn sufficient information about a person through the pieces of their work and their biography, you can know sufficient about God through limited gospel account about Jesus. THat's part of the mechanism.

 

[Lovette]

So, what is the problem with that?

You ignoring Gen. 5:3 - "And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth." At that point, Adam had sinned, therefore all mankind had sinned through him, none was good, none was righteous, except Jesus.

 

[DavidLamb]

I prefer three "presences". God the Father in heaven, the Spirit on earth, the Son in between. A "person" has to be a real human being in flesh and blood, having emotions and physiological needs. Non human beings can be "personified" as a human being, like the sun with a smily face and and sunglasses, but it's still not human.

Our language cannot adequately express truths about Almighty God. Calling God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit "presences" brings its own problems. I'm sure you didn't mean it that way, but is sounds rather like what followers of the occult say. ( "I felt a presence in that haunted house," for example). God is more, much more than a presence. Calling Father, Son and Holy Spirit "Persons" is not trying to make them into human beings, like drawing the sun with a smiley face. Father, Son and Holy Spirit do things which are not done by a mere presence. They talk, love, hear, create, encourage, judge, and much more.

 

[Lovette]

Our language cannot adequately express truths about Almighty God. Calling God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit "presences" brings its own problems. I'm sure you didn't mean it that way, but is sounds rather like what followers of the occult say. ( "I felt a presence in that haunted house," for example). God is more, much more than a presence. Calling Father, Son and Holy Spirit "Persons" is not trying to make them into human beings, like drawing the sun with a smiley face. Father, Son and Holy Spirit do things which are not done by a mere presence. They talk, love, hear, create, encourage, judge, and much more.

"When two or three gathered in my name, I'm in their midst." What's the difference from "presence"? Is God not seated on his throne in heaven? None of these "much more" exist if He's not present.

 

[DavidLamb]

The problem with that is, humans are also made in the image of sinners, Gen. 5:3. Adam begat Seth in his own likeness, the original image was tainted by sin. From there on, you've got a copy of a copy of a copy, on and on, human image deviates further and further from God. Only Jesus was made in the original image of God like Adam and Eve, untainted by sin.

But still in the image of God, though marred by sin. That is why God said, after the time of Genesis 5:3:

(Gen 9:6 NKJV) "Whoever sheds man's blood, By man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God He made man.

That would make no sense if mankind since the Fall was no longer "in the image of God." Think, too, of what Jesus said, when asked a trick question about paying taxes to Caesar:

(Mat 22:18-21 NKJV) But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, "Why do you test Me, you hypocrites? Show Me the tax money." So they brought Him a denarius. And He said to them, "Whose image and inscription is this?" They said to Him, "Caesar's." And He said to them, "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

The meaning of the words I have put in bold is surely that just as the coin bore Caesar's image, so the questioners bore the image of God, and should give themselves wholeheartedly to Him.

 

[DavidLamb]

"When two or three gathered in my name, I'm in their midst." What's the difference from "presence"? Is God not seated on his throne in heaven? None of these "much more" exist if He's not present.

I didn't say, or even imply, that God is not present with His people. God certainly is present. God also chastises his people, hears them when they pray to Him, forgives them when they confess their sins, and so on, but we don't say that God is a chastisement, or a hearing, or a forgiving, so why should we call Him a presence because He undoubtedly is present with His people?

 

[Lovette]

The meaning of the words I have put in bold is surely that just as the coin bore Caesar's image, so the questioners bore the image of God, and should give themselves wholeheartedly to Him.

I think that;s more of a political issue, specifically, religious freedom. Tax belongs to Caesar, worship belongs to God.

I didn't say, or even imply, that God is not present with His people. God certainly is present. God also chastises his people, hears them when they pray to Him, forgives them when they confess their sins, and so on, but we don't say that God is a chastisement, or a hearing, or a forgiving, so why should we call Him a presence because He undoubtedly is present with His people?

Because "chastisement, or hearing, or forgiving" is only limited to one, "presence" covers all of these. And by no means is that "occultish'.

 

[GWH]

You ignoring Gen. 5:3 - "And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth." At that point, Adam had sinned, therefore all mankind had sinned through him, none was good, none was righteous, except Jesus.

No, the problem is you ignoring that I referred to Gen. 5:3, saying "Yes, Adam and everyone else has sinned (Rom. 3:23)."
We are looping, Lovette.

 

[biblestudent78]

In my understanding, the Holy Trinity is a mechanism, God the Father rules in heaven, God the Son is the access to God between heaven and earth, which are separated by the chasm of sin; God the Spirit rules on earth and draws God's people to God the Son.

The mysteries of a 3 in 1 God are infinite, but your simple parsing is as good or better than any other, usually theologically torchered, definition.

 

[DavidLamb]

I think that;s more of a political issue, specifically, religious freedom. Tax belongs to Caesar, worship belongs to God.

Man being made in God's image isn't a political issue.

Because "chastisement, or hearing, or forgiving" is only limited to one, "presence" covers all of these. And by no means is that "occultish'.

But being present with His people is only one aspect of His being.

 

[biblestudent78]

Also, "God" is not a mechanism, the doctrine of trinity is, for the purpose of teaching how he connects with his church. You think it's weird because it's more of an eastern Orthodox view of the trinity, the key difference is that God the Father is an absolute mystery, totally beyond human understanding, because he as the Creator dwells outside of the creation of time-space continuum we reside it, we can only know about him through everything good in humanity, like justice and virtue and beauty, those are his traits; Catholic and most Protestants, on the other hand, try to comprehend God through human reasoning and interpretation.

Lovette:
I like your gift for the obvious. It is entirely possible that the massive and continuing proliferation of Christian sects is that it's core, though unstated assumption, is that God is rational - accessible by human reasoning, proof texting and argumentation. The best scholar, the best bible student and the best theologians are where we turn to craft a "God in our box" based theologies.

Where I might quibble with you is that IMHO one can read the scriptures as man's attempt to capture God in human history. Or one can read the scriptures as a sign that within the world-wide community of mankind, there is an irresistible innate desire for the divine.

Perhaps a very crude metaphor would be salmon. They left the place of their creation with almost no intellectual connection to the rock in the riverbed of their creation....but are drawn instinctively back to their point of creation driven not by logic but by something much more reliable, a sense of purpose and direction.

To many the bible is just 700,000+ pages of confirmation for what they have already chosen to believe. It not about a call to personal meaning, purpose and direction in life, but only the worship of the God in their sect's box.

 

[Delvianna]

• God: Belief in one God as three equal, distinct persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) sharing one divine essence. I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of Heaven and Earth and of all things visible and invisible.

I do not agree fully with this statement. I'm not a trinitarian believer, I'm a dualist. Father/Holy Spirit are the same + the son Jesus and both together = God.

Jesus Christ: Jesus is the Son of God, fully God and fully man, who was born of the Virgin Mary, crucified under Pontius Pilate, resurrected on the third day, and will return in glory. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten, begotten of the Father before all ages. Light of light; true God of true God; begotten, not made; of one essence with the Father; by Whom all things were made; Who for us men and for our salvation came down from Heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man. And He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered, and was buried. And the third day He arose again, according to the Scriptures, and ascended into Heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead; Whose Kingdom shall have no end.

Again, partially agree. He was fully God before he lowered himself to under the status of angels and became fully man but just like humans who are indwelled with God's spirit, he was. The rest of it I agree with.

The Holy Spirit: The Holy Spirit is the Lord and Giver of Life who proceeds from the Father. Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified

Agreed with the first sentence, again, not a trinitarian believer.

The Church: We believe in one holy, world-wide and apostolic Church and one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

I don't agree with the concept of an institution of "church". The "church" now is the body of Christ, (believers) and not a concept of a building where one goes to listen to sermons.

The Goal: The ultimate goal of the Christian life is a gradual, lifelong process of becoming united with God and partakers of the divine nature through faith, grace and prayer.

You left out obedience. You cannot grow closer to God if you leave out the very foundation of what defines the relationship and covenant, obedience. Someone cannot be your Lord/King/Master without obedience to that leadership.

 

[biblestudent78]

Delvianna​

One cannot become become partakers in the divine nature of God without obedience. That is exactly what "partakers" means. See 1 Corinthians 13, Galatians 5 and Matthew 25 and tell me this is your understanding of "obedience."

 

[biblestudent78]

Delvianna:
One cannot become become partakers in the divine nature of God without obedience. That is exactly what "partakers" means. See 1 Corinthians 13, Galatians 5 and Matthew 25 and tell me this is your understanding of "obedience." But I connect to your Eastern Orthodox understanding of the 3 tiered supremacy of God the Father, Christ the Son and the Holy Spirit a component of God the Father but not the Son for not particular reason than it is "harmonious".

 

[Lovette]

No, the problem is you ignoring that I referred to Gen. 5:3, saying "Yes, Adam and everyone else has sinned (Rom. 3:23)."
We are looping, Lovette.

Then stop looping. Of course all have sinned, that's why we are in need of salvation from the one and only sinless.

 

[Lovette]

The mysteries of a 3 in 1 God are infinite, but your simple parsing is as good or better than any other, usually theologically torchered, definition.

Don't turn the trinity into the emperor's new clothes, that only visible to the educated and the enlightened, everybody else is just too dumb to see it. What I'm doing is simply an otherwise "infinitely myterious" subject.

 

[Lovette]

Man being made in God's image isn't a political issue.

No, but "render Caesar's to Caesar, God's to God" is.

But being present with His people is only one aspect of His being.

That's the whole point of God's incarnation, so that he could dwell among us and be present with us. Without this aspect, no other aspect matters.

 

[GWH]

Then stop looping. Of course all have sinned, that's why we are in need of salvation from the one and only sinless.

Apparently you lost track of the discussion.

You said there is a problem with me saying that the meaning of persons being created in the image of God does NOT refer to physical characteristics/flesh and blood. It is humans who are personified or made in the God's image rather than animals.

I asked what is the problem?

We agree that all humans have sinned, so is there no more problem/disagreement?

 

[DavidLamb]

No, but "render Caesar's to Caesar, God's to God" is.

When taken specifically, yes. But surely there is a principal here that applies generally. It is the principal stated by Paul:

(Rom 13:3-7 NKJV) For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience' sake. For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God's ministers attending continually to this very thing. Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.

That's the whole point of God's incarnation, so that he could dwell among us and be present with us. Without this aspect, no other aspect matters.

God is present with His people not only when about two thousand years ago the incarnate Jesus Christ was among them, but afterwards too:

(Joh 14:23 NKJV) Jesus answered and said to him, "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him.

 

[Lovette]

Apparently you lost track of the discussion.

You said there is a problem with me saying that the meaning of persons being created in the image of God does NOT refer to physical characteristics/flesh and blood. It is humans who are personified or made in the God's image rather than animals.

I asked what is the problem?

We agree that all humans have sinned, so is there no more problem/disagreement?

What you have in mind as the "image of God" might be closer to the CHARACTER of God - or virtues of God, instead of model or archetype of God. I'm just saying that a person cannot be called a person without emotions, tempers, physiological needs, physical body and gender. This might be another far stretch, but I think this is relevant, these separate real human from AI robot.