Endless Pet Doctrines

[brakelite]

@bbyrd009 . God gave His Son to the human race. That cost Him. That was a real sacrifice. And to watch what Jesus had to endure throughout his life must surely have pained the Father, despite His agreeing to the deal.
See Isaiah 9:6; John3:16; 1 John4: 9,10; 1 John4: 14

 

[Mjh29]

When the Son of God took on human flesh, He didn't do so with any intent of rescinding the humiliation. He will always be a man. What that cost in power, and other divine attributes we may never know, but when He became a man Jesus had to rely on His Father to do the works and miracles that revealed the love of God to mankind and when all His enemies are made subject to Him, then the kingdom is given back to the Father and the Son will be eternally subject to the Father...as we are. That is a cost we will never understand, that come-down was inestimable.

While I do agree that He will forever be a man, I cannot believe that His power was diminished. Allow me to explain. God is infinite in power and glory. We are His creation. While it is true that He lowered Himself to become a servant, He did not relinquish His Godly power. Lets say a prince decides to change into ratty clothes, and walk the streets of his father's kingdom. Does he have less power than before, simply because he put on peasant clothing? No, and in fact, if ever threatened, he could reveal himself and use this power to command his sercants obedience. However, out of his love for his subjects, he chooses to keep the hood on, so as to understand what they feel and go through on a day to day basis.

This is how Jesus was! Just because our high King took on human flesh did not mean He lost His place in the Trinity; He was still God as was the Father, which is why He can say with confidence, "If you have seen me, you have seen my father which is in Heaven."

Now the question is, why then did he seem to be restrained and maybe even weakened by His flesh? Because He allowed it to weaken Him for our sakes. He allowed Himself to 'keep on the hood' of humanity, not so that he could better understand us, but so thay we could better understand Him! He was the perfect example of human exsistence; mild manneres, kind, patient, meek, humble... every perfect attribute we could never attain, He attained for us by living a perfect life in our behalf. Thr prince, to save the servant bride he loved so dearly, us; the peasant woman who is addicted to the drug called sin, he took upon himself the clothes of a peasant for her and, without once lifting the hood and using it to ease the suffering of life as one of us, took upon himself the punishment due His beloved, and payed for her by blood, sweat, and tears. The grandest part is that the King saw what he was doing, and approved!! Once the payment for our freedom was made, he took our hand and proclaimed his love to no longer be a slave to sin, and no longer a peaseant, but to be his wife and therefore the princess or all that is His. And someday, when our time comes, We will go to His Castle, and sit at his side; at the side of the then-prince, now-King who loved us so much that He did the unthinkable; willingly lowered Himself on our behalf.

 

[bbyrd009]

But likewise, we cannot make out that this is just a "choose you own adventure" story to God, where he chooses the 'best choice' from the muddle humans have just tossed him.

Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing its fruit

suggests to me that we could at least contemplate that as a possibility, and imo for whatever reason God seems to even prefer muddles in a sense. Also God is again put in the position of choice here, just like back at the ToK, when imo the choice is ours, not God's? And practically speaking don't we do the same? At least quite often?

 

[bbyrd009]

Mmm. Always flippant? Are you truly saying you know what the creator God felt at that moment?

no, but i am saying that "here, have a skin then" does not seem to reflect an angry or even anguished Father, as was forwarded

 

[bbyrd009]

All we need to do is look at the rest of scripture to find God's heart on the matter. How can you say he does not grieve at the sins and pains his people have?

i can't for sure by any means, but imo God, Grieving is the personification that i was just being accused of earlier, more or less? Plus it doesn't fit very well with a gardener, pruning, at least to me. Imo this is the product of our Codependence, not God's nature. From God's pov it would have to at least be mixed with "hey, don't sin and you won't have pain."

God creates evil, too, and imo one will postulate a God at odds with Himself on that path. Just carrying it out to its conclusions maybe reveals more; does God also "grieve" at satan? Then why did He create him? If you are omnipotent is it even possible to create something that you will be sorry you created later? And yes i'm aware of the vv, but i suggest they are meant to reflect the poor choices of the men, not the state of mind of God

 

[bbyrd009]

The fact we sinned and rebelled meant he had to push off that ultimate goal

but i thot God knew the end from the beginning

 

[bbyrd009]

But if Adam and Eve hadn't of sinned, then after their time in the garden, they would have moved into eternity with God.

hmm

 

[bbyrd009]

For this dark time in human history to BE the goal of God, then he would have had to work, specifically, to make it come to be. And thus, we would be able to say that sin and evil were his fault.

dark time in human history, hmm. We live in a miracle, anyone reading this, and i suspect the PTB cannot really understand why we have not risen en masse against them yet, nor why crime is going down in every area. dang, i'm late for work! later

 

[VictoryinJesus]

I agree with your point, but there are exceptions. Racism cannot be ignored or it festers.

I’m probably not the person to comment on racism because I’ve never walked in the shoes of it.

Romans 12:19-21
[19] Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. [20] Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. [21] Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

It is either true or it is not. His remedy is “Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.” Wouldn’t that include racism? He tells us the real power to overcome anything is love, man doesn’t believe it and takes the fight into his own hands doing it man’s way. What that says to me above in the word is that it doesn’t go unseen, even the worst and ugliest harm...but God’s way of dealing gets it done. Step aside and give place to God’s wrath and He brings change...true change.

Proverbs 18:12
[12] Before destruction the heart of man is haughty, and before honour is humility.
—Who takes down the haughty in destruction? Who lets pride and an haughty spirit fall? Proverbs 16:18
[18] Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.

The good news is: God can break pride, and bring honour after humility. So love would seem to be allowing (stepping aside) for God’s wrath to work in a heart. That is our hope: that His ways are higher than our own. Proverbs 13:3
[3] He that keepeth his mouth keepeth his life: but he that openeth wide his lips shall have destruction.

 

[bbyrd009]

but in substance, He was entirely separate

hmm

because if He were in any way indivisibly of one substance as many teach, then there was a part of Him which did not die...presumably the divine part therefore what remains is an inadequate human sacrifice.

ezackly. The Son of Man must be raised up like a snake on a pole, in order to draw all men to Himself; but God did not need nor want a sacrifice to "cover" your sins so that He could commune with us; we needed a Symbol to be drawn to. Christ did not die for your sins iow, so that an Angry God might be appeased, as is taught us

 

[bbyrd009]

Scripture describes the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

yet you posit a Christ Who had trouble assuming the role? So i don't quite get it wadr

 

[bbyrd009]

Thus way back then, the Father and Son decided that if/when man would fall, such an action of the incarnation and the shedding of blood in order to redeem man and make atonement was necessary.

yet you cannot Quote any blood being shed, as our recent thread on the matter revealed imo; the closest we can come is "blood and water," and that is in English. Wouldn't such a supposedly sacred and precious outflow have warranted a line or two somewhere in Scripture in a less ambiguous phrasing? Plus you say "decided," when the Lamb was slain "from the foundation of the world," a human endeavor, which may also be put "by the foundation of the world."

According to the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
I desire mercy, not sacrifice

You're not considering that it is to your advantage that one man should die for the people rather than the whole nation perish.
which i have actually heard preachers Quote as if God had said it, rather than a Pharisee lol
Jesus did not die for our sins in the way we are taught, but the authors knew that people needed a Savior, and would read what they wanted.

Otherwise why would we need to pick up our own crosses?

 

[bbyrd009]

a close friend of mine was for many years world president for one of the principal organisations that lobbied constantly against the liquor industry. She showed me some statistics one day that the public are not informed of.
First, the bad stuff like Capone etc only happened in a few major centre like Chicago and Atlanta and New York. Second, while prohibition was on, everywhere else jail's were empty, hospitals had 50% less patients, and churches were attended by all members of families and not just the women, as well as families much better off financially with the menfolk at work more often and the money not going to gambling our liquor. So depending on what you see as the end goal, prohibition worked, or didn't.

can't disagree there, even if Tenn and Ky jails were pretty full too i guess; but we can at least say that the jails were not as full wherever the law was not enforced i guess.

But legislating morality has always been a fail imo, and it is designed to fail, so that laws might generate revenue that can be extracted. Let's not forget that the same bunch who want to legislate our morality are also guarding poppy fields in Afghanistan right

but it is illegal for you to buy a fertile hemp seed lol

 

[bbyrd009]

and churches were attended by all members of families and not just the women

she says this like it is a good thing
hmm
guess it hinges upon one's def of "Church" mostly, which imo those are not

 

[bbyrd009]

God gave His Son to the human race. That cost Him. That was a real sacrifice.

not buying it, sorry

And to watch what Jesus had to endure throughout his life must surely have pained the Father, despite His agreeing to the deal.

yet the Lamb was slain "from/by the foundation of the world," or basically the moment Adam ate from the ToK.
what i am hearing is a human pov of a Spiritual Principle that exists outside of time, thus no "enduring throughout His life" as we experience that either imo

or, another way to put that is maybe that that is what God is/does. God endures

 

[bbyrd009]

See Isaiah 9:6; John3:16; 1 John4: 9,10; 1 John4: 14

tag for later, but we are being deliberately massaged bc we read from our own povs imo, and you are prolly not going to like my interps there i guess

 

[VictoryinJesus]

not buying it, sorry

I would agree we are the ones that required sacrifice. Yet right from the start there was a difference between Abel’s offering and Cain’s. Tried to quote @brakelite comment but it wouldn’t let me for some reason. You say you are not buying that God sent His son and that is the real sacrifice? Correct...or did I misunderstand your response? Can you explain in light of: John 1:18
[18] No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

And, John 3:16-18
[16] For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. [17] For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. [18] He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

I’m not saying you are wrong, only I don’t see how you can make that claim?

 

[VictoryinJesus]

God endures

I’ve heard Matthew 17:17 used to support degrading comments, as if Jesus also degraded by words: “Then Jesus answered and said, O faithless and perverse generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I suffer you? bring him hither to me.”

Not so. “God endures.” 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 [4] Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, [5] Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; [6] Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; [7] Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

Matthew 19:14
[14] But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.


Genesis 4:13
[13] And Cain said unto the Lord , My punishment is greater than I can bear.

 

[Nancy]

Who is dead? Everyone is dead who has not encountered and received the Life which Jesus is. Most people walking around us remain zombies, walking dead men. Those who have received Life often remain babies on milk. They have more knowledge perhaps than the average zombie, but what kind of a conversation about the things of God would we expect from a baby in Christ? Some of them remain babies for many years. Some may never mature at all. They just fill up spaces here and there and mimic what someone told them early on in their growth. They still don't understand what "thus saith the Lord" beyond "ga ga, goo goo".

Jesus confirmed that many of those around us in the eyes of God are dead:

"And he said unto another, Follow me. But he said, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father.
Jesus said unto him, Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou and preach the kingdom of God." Luke 9:59-60


For the "now" I would say it is where everyone is [no time element purposely]. Some are completely blind and deaf. Some see and hear a little here or there. Some are improving. Consider the natural or carnal man. As his body ages it is a very normal thing for the natural perceptions to become less sharp. Spiritually we should be going in the other direction. If we have a new man that is never to die should he not be growing toward God?

"He must increase, but I must decrease." John 3:30

So the "then" would or should be when our vision and our hearing are like God's. When is that?
We should always be on the approach, but as we likely know many are simply languishing in a pew somewhere at what should be the best times and need we speak of the worst times?

"Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is." I John 3:2

Have not some put this perfect vision off to beyond the natural grave [which could mean never] but denying the possibility of being perfect before the dirt is thrown over their faces? Is that not calling Jesus a liar? Is that not a negative faith? Jesus said this:

"Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." Matt 5:48

Did he also say not to expect or believe it until sometime after the dirt is thrown over your face?
So when is the "then"?

"This is the day which the LORD hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it." Psalm 118:24

So then is now, then. Could it be or should it be?

"(For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.)" II Cor 6:2

So if our faith is not negative:

"And when he was come into the house, the blind men came to him: and Jesus saith unto them, Believe ye that I am able to do this? They said unto him, Yea, Lord.
Then touched he their eyes, saying, According to your faith be it unto you." Matt 9:28-29

Wonderful post Amadeus! Good scripture, good interpretation! Especially the last line. ♥

 

[Nancy]

@aspen said: ↑
So one of my other pet doctrines I am focused on is ignoring haters. I am cleaning up my experience on this board starting last night.

If you are a person who targets other people or groups, you qualify for an ignore. Nothing personal, loving you doesn’t mean I need to read your garbage.
Good for you @aspen
I'm with you 100% on this. Without love-there is NO unity...just carnality. One of my constant prayers, is to see others through the eyes of Christ. "
1 Corinthians 13:1-3 New King James Version (NKJV)
The Greatest Gift
13 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. 2 And though I have the gift of to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing.
Amen!