 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > General Chat > Question: Should Any Seriously Mentally-Challenged Persons Be Baptized? | Forum Quick Jump
|
 | 
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 1/21/2010 7:51 AM (GMT -6) |   | Tom:
If I thought Jesus had just told me that cannibalizing his flesh meant eternal life, I answer his question with "Gimme a slice of your finger." I'm serious. Remember, Peter and the others are good Jews who don't eat human flesh. You really think they're here conceding to cannibalism because it's Jesus who's demanding it?
1) He never really conceded, if you think about it. He didn't ask him any such thing.
2) Let's not forget this is the SAME Peter that THIS happened to...that Paul had to withstand to the face on something else...
about noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. Then a voice told him, "Get up, Peter. Kill and eat."
"Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything impure or unclean."
The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean."
This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.
Yeah. Good ol' Peter...
| | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 1/21/2010 7:57 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
So what IS the deification of the physical body if it still rots and succumbs to death?
If you want to talk about what God's able to DO in/with/through the human body, fine. He can shine in us, whatever. That's cool.
But if you're offering the "deification of the body" as a theological category, what (biblically speaking) does it fall up under if a fully deified body can rot and die? Just that it got to "shine" some? Hey, whatever. If having your body SHINE before it dies and rots is important theologically to you, go for it! I'll take photos.
1) Lazareth's body was raised from the dead by Jesus, even though "by this time, he stinketh", so they said...but probably died again later. Jesus's body succumbed to real, actual death. Both bodies experienced the power of God in magnificent ways before their final human deaths, though. So what's your point?
2) Having the human body "shine" is not the important thing here. It's not just to be minimized as some parlor trick. What's important is what is possible for human existence as being "temples of the Holy Spirit." Wouldn't you agree?
| | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 1/21/2010 8:01 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
I mean, why didn't Jesus walk about glowing all the time?
Ask Jesus himself. You can talk to him about it. Me? I don't have know the answer to that. It's enough for me that it happened...and that Jesus said this...
Very truly I tell you, all who have faith in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.
God said it. I believe it. That settles it.
HA! 
| | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 1/21/2010 8:12 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
But you use this (Tabor and all) to make the theological point that we are temples of the Spirit. Why? A) No other NT writer tries to do make that point that way. I mean, if you didn't have Jesus shinning on Tabor recorded in the NT, would you have NO reason to believe that your body is a temple of the Spirit?
The idea is not about using the Tabor Light to "make the point" that humans can be temples of the Holy Spirit. But the Tabor Light is MORE than just some parlor trick...
2 Peter
So I will always remind you of these things, even though you know them and are firmly established in the truth you now have. I think it is right to refresh your memory as long as I live in the tent of this body, because I know that I will soon put it aside, as our Lord Jesus Christ has made clear to me. And I will make every effort to see that after my departure you will always be able to remember these things.
For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased." We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain.
We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 1/21/2010 8:14 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 1/21/2010 8:15 AM (GMT -6) | | D: Nope. I don't believe that a true memorialist can, in any way, link the "Lord's Supper" to deification of the flesh by God's Grace. No way. Not a TRUE memorialist, qua the Zwinglian and Zwinglian derivative perspectives.
T: Who cares if one LINKS the Lord's Supper to having God make your body shine before it rots in the grave later? Why do I need the Lord's supper to be understood in non-memorialist manner to believe I'm a temple of the Spirit. A memorialist CAN believe that believers are temples of the Spirit and they CAN believe the their bodies can shine if God wants them to shine. It's just doesn't follow that memorialists are committed to denying that they are temples of the Spirit, or believing in anything miraculous happening to/in the body.
After all Bro, if your "deified flesh" ends up rotting in the grave, then "deification" of the flesh only means TEMPORARILY GLOWING. I'm like, big deal. I mean, yeah, it would be nice. But HOW nice does God intend for it to be if Jesus shone once on a moutain to three people? BUT YOUR POINT, you say, isn't about the shinning, it's about our bodies being the Temple of the Spirit.
OK, so we're temples of the Spirit. There. What forbids memorialists from agreeing to this...UNLESS...ahhhhh...you're interpreting our being "temples of the Spirit" in a way that ENTAILS EO's epiklesis. Oh well, if that's the case, then I guess I can't really believe that God indwells me, can't REALLY give my life to him, can't REALLY hear him speak to me, etc.. Hmmm.
Dude, that's crazy.
T
KIXYTΘEMTAPost Edited (Tom) : 1/21/2010 7:22:39 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 1/21/2010 1:10 PM (GMT -6) | | Oh, sheesh. I see the issue. I can't believe it's all over this...I was wondering where all this was coming from...
T: I get the idea that you think only somebody who takes an EO position on epiklesis (or let's say, somebody who is anything BUT a memorialist) can REALLY believe human bodies are temples of the Spirit.
D: Nope. I don't believe that a true memorialist can, in any way, link the "Lord's Supper" to deification of the flesh by God's Grace. No way. Not a TRUE memorialist, qua the Zwinglian and Zwinglian derivative perspectives.
:slaps head:
When I said "Nope", I was saying "Nope. I DON'T believe that." What I should have typed was this:
Nope...I don't believe that only someone who takes an EO position on epiklesis can really believe human bodies are temples of the Spirit. What I'm TRYING to say is that I don't believe that a true memorialist can, in any way, link the "Lord's Supper" to deification of the flesh by God's Grace. No way. Not a TRUE memorialist, qua the Zwinglian and Zwinglian derivative perspectives.
Oh, Lord have MERCY...
| | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 1/21/2010 1:18 PM (GMT -6) | | Now, let's get some things straight:
1) You, Tom, are NOT a dyed-in-the-wool memorialist. Period.
2)As far as epiklesis goes...if you are so concerned about the "charge of cannibalism", then just stick to the overall MEANING of epiklesis that the EO clearly state...
The prayer for the coming of the Holy Spirit is considered by the Orthodox to be an essential part of the Divine Liturgy. It is called the epiklesis, which means literally the calling upon or the invocation.
The Orthodox Church believes, as it prays, that the Holy Spirit is always "everywhere and fills all things." The invocation of the Holy Spirit at the Divine Liturgy is the solemn affirmation that everything in life which is positive and good is accomplished by the Spirit of God. Creation, salvation, eternal glorification; the entire work of God in making and saving the world is accomplished by the power of the Holy Spirit. He is the one who dwelt in Jesus making him the Christ. He is the one by whom Christ was incarnate of the Virgin Mary. He is the one who led Christ to the cross as the innocent Victim, the one who raised him from the dead as the triumphant Victor.
He is the one who guarantees the indwelling of God with men in the Holy Communion of the Church and in the life of the Kingdom to come.
You say:
How about this:
We ask you, Holy Father, to sanctify us in this moment as we your Body celebrate your life and death through participation in this cup and this bread, your blood and your body. Send your Spirit to quicken us with your grace. May we be the gifts you seek, your life-giving Body for the world you love. Purify our souls, forgive our sin, bring the power and glory of your Kingdom to and through each one here gathered. Amen.
D, I’d say “through participation in this cup and this bread, your blood and body” which, if you’d like, KEEPS the mystery on the level of analogy and metaphor LINGUISTICALLY, as it is in Scripture. DON’T RESOLVE IT if you don’t want to. But make sure people understand that THEY are the ultimate elements. But we still disagree I think, because you believe we BECOME the ultimate elements (Christ's Body on earth) MATERIALLY via the actual material eaten and drunk. I don't locate it there. I locate it immaterially in the exchange of grace and faith ground in the perception/remembering of history's truth SYMBOLIZED in the elements.
You seem so hellbent on staying away from some sense of cannibalism (or whatever such thing) that you have to do what you do. But from where I sit, you mean the same thing: We are "quickened" to Christ's presence and life flowing in our bodies via the invocation of the Holy Spirit on the PEOPLE through participation in the cup and bread "re-presenting" Christ's blood and body. The concern you seem to have about what people should believe are the "elements" doesn't seem to be as high as you want to make it out...as long as everything's taught right.
Post Edited (One Love) : 1/21/2010 12:54:42 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 1/21/2010 1:43 PM (GMT -6) | | More clarification.
You seem to think that I am saying the following:
"It is absolutely necessary that the bread and wine MUST be transmuted into something other than bread and wine by the Holy Spirit in order to mediate any Grace to partaking persons unto the deification of the flesh."
I'm really hoping that you will hear this clearly: This is NOT what I am saying.
Not. Not. Not. Not. Not. Not.
So, what AM I saying? Simply this:
"It is absolutely necessary that the Holy Spirit be consciously invoked so that mediated Grace (via "re-presentation" of and participation in Christ's Body and Blood through partaking the bread and wine) is understood to ONLY occur by the Holy Spirit's working in and through all parts of the eucharistic partaking. All of this works unto the deification of the flesh by the Spirit's working."
In this belief, I agree with MUCH Church Tradition, EO, RC, and many mainline Protestants (Lutherans, Anglicans, Reformed, etc)
Please tell me that you see the difference. Bottom line: True memorialists don't do ANY type of epicletic invocation of the Spirit for the purpose of sacramental mediation and reception of Grace. YOU allow for that, Tom...so you are NOT a true memorialist in the typical evangelical sense. If your main issue is that you want to completely exclude ANY POSSIBLE INTERPRETATION of transmutation and/or transformation of the elements in a Eucharistic Liturgy...then fine. But it seems like you're going over board with it.
You can't see doing a Eucharistic experience without using "in rememberance of me" or something like that. I agree with that. I can't see doing an Eucharistic experience without consciously invoking the Holy Spirit upon all elements of the partaking. You can agree with that, I'm sure.
Post Edited (One Love) : 1/21/2010 1:13:30 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 1/21/2010 2:11 PM (GMT -6) | | | | |
| 127 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 9:31 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|