 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
Matthew Timothy Short
Huh?
Date Joined Apr 2002
Total Posts : 635
| Posted 4/1/2003 1:03 AM (GMT -6) |   | This is eternal life: knowing God.
However, just like a marriage is all about knowing my mate, is my relationship with God a relationship of knowledge?
I know my mate in order that by knowing them, I would bless them (not simply to use them); so is it the same with God? That is, do I come to know Him, in order that I might bless Him and/or come to Him, knowing that I might use Him?
"This is eternal life, that they might know You, God the Father and the Son who was sent." (Jhn 17:3)
Every comment appreciated, but not always admired  …
Edited by - Tim on 04/01/2003 06:04:53 AM | | Back to Top | | |
 |
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 4/1/2003 4:31 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
Matthew Timothy Short
Huh?
Date Joined Apr 2002
Total Posts : 635
| Posted 4/1/2003 12:34 PM (GMT -6) | | I preferred the second read, PotOnWheel, seemed more informative about answering, "is my relationship with God a relationship of knowledge."
In getting to know God though, the Lord Jesus Christ is not accusing me all the time, putting me down, condemning me, using me, and wringing the life out of me; the same way it was in my marriage at one time. So what do you think of the second part of my question, "do I come to know God, in order that I might bless Him and/or come to Him, knowing that I might use Him", not unlike marriage  ?
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 4/1/2003 4:07 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
I preferred the second read, PotOnWheel, seemed more informative about answering, "is my relationship with God a relationship of knowledge."
Tim, in the second LINK it does have this part, which I understand to not be so good: Barlaam maintained that knowledge of God is not a matter of the vision of God, which takes place through transformation of the senses, but a fruit of man's understanding, a working out of reason. Therefore he said that the Prophets' vision of God is inferior to our own understanding. If this had prevailed, it would certainly have distorted the Church's truth concerning the knowledge of God.
It does have this, though, that reminds me of Christ's words about eues that see (Or don't: Matthew 13:15-16; Mark 8:18): The vision of the uncreated Light is called a deifying gift, which God gives to man according to His will. This deification is man's union and communion with God, it is a participation and a deifying communion. Thus the term 'deification' is interchangeable with the terms 'communion', 'participation' and 'union'.
Vision, deification and union with God are the things which offer man true knowledge of God. In this condition man attains real knowledge of God. This knowledge is higher than knowledge through the senses and, to be more precise, it is in accordance with the senses and above the senses.
I thought that THESE sentences from the first LINK were significant, though. And they DO answer what you asked on the TRINITY thread too!!! (the underlined part below!)
quote:
The situation in St. Gregory's time was that Orthodoxy was being debased; it was becoming worldly and being changed into either pantheism or agnosticism. Pantheism believed and taught that God in his essence was to be found in all nature, and so when we look at nature we can acquire knowledge of God. Agnosticism believed and taught that it was utterly impossible for us to know God, just because He is God and man is limited, and therefore man was completely incapable of attaining a real knowledge of God.
. . . . .
In the face of the danger of agnosticism St. Gregory Palamas taught that the actual procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father is a different thing from His being sent by the Son. Thus while we do not know the essence of the Holy Spirit, we do know His energy.
All spiritual life is a result and fruit of the energy of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the saint taught, we cannot participate in God's essence, but we can know and participate in His energies. As the great dogmatic theologian St. John of Damascus teaches, we can see His three unions: union in essence, of the Persons of the Holy Trinity; union in substance, in the Person of Christ between the divine and human natures; and union in energy, between God and man.
BUT YOU HAVE OTHER ISSUES...
quote:
Tim:
...the Lord Jesus Christ is not accusing me all the time, putting me down, condemning me, using me, and wringing the life out of me; the same way it was in my marriage at one time. So what do you think of the second part of my question, "do I come to know God, in order that I might bless Him and/or come to Him, knowing that I might use Him", not unlike marriage ?
REPEAT AFTER ME: Creation, Fall, Redemption, Restoration
You seem to be saying that marriage is a USING. It's not. It's not.
Here is the male architype of marriage, John the Baptist: "He must become greater; I must become less." (John 3:30)
But, "Creation...Fall", the thesis of God, the creation that he pronounced "very good" upon is tarnished. But it is not broken! The same one good thing can be worked and shaped into something revelaing the good potential that its spoken-nature holds. Or it can be worked and shaped into something else. That's how science, and philosophy, and the arts can and do yeild good-Good art, good-Bad art, bad-Good art, and bad-Bad art. "Structure" and "direction." Marriage is GOOD. In God's words: "very good." But there are bad shapings of marriage. And their are, perhaps, counterfiet psudo-marriage-like permutations that might even be shuffled into a mix. Dominations by either partner fit that. But "USE?"
You asked: ...what do you think of the second part of my question, "do I come to know God, in order that I might bless Him and/or come to Him, knowing that I might use Him."
I'll try.
What's "Use him" mean?
Should I make something negative out of that. Or something possitive and constructive.
Christ said:
quote:
"... but whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life." (John 4:14)
If you come thirsty, hungry, and take up your cross, then you can know that in HIM is life; and only in Him.
You also wrote: "in order that I might bless Him..."
We CAN bless the Lord. Understanding how that it true might be important. The answer is related to the Eucharist. Christ, a human and yet God, deified humanity, conquered death and ascended to heaven. HE is worthy. Redemption is accomplished, but the restoration is a now-and-not-yet thing. But what we bring to Christ to bless... what we offer in praise and honest thanks-giving becomes offered to God through Christ. ("Holy gifts for the Holy.") Our service to God is NOT a "Work" in the sense of "works" that Fundamentalists point out (rightly) that don't save us, in that they do not replace "Grace through faith." But our works can be offered in Christ and are a sweet smelling offering to God.
Late night. Bye!!!!!! | | Back to Top | | |
|
GregBoyd
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818
| Posted 4/1/2003 5:52 PM (GMT -6) | | The biblical concept of "know" usually involves much more than "information" -- and I think this is clearly the case in Jn 17. When Jesus says "Father, I know you...", he's saying much more than "I know about you." Anyone can learn about your wife, Tim: but only you "know" her. Know what I mean?
Blessings
Greg
"In Christ...the ONLY THING that matters is faith energized by love." Galatians 5:6 | | Back to Top | | |
|
a_theist
"Thy will be done."
Date Joined Dec 2002
Total Posts : 286
| Posted 4/1/2003 6:33 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Know what I mean?
LOL!
"The 'sovereignty' of God is not, I suggest, a very biblical idea, especially if one has a low opinion of the respect of sovereigns for the freedom of their subjects."
~Charles Hartshorne | | Back to Top | | |
|
Matthew Timothy Short
Huh?
Date Joined Apr 2002
Total Posts : 635
| Posted 4/1/2003 9:38 PM (GMT -6) | | "This is eternal life, that they might know You, God the Father and the Son who was sent." (Jhn 17:3)
POW: What's "Use him," mean?
Let’s call ‘use’, to mean in this sense of God, of receiving advantage for any purpose, but especially for a profitable purpose, yet not unlike in a marriage, which at times seems damaging, destroying, or appears to lay waste to the other person, also.
As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who feeds on Me will live because of Me. (Jhn 6:57)
This second verse from the trinity thread would be better here, I think.
I do not live the Christian life because of me, myself and I; MY unfailing resource is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
If I feed on the Son like the Son depended on the Father, will I live, even as the Son lived on earth?
Jesus depended on the Father; the Father worked through Him; I now feed on the Son; that is, I find my nurture and nourishment in the fruit of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection to glory, for me. I believe in and count on Jesus Christ to be my all in all; I live because of Him. Just like the Father worked through the Son, so now the Son wants to work through me; He wants me to get to know Him in that same manner. As the very one who lives in me, Christ will glorify His Father by His work of redemption in me.
Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord, as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue. (2Pe 1:2-3)
Greg: Know what I mean?
Possibly NO, I knew about my wife at one time, before I got to know her sexually, and I am still getting to know her; did Jesus empty himself out to the point, to where he is growing in intimacy with the Father all over again? Did the Son of God give that independent generation of life eternal that belonged to His very nature away, to draw on the Father’s life for his own?
As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who feeds on Me will live because of Me. (Jhn 6:57)
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 4/2/2003 1:27 AM (GMT -6) | | Tim asked: Did the Son of God give that independent generation of life eternal that belonged to His very nature away, to draw on the Father’s life for his own?
PoW: ABSOLUTELY NOT. This is pretty bad theology. (Christology.) You know what they say about how you recognize counterfiet money: that you learn really, really well what the real thing looks like. What you wrote just isn't true, Tim.
The Son NEVER ceased to be God. The passage in Philipians doesn't mean that ne stopped being God -- just that as Christ, as a man, he gave up the priviledges. The Trinity DID NOT CHANGE. The relationships inter-Trinity did not change. The Son's activity in the Creation, AS GOD, upholding everything, etc. DID NOT CHANGE.
"Cutting to the chase," Christ did say "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me." (The darkest experience any human every has experiened.)
One of the Trinity suffered. But Christ suffered AS MAN, NOT AS GOD. The S0n PERSONALLY sufferred AS MAN. Christ's human will felt total abandonment, and in so doing felt the ENTIRE wieght of the curse. He bore IN HIS FLESH, personally ALL the sin of the ENTIRE world. "He ascended to heaven and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty." (This is why we have the Nicene Creed, Tim!) Our humanity is resurrected IN Christ. By the Spirit we partake of Him. Salvatino in in the ONLY ELECT man, Christ. HE is predestined. We are "chosen in Him."
Tim: "Did the Son of God give that independent generation of life eternal that belonged to His very nature away...?"
PoW: He did not give up his deity. Besides, the Son is "begotten of the Father. ONLY the Father is 'inoriginate' -- not 'from' another person. So, double "no."
Did "eternal life" "belong" to Christ's human nature. That humanity that was his from conception, by the Spirit, was "without sin" (creed) but it STILL needed "divinization/reception of eternal life." Oth3erwise temptation would not be possible. OTHERWISE WE COULD NOT BE SAVED.
Tim: "Did the Son of God draw on the Father’s life for his own?"
PoW: I'm not going to say "draw upon" for the divine Son. The begottenness of the Son is a mystery. Gregory of Nyssa points out that we DON'T really even understand the difference between "begottenness" and "procession." The difference is there; but we won't understand it. He's right.
Did the Son "draw on the Father’s life for his own?"
WE ALL MUST: "THROUGH THE SON, IN THE SPIRIT."
Dont' take any woden nickles.
Get something trustworthy. www.oca.org/pages/orth_chri/Orthodox-Faith/Doctrine/Nicene-Creed.html | | Back to Top | | |
|
SeanG
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2002
Total Posts : 278
| Posted 4/10/2003 9:28 AM (GMT -6) | | This verse is one of the absolute favorites of Jehovah Witness, and when I bump into them at a donut shop I will quickly point them first to this verse. And they are happy to read it out loud to me. Then I ask them to open up to John 1:1, you know this verse, “In the beginning was God, and the word was with God, and the word was God.” Well, in the New World Translation, the JW's Bible, it says, “In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was a God.”
Take note that they add an “a” where there shouldn’t be one. However, this works to our advantage, as the Jehovah Witness will emphatically state that they are strict monotheists, but this is where they run into a problem. After you have them read this verse out loud, you can ask them, “is Jesus a real God, or a false God?” This is where they will start squirming. Why?
Because the verse in John 17:3 reads, “And this is eternal life, that they may know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom though hast sent.”
Jehovah is the only true God! Jesus, is Michael the arch angel in JW theology, and is not God. However, in the attempt to hide Jesus’ divinity, they inadvertently create another problem. And when you clearly point this out to them, the Holy Spirit can start to convict these blind followers of the Watchtower.
Much thought.
Edited by - SeanG on 04/10/2003 2:29:55 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
kerygma
Registered Member
Date Joined Aug 2002
Total Posts : 45
| Posted 4/21/2003 8:48 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
This verse is one of the absolute favorites of Jehovah Witness, and when I bump into them at a donut shop I will quickly point them first to this verse. And they are happy to read it out loud to me. Then I ask them to open up to John 1:1, you know this verse, “In the beginning was God, and the word was with God, and the word was God.” Well, in the New World Translation, the JW's Bible, it says, “In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was a God.”
Take note that they add an “a” where there shouldn’t be one. However, this works to our advantage, as the Jehovah Witness will emphatically state that they are strict monotheists, but this is where they run into a problem. After you have them read this verse out loud, you can ask them, “is Jesus a real God, or a false God?” This is where they will start squirming. Why?
Because the verse in John 17:3 reads, “And this is eternal life, that they may know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom though hast sent.”
Jehovah is the only true God! Jesus, is Michael the arch angel in JW theology, and is not God. However, in the attempt to hide Jesus’ divinity, they inadvertently create another problem. And when you clearly point this out to them, the Holy Spirit can start to convict these blind followers of the Watchtower.
I must be dense today. I've read this several times, but what is "another problem?" And what is their attempt to hide Jesus's divinity and how?
Scott
But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. Isaiah 53:5
| | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 1:50 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 |
|
|