The question that stand foremost in my mind everytime I meet this issue is this:
1) They say there is ONLY ONE GOD-- ONLY ONE TRUE GOD, and that is not Christ, it is the Father and the Father alone.
Then when I say they deny that Christ is truly God--
They say I misrepresent them.
BUT--
How can they say Christ is God IF the Father ALONE IS THE TRUE GOD.
Christ must then be either a false God,
or no god at all.
There is NO ROOM FOR A SECOND GOD in scripture,
even if they say being the SON OF GOD gives Him "inherited" godhood,
in their definitions. Scripture emphatically declares there is only ONE GOD AND NONE BESIDES HIM! To say that Christ is NOT that true God, along with the Father, is denying that Christ is God.
Indeed, Mickey has strongly accused me of worshipping more than one GOD--
YES, I WORSHIP CHRIST MY SAVIOR, as well as the FATHER-
FOR CHRIST IS WORTHY (Rev. 5) HE is fully God,
THE FATHER IS WORTHY (Rev. 4) HE is fully God,
AND THEY ARE ONE GOD, ONE DEITY in perfect unity.
And you are right-- I did stop the discussions against Christ as truly God on a forum where I am a moderator--
If people came with long denouncements on EGW we would also stop them, how much more important that our forum not allow continual discussions that pull down our LORD AND SAVIOR.
he believes that the "self-existant, underived life" of Christ is not really self-existant, and underived" but something the Father gave Christ and that Christ is dependant upon the Father for life.
Here, "dedication" misrepresents my belief totally. Christ most definetly possesses "self-existent" and "underived life". He inherited this quality of life from the Father - John 5:26, however, Christ is not dependent upon the Father for life - as is the case with created beings.
What does "underived life" mean?
To be derived from -- means having a source. Coming from something. Emerging from something.
Underived means having no source, not coming from something else.
Thus when they say, Christ was literally born out of the Father, and received His life from the Father, it is saying He derived His life from the Father. Thus a person saying He was given life by birth, is saying His life was derived from His Father. Whether that life is in future "self-existing" does not negate the fact that it was originally "derived".
But Christ has life UNDERIVED-- He has existed eternally with the Father.
This is not something that can be "inherited", for as soon as it is "inherited" it is derived.
But Christ has life UNDERIVED-- He has existed eternally with the Father. This is not something that can be "inherited", for as soon as it is "inherited" it is derived.
Not so! Christ has "life in Himself" Jesus said the following:
John 5:26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;
This "life in Himself" is that quality of life that is underived, unborrowed, life original! Its the very same life of God. And Jesus plainly says that He has this quality of life because HIS FATHER GAVE IT TO HIM. Christ's underived life was INHERITED from God, His Father and that is how the Father gave this quality of underived life to His Son.
The life that human beings have is NOT inherited or derived from their parents. This life is derived and borrowed from God and humans are dependant second by second on God for sustaining this life. This isn't the case with Christ. He has the same quality of life as God, His Father and is NOT dependent on the Father for the sustenance of His life. Yet this life original, unborrowed, underived is clearly inherited from and GIVEN to Christ by God, the Father.
If trinitarians would simply quit forcing their own definitions to the plain utterances of scripture, the confusion regarding the doctrine of God would be non-existent among Adventists.
I think, non Trinitarians have one fundamental error in their way of thinking that is why they are confused about trinity and all their conclusions about it are all wrong.
And non Trinitarians are not without problems too.
Because they think of god as one, they would readily assign that one deity of course to the Father. Now they have a dilemma in their hands and that is, what are they going do with Jesus?
Will they believe him as fully god in every sense of the word or a lesser divine being?
If they believe Jesus as fully god, they will now have two gods in their hands (the father and Jesus) and in their mind this is polytheism.
But if they believe Jesus as a lesser divine being (lesser than the father), they would have denied the full deity of Jesus (which is worse).
All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2
Page 2 of 2
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in
