Hello Stuart,
I hope that most here have considered your expressed opinions and beliefs a
challenge, and not a snub. As has been pointed out, you are far from the
only person of Faith that has rejected a triune Godhead, nor will be the
last.
I guess the points that confuses me are that you seem to separate divinity
from deity, which makes one wonder how many divine beings your theology
recognizes. I would ask about your views concerning the Holy Spirit, but I
am not sure if everyone is ready to hear the other shoe drop.
Also, in a previous message you said:
"Obviously no one has lived a life of the same magnitude as Jesus who was
clearly the messiah, or the way to eternal life, but my point (which you
handily left out of your deconstruct) is that by claiming that Jesus was
God, you put that messiahship way out of the reach of mere mortals, you set
his example as being so beyond the pale of human endeavor that none can hope
to duplicate his spirituality."
I do not quite understand...do you believe that you can live a life that
will somehow grant you "messiahship," if we would only quit putting Christ
on a pedestal? I think that you are mistaken in how our "spirituality" is
ascribed. We are to use the life of Christ as our ideal and example, but if
we could obtain that goal on our own, for what reason would we need a
Savior?
Norm Woodward
Warner Robins Georgia
-----Original Message-----
From: Stuart d Kirkley [mailto:stucandu@lycos.com]
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 2:39 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: RE: Virgin Birth
Whoa, back up. I never said I dispute the divinity of Christ. That divinity
is assured since he is the only begotten of the Father. What I dispute is
the notion that Jesus, the man, was God incarnate. There should be a
distinction between Jesus, the man, Christ Jesus, the saviour, Christ, the
divine sonship of all mankind, and God, the Father-Mother, divine Parent. I
could expound more fully on this, but I detected by the sudden dearth of
posts from the collective (in light of the rash of posts lately) that I
might have put a few noses out of joint. I did address this in my apology,
which I sincerely offer in the spirit of true brotherhood.
--On Sun, 3 Mar 2002 22:59:51 Adrian Teo wrote: >Hello Guy, > >While I disagree strongly with Stuart's conclusions, I must say I am not >surprised. There are many intellectual Christians who believe, as Howard >does and has argued, that all matters of faith should be open to question >and reevaluation. Stuart is simply putting this belief into practice and >has, IMHO, presented a somewhat reasonable and plausible argument for >rejecting the divinity of Christ. This Arian argument is still very much >around today, and they are holding their ground quite well. The Scriptures >can be used to support both opposing arguments. We will continue to hear >these arguments brought up, continue to see denominations splitting up over >doctrinal disagreements, and continue to see fragmentation in the church as >long as people continue to boldly adopt this skeptical/critical approach to >Christianity. It is every man and woman for himself/herself. We each become >our final arbiter of truth. > >This is my observation of the state of affairs, and I've tried to describe >it as objectively as possible, given my limitations. It is not in any way >intended to offend or insult anyone, nor to accuse anyone of being >unChristian (unOrthodox perhaps), although we do need to define the >bounadries of Christianity, lest it becomes a menaingless concept. > >My two-cents worth. > >Adrian. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Guy Blanchet >To: stucandu@lycos.com >Cc: asa@calvin.edu >Sent: 3/2/2002 6:56 PM >Subject: Re: Virgin Birth > >Stuart d Kirkley a écrit: > >> -- >> >> On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 15:24:28 >> bivalve wrote: >> Even being born as the heir apparent to Caesar >> would have made the Creator physically dependent on others to feed >> and clean Him. >> >> I still, for the life of me, can not understand how people can >rationally state that Jesus was God incarnate. To me this is one of the >biggest stumbling blocks of theololgy which stems from and leads to a >narrowness of scriptural interpretation. If, as the Bible states clearly >many times, God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son >to be the Saviour of the world, reveals God as Parent and Son as >offspring, distinct and individual, how do you arrive at the idea that >Jesus was God???!! I just find it incredulous that well reasoned people >can actually hold to this doctrine. >> Sorry, I had to get that out. >> >> 2,000,000,000 Web Pages--you only need 1. Save time with My Lycos. >> http://my.lycos.com > >Mr Kirkley, > >Do you feel better now that you 'got it out'? So you're blown away by >the fact that well-reasoned people believe Jesus is God? Don't be. >Isaiah said these words about Jesus : "See, I lay in Zion a stone that >causes men to stumble, and a rock that makes them fall, and the one who >trusts in him will never be put to shame." The stone is Jesus and he >causes certain people to stumble. I also attract your attention to >these words from Paul in first Corinthians: "Has God not made foolish >the wisdom of the world.[...] For the foolishness of God is wiser than >man's wisdom, [...]." Mr. Kirkly, >be careful of worldly wisdom lest you stumble yourself. > > >GB > >
2,000,000,000 Web Pages--you only need 1. Save time with My Lycos. http://my.lycos.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 05 2002 - 17:15:47 EST