Local Church Discussions - View Single Post - Biblical evidence for becoming God in life & nature?

Drake · 11-21-2021, 07:44 AM

Trapped >"I asked you to explain this a while back, so I feel like I have the OK to respond to this post even though you directed it to Raptor who also asked you to explain this. Like I said, I have the ability to respond as if I hold the viewpoint that God Himself became a man, that God is Triune, etc.... and I will respond from that viewpoint (the one you espoused in this post)."

Trapped, please feel free to respond. Of course you have the OK. I addressed my comments to Raptor because he is the one who is holding a scriptural dialogue. Also, in this note because I assume the basic article of the Christian faith concerning the Deity of the Lord Jesus then I simply mean any objections about that should be taken up in the Trinity thread where it is being discussed extensively. I'm also willing to engage Raptor because thus far he has refrained from snarky non-sequitur arguments. We may not agree in the end (but who knows, he makes compelling arguments), yet at least the reader will be presented with both sides of the argument from a scriptural point of view and can decide for themselves whether there is biblical evidence for man becoming God in life and nature.

Trapped> "Okay then, if this is the same opposing mechanism by which God became a man, then what you are saying is that in order for God to become a man, man had to communicate some communicable attributes to God."

Trapped,

I did not say this at all. I read your post 2.5 times and this is where the train of your argument jumped the tracks. So we'd best return to the Scripture as Robert exhorts.

John 1:1, 14 says that God, the eternal Word, the Only-Begotten was incarnated to be a man. Incarnation did not affect what God is in His eternal essence. In some way according to His transcendence and otherness, He made it work. Perhaps one day we'll understand it but until that day ants will merely speculate with each other how humans can ride bikes.

Since we both agree for this dialogue that Jesus is the incarnated God, the eternal Word made flesh, the Only-Begotten Son of God of the Divine Trinity, then we should be in complete agreement that incarnation did not affect His Godhead, Godhood, transcendence, or otherness.

Are we in agreement on that?

Drake

11-21-2021, 07:44 AM	#89
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Biblical evidence for becoming God in life & nature? Trapped >"I asked you to explain this a while back, so I feel like I have the OK to respond to this post even though you directed it to Raptor who also asked you to explain this. Like I said, I have the ability to respond as if I hold the viewpoint that God Himself became a man, that God is Triune, etc.... and I will respond from that viewpoint (the one you espoused in this post)." Trapped, please feel free to respond. Of course you have the OK. I addressed my comments to Raptor because he is the one who is holding a scriptural dialogue. Also, in this note because I assume the basic article of the Christian faith concerning the Deity of the Lord Jesus then I simply mean any objections about that should be taken up in the Trinity thread where it is being discussed extensively. I'm also willing to engage Raptor because thus far he has refrained from snarky non-sequitur arguments. We may not agree in the end (but who knows, he makes compelling arguments), yet at least the reader will be presented with both sides of the argument from a scriptural point of view and can decide for themselves whether there is biblical evidence for man becoming God in life and nature. Trapped> "Okay then, if this is the same opposing mechanism by which God became a man, then what you are saying is that in order for God to become a man, man had to communicate some communicable attributes to God." Trapped, I did not say this at all. I read your post 2.5 times and this is where the train of your argument jumped the tracks. So we'd best return to the Scripture as Robert exhorts. John 1:1, 14 says that God, the eternal Word, the Only-Begotten was incarnated to be a man. Incarnation did not affect what God is in His eternal essence. In some way according to His transcendence and otherness, He made it work. Perhaps one day we'll understand it but until that day ants will merely speculate with each other how humans can ride bikes. Since we both agree for this dialogue that Jesus is the incarnated God, the eternal Word made flesh, the Only-Begotten Son of God of the Divine Trinity, then we should be in complete agreement that incarnation did not affect His Godhead, Godhood, transcendence, or otherness. Are we in agreement on that? Drake