Eschatological View

[edburley]

Ed: As far as the Dirtboy disagreement goes, I read you. Unless he wants to chime in and tell us his all intention (which I wouldn’t blame him at all if he didn’t ), it’s a dead issue for me.

Anywhoo, the Trinity… I like what you are saying and as far as the Trinity goes, though I’m pretty agnostic about it. I just have NO IDEA. To me, the scriptures just aren’t clear and when God says: “The Lord your God is ONE GOD”, and “You shall have no other Gods before me”. Well, I pray He graciously lets me keep out of it!

The oneness thing though. I’d like you to clarify a point here.

God dwelt fully and completely, in full measure, within Jesus the man. In this way, Jesus was truly divine, and much more so than the rest of us (Eastern Orthodoxy teaches that we are all divine if we believe in the Lord Jesus Christ - and I believe we are). Jesus said that we are one with him, as he was one with the Father. Can’t escape that simple truth about Oneness, not with a clear statement like that.

It’s the “much more so” divine, I’m confused about. How can We be ONE if He is “much more divine” and how can “divine” (as in OUR divinity) be divided as in there is “divine” and then there is “much more so divine?”

Now, I KNOW that Jesus had something we don’t obviously, but I tend to see this more of His ability to tap into it, or His awareness of it, or that God just granted Him that, whatever, but to me divine is divine. It’s like being pregnant, you are or you aren’t. Could this be where the “earnest” of the Spirit comes in? What say you?

Sass, my view has to do with the idea that God gives the spirit in varying measures to different people. Jesus had the spirit of God dwelling in him fully, whereas many of us only have “a measure” of the spirit. Perhaps I chose my words poorly. Perhaps I am not dogmatic on the issue.

The way I see Jesus and the Father as one is the same way I see a husband and wife as one…it doesn’t make them the same (obviously men and women have different body parts, etc.) but in some ways they function (or are supposed to function) as one. I think that’s why the writers used the groom and bride analogy for Christ and the Church…The Church is also called “One Body” and yet, she is “many members.” So, trinitarianism has some scriptural warrant (much more so than unitarianism or modalism, in my opinion) from the standpoint of “The One and the Many” but the scripture does not necessitate trinitarianism - hope that is clear in my explanation…

[dirtboy]

thank you dirtboy for clarifying your comments. I stand corrected and apologize for my misinterpreting them and inferring too much. I hope that, in spite of some differences of opinion, we can continue to dialogue in the future.

Being new to the board, I jumped when I should have waited - zigged when I should have zagged. iow, I should have given you the benefit of the doubt. Again, I’m sorry for that.

peace,

ed

Hey, no worries my brother! You know it’s really hard with print because there are no “tone of voice” or expressions to go with what we write. Furthermore, there is no, or limited relationship when discussions take place so it is so easy to misunderstand what is being said. So, no problem as far as I am concerned and I’m glad we’re cool. I can’t count the times in my life that I’ve zigged when I should have zagged!
Blessings,
Chris

[sass]

Sass, my view has to do with the idea that God gives the spirit in varying measures to different people. Jesus had the spirit of God dwelling in him fully, whereas many of us only have “a measure” of the spirit. Perhaps I chose my words poorly. Perhaps I am not dogmatic on the issue.

The way I see Jesus and the Father as one is the same way I see a husband and wife as one…it doesn’t make them the same (obviously men and women have different body parts, etc.) but in some ways they function (or are supposed to function) as one. I think that’s why the writers used the groom and bride analogy for Christ and the Church…The Church is also called “One Body” and yet, she is “many members.” So, trinitarianism has some scriptural warrant (much more so than unitarianism or modalism, in my opinion) from the standpoint of “The One and the Many” but the scripture does not necessitate trinitarianism - hope that is clear in my explanation…

Thanks Ed, that helps. And if God gives the spirit in measure, perhaps we should always be praying for more. Lots to think about…Peace.

[byronarn]

I would have to say historic premillenialism, as of this moment. I believe the Millenium is a future Golden era in which Christ will literally rule over the nations and which the Elect will co-reign with Christ. This era will be immediatley preceded by the Great Tribulation and the Resurrection of the faithful, followed by the General Resurrection and age-abiding punishment of the wicked in hell.

I do sympathise with a partial-preterist amillenialism, though. IOW, the Jewish revolt of 70 AD was the Great Tribulation and we are currently living in the Millenium (which is allegorical and not a literal thousand years).

I am not dogmatic about eschatology, however, except to say that Christ will physically return, in the same way that he was physically resurrected and physically ascended to heaven.