The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Free Willism or God's Soeveignty in Salvation of All

Evangelical Universalism
#979

I do not think that, whatever side of the ‘trinity’ debate you are on, that it makes any difference - as long as you are living whatever truth is clearly taught in the scriptures. If you want to add metaphysical speculation to that, fine - I think you can do it without warping the scripture.
If you don’t recognize the Council’s philosophy, fine - as long as you understand what is clearly taught in the Bible as to who Jesus Christ is, and follow him.

I’'ve been a Trin, now I’m not - and it has not made any difference to me. God the Father is still God the Father, Jesus is the Son of God (whether he existed prior to his birth does not concern me, except as an intellectual puzzle), messiah, King - and all the other high offices he holds under the Father’s wisdom. All praise is to be given.

I really don’t see what the problem is anymore, unless someone makes the belief THE basis for fellowship, or considers the ‘other side’ as somehow ‘lesser’ in wisdom or insight or etc. The brightest minds and most sincere Christians have differed on this since the 4th century or so; and while it’s a fun intellectual excercise, let’s not make it definitive, unless we are willing to add to the scripture.

#980

No, the concept is not in the Bible. It is the least trifle to me if you think it is. It is not important in the grand scheme of things.

Yes, sordid. They demanded the Arians sign on to their made-up Trinity stuff knowing full well they would not, but the Arians demanded them produce the actual scriptures. They refused. So the Arians refused to sign on. Had the Arians maintained supremacy we probably wouldn’t have had almost 2,000 years of doctrines of demons infiltrating the church.

#981

I think we crossed emails - please see my post from about 30 seconds ago.

#982

The concern for fellowship and division would be over worship. We worship Christ as Lord God in my church. You probably would not want to do that. Further, if Christ is not God incarnate then the atonement falls short of what is necessary for our salvation.

#983

Wrong on all counts, but as I said - it’s been going on a long time. No solutions here.
Of course I worship Christ as Lord - or I would not be a Christian.
And nowhere is the atonement spoken of as depending on anything but God’s man obeying his Father to the death.

#984

Why worship Christ if he is not God? Would not that be a sin to worship anything but God?

No where except the book of Hebrews which explains that Christ and his New Covenant are better for a host of reasons one of which is that He is the God incarnate sacrifice, a better sacrifice. Many people have obeyed God the Father to the death. Christ is not distinct for that reason, but instead that He is also God incarnate.

#985

Jeff, Hebrews does not say that.
Things other than the Father are worshipped, but not in the same way.
Look, you’ve heard all this before.
When it comes to certain arguments, I just don’t care. If you don’t mind, I’ll just try to follow the Lord.

#986

No, if God did not send His Son into the world to die for our sins, then everything fails. God did not send Himself. He sacrificed His Son, not Himself.

We worship Christ as what the Bible calls Him: Son of God, not “God the Son.”

#987

Christ is the IMAGE of the invisible God. Christ is not THAT God He is the IMAGE of. While God was in heaven, Christ was on the earth.
It is good and proper to worship Christ as God’s true image. All other images are idol worship since they do not represent God as God.

The Bible never says “God incarnate” when speaking of Christ.

#988

I have a few questions for Eusebius, regarding the theology of Adolph Ernst Knoch.

What is his position on free will?
Does he believe it exists?
Does he advocate a position of hard theological determinism, like you put forth?

I’ll try to take it easy today, with Jeff and Eusebius. And to everyone else. After all. **The billy goat curse is broken ** :exclamation: :laughing:

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRjmI4R9n3QRY0p_vuTLWTOZifQBQYSKPzN8QlYEHdGfGFBhiUuKQ

First a prayer article, to start the day:

What Prayer Can Do: Joy in the Journey

or

youtube.com/watch?v=IfE7ullP7LU

#989

He taught it is not free. He has been dead for some time.

He believed we all have a will.

Can you ask that just using a bible verse please?

#990

I’m too much in an euphoric mood today, due to the Cubs victory. So I won’t be able to focus. So let me rephrase that last question. Do you and Knoch have the same theological viewpoint, regarding will and the Bible?

#991

Also I am interested to know, Eusebius do you differ with Knoch on any points? What points?

#992

What I have bolded is a remarkable statement. I have never read anything of the sort. Please let me have a primary source for that.

#993

The problem is that we have segments of theology - for many pages of thread. It wasn’t until I read A.E. Knoch’s errors in doctrine, that I’m beginning to understand, where Knoch (and Eusebius, following in his footsteps) - is coming from. Sure, the article author does response to Knock’s theological viewpoints, with sound - but Orthodox - doctrine. But he does present Knoch’s viewpoints, so that you can clearly understand them. I wish I knew about this article, at the start of this thread. :exclamation: :slight_smile:

#994

The Bible NOWHERE says… “Yahweh spoke to Adam through Jesus”. The Bible NOWHERE says… God spoke to Adam “using intermediaries”.

As for trying to make your seriously pedantic error right in claiming “God no one has ever seen”… God SPOKE to Adam and Eve, that’s what the text says! Try something really novel and actually READ the plain text of Gen 3:8-13 and see who is SPEAKING with whom; NO not Jesus nor any other “intermediaries” but Yahweh HIMSELF!

#995

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRezrSGL39FL2LyNh70gcqcb_O9myjOSJGhio7eMR1cHMzgkZnzU2PPwU2w

I had to look up pedantic :exclamation: :laughing:

#996

Randy Said:

Well, that would be Eusebius’s place, to flesh out his (and maybe in this case Knoch’s) theology.

The problem is the attitude. Christianity has held to some basic premises and I am definitely guilty of barfing over the bar in this area. :blush: But Paul talks to the churches about some basic traits. :astonished:

Not counting the obvious Corinthians chapt 13, :sunglasses:

1Th 5:14 We urge you, brethren, admonish the unruly, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with everyone.
2Ti 2:24 The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, :smiley:

#997

I might answer you if you answer me: Jesus said He was the Son of God and was begotten by holy spirit. Did Jesus have two Fathers?

And how can Jesus be “God” since Jesus, when He was on earth said “I am ascending to my Father and your Father and my God and your God.” So how can Jesus be God when His God was in Heaven while he was on earth? And Paul said “for us there is only one God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus Christ.”
Just one God. Not three Gods. Not Three in one and one in Three. Not a Trinity. One God. One.

#998

If I understand you correctly, this sentence does not express classical Trinitarian thought; it expresses Modalistic thought.

From the beginning, classic Trinitarians have believed in three distinct persons or individuals who share the one divine essence that they call “God.” in that sense the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. Also, in the same sense, Trinitarians speak of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

Modalists believe that there is a single divine Individual who is called “God” and who expresses Himself in three different ways or modes—as an old-time actor expressed himself in different ways by wearing a variety of masks. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and not three distinct Individuals, but three expressions of one Individual—the true God.

Many people who think they are Trinitarians, are actually Modalists. Do you think that might be the case with you, Jeff?