Leaderboard

How is it God setting up man to fall? He defined what His rules were, and gave man the choice to obey or not. If you have children, and you tell them to do something, are you setting them up to fall if they disobey? Fallen from the exalted position God originally meant for man, having dominion over His creation. God cannot leave sin unpunished or He would not be a just and righteous judge. The price for sin is death... somebody had to pay it. In His mercy God provided His Son as a sacrifice to pay for our sins. God is not only smart, but also both righteous and merciful.

I think "religion" makes most people puke, me included. I had enough in TWI thank you - no mas religion for me. But, it seems to me, the whole point of the Bible, and mankind needing a personal savior, Christ, is: because man is "fallen" or whatever you would like to call it. If mankind is not fallen - why even believe the Bible? why believe Christ? why believe in a God? It makes absolutely no sense. If I did not believe that simple, basic premise, I would not believe either. I would consider it to be a waste of time and think those poor "believers" were deluded. And, as noted, we do have people who believe this. But, many of us accept the original premise and so thus - mankind needs a redeemer. The Bible's whole point is: There is a new "Kingdom" coming. There is a new Heaven and Earth coming. You will need a new body for the new environment that is coming. The point is to invite all to the new Kingdom and Heaven and Earth. Its a simple point, we can choose to believe the premise or not. But to not believe the first point in the Bible made about mankind - he was perfect and then fell, well, why believe any of it? I wouldn't.

Gee, folks! I sure spent a lot of time on this post...somebody must have "pushed the right button"! As with most of my writings, I would appreciate honest feedback, and gentle correction (with facts, and logic, if you please)where I may have strayed. I would especially like to hear what you all (especially my "friends") think of my take on the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil". I had spent quite some time years ago working to see that and have not heard it put that way before, so I believe it's a rather new idea. If it makes some sense to any of you, do let me know - maybe it would make a good TOPIC! SPEC :)

There can never be a reconciliation between one who believes and one who doesn't. As a believer, when God says man is fallen, and, as he tells us, he created us to be masterpieces, I think of fallen man as if someone had thrown paint on the Pieta, or slashed and spattered paint on the Mona Lisa - a masterpiece that has been marred, spoilt - ruined, fallen. I believe that Adam, had he not worshipped and given his authority to the Adversary, would have had the right to go eat of the tree of life and rule, Christ would not have been needed as Adam was fulfilling his mission (there's a reason why Christ is called the "second" Adam), and things would be totally different today. When Adam made his choice to worship the Adversary and "become as gods", when he decided - well, God really doesn't mean it when he says it will be death if I do this - he lost something, something died - something so profound, that he tried to put it back on, via skins. I almost think he wore his spirit for all to see. He was glorious when he walked the Garden - a masterpiece creation of God. I think it was similar as when Peter saw Jesus in his "transfigured" glorious body. Peter never forgot and mentions it in Acts. The Hope of a new body and transformation was a reality to him. He had seen it first hand. God promises to restore us to glorious, masterpiece state. That is our Hope.

He/She has only made a few posts. Probably a troll or someone studying to be a troll. You just have to ignore them, they get off on the attention -- sometimes literally.

We don't know from reading verse 1, but we can know from how the word is used throughout the Old Testament. "The Word" is always the communication of God's heart and mind, and never a separate person. Both. God's Word is something continuing from the beginning, and it became flesh in a one-time event. BTW, here is a good list of books about the subject: http://kingdomready.org/blog/2010/01/13/biblical-unitarian-books/

In verse 14 it is clearly talking about Jesus. "The Word" - whatever that is - was made flesh and we beheld his glory... as of the only begotten of the Father. But how you interpret verse 1 (which is what you originally referred to) will determine how you interpret the rest of the passage. Is "the Word" a pre-existing Person? Then verse 14 says that Person became flesh, and thus you have the Mystery of the Incarnation, etc. Is "the Word" God's mind and His plan? Then verse 14 says that mind, that plan, became flesh, and the only-begotten Son of God was the result. It all hinges on what "the Word" means to you.

As T-Bone said, that's the agenda in any systematic theology. But in those early centuries of Christianity, they ended up with apparent contradictions because they lost sight of the understanding that did make things fit. In the original Hebrew mindset, a person could be called God in a representational sense and not mean he was THE God, the Creator. (Besides, only a small handful of verses call him God in any sense.) The idea of the Messiah being a man, the Son of God who would rule the world on God's behalf, was a simple concept for the Jews that was prophesied throughout their history. When Greek thought started overshadowing Hebrew (as more and more Gentiles became Christians) this understanding was overshadowed by gnostic and philosophical ideas and that's where the apparent contradictions come from, which led to the dilemma: Is Jesus a god or a created being or a demigod or what? And if he's God and the Father is God, we'd have two Gods, which we can't have. Since Hebrew thought was looked down on by then, they had to come up with a solution from Greek philosophy, and the rest is history. BTW, John 1:1 only seems to say Jesus is God if one begins with the assumption that "The Word" is a person rather than the mind and plan of God. And that idea was influenced by Greek philosophy too.

Try adding just a whiff of cinnamon to that recipe for a real treat.....

If I had only VPW's writings to go by, I probably would have changed my views about the Trinity as I changed my views about many TWI doctrines. But there have been and still are many qualified writers who present the case much better than VPW did, that Jesus is the Son of God, and that the Trinity was developed long after Christ and the NT. TrustAndObey has it right, IMO. The real issue in John 1:1 is not the meaning of "with" but the meaning of "word." If you begin with the assumption that logos is a person, then the whole chapter could seem to be saying something other than what it says. But the logos or "word" has to do with the heart and will and mind of God. Therefore God's Word was God in the same way my word is me. It was understood this way for hundreds of years, even after the doctrine of the Trinity was developed. In all English Bibles before the KJV in 1611, verse 3 of John 1 still read, "All things were made by it; and without it was not any thing made that was made." Saying the word was "with" God is a Hebrew expression. The following is from John 1:1 Caveat Lector (Reader Beware) by Anthony Buzzard: Allowance must be made for Hebrew idiom. Without a feel for the Hebrew background, as so often in the New Testament, we are deprived of a vital key to understanding. We might ask of an English speaker, “When was your word last ‘with you’?” The plain fact is that in English, which is not the language of the Bible, a “word” is never “with” you. A person can be “with you,” certainly, but not a word. But in the wisdom literature of the Bible a “word” certainly can be “with” a person. And the meaning is that a plan or purpose — a word — is kept in one’s heart ready for execution. For example Job says to God (10:13): “Yet these things you have concealed in your heart; I know that this is with you.” The NASV gives a more intelligible sense in English by reading, “ I know that this is within you.” The NIV reads “in your mind.” But the Hebrew literally reads “with you.” Again in Job 23:13, 14 it is said of God, “What his soul desires, that he does, for he performs what is appointed for me, and many such decrees are with him,” meaning, of course, that God’s plans are stored up in His mind. God’s word is His intention, held in His heart as plans to be carried out in the world He has created. Sometimes what God has “with Him” is the decree He has planned. With this we may compare similar thoughts: “This is the portion of a wicked man with God and the inheritance which tyrants receive from Him” (Job 27:13). “I will instruct you in the power of God; what is with the Almighty I will not conceal” (Job 27:11). It makes perfect sense to me. Then the Word of God became flesh when His plan became reality - at the birth of His Son. It's all about God's plan of salvation coming into fruition, not God becoming a man. John even specifically states that the reason he wrote his Gospel is so that we might believe "that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God" (John 20:31).