Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe
T-Bone

Concerning the Bible...

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, TLC said:

So from your perspective, there's no difference... yet, perhaps you might consider that from my perspective, there is (and has been, for over 40 years.)  Long ago (before twi) I came to the realization that whatever is spiritual:  (1) is spiritual, (2) is not physical, and (3) is a reality beyond the reality that is common to all men.  Of course, not only did that stir a certain hunger to learn more, it also established an "irreducible" premise within me.  But, if that is wrong... then I suppose I might nearly well be in that category of men "most miserable" in this life.  

That said, perhaps I'm inclined to see certain things a bit differently.   For instance, although I'm not likely to ever speak out about it, within my mind I would probably not agree with someone that said, "The bible is the word of God."  Because in my mind, the word of God is something spiritual, whereas the bible is something physical.  Therefore, I would think and say, "The bible is the revealed word of God."  However, I said "probably not," as there are times when I think I understand what they are intending to say, rather than focusing on what they actually said... and there are enough times in conversations with others where I myself more simply and casually refer to the bible as being "the Word of God." Yet, in the back of my mind, it's a distinction that is never very far away or hard to make, should the need for it ever arise.  Furthermore, the relationship between "the Word of God" (which is spiritual) and God (who is spirit) is such that if we think or see God as being perfect (i.e., inerrant), then so is His word.  What remains, then, is how any of us think that which is both (1) invisible and (2) inherently perfect, is revealed to man.  Can scripture be perceived as something spiritual? Or do you say that it can only be that which is physical?

…(snip)

On the spiritual vs physical you might be right; me on the other hand - a few years ago, I did some reading on superstring theories and other dimensions – so I kind of went in a different direction; if there’s anything to that stuff – it’s possible the spiritual realm is wrapped up within our physical realm…multiple dimensions folded up on each other – some theories speculate there might be at least 10 dimensions ( the basic theory suggests there’s 3D regular space + 6D hyperspace + 1 of time) that make up the fabric of reality …so maybe the spiritual realm is right here and now -  even though in physics, the current acceptable norm is the 3 dimensions and one of time; some physicists look into a theory of everything - something all encompassing to tie every aspect of our universe together, stuff that would unify the 4 fundamental forces (gravity, electromagnetism, the strong and weak nuclear forces) for example...all this speculating in their various models usually requires that there are other dimensions…I read some fascinating stuff by Hugh Ross – using superstring theories he speculated on the nature of our new bodies – and with the ability to manipulate one’s fundamental particles, one could walk through walls or suddenly cease to be seen…

I follow what you’re saying about God being spirit and perfect – and as you put it “What remains, then, is how any of us think that which is both (1) invisible and (2) inherently perfect, is revealed to man.” That is a lot to think about right there! Great point, TLC !

to follow up on your point I again refer to something CS Lewis said – which I had quoted in my very first post:

"The human qualities of the raw materials show through. Naivety, error, contradiction, even (as in the cursing Psalms) wickedness are not removed. The total result is not ‘The Word of God’ in the sense that every passage, in itself, gives impeccable science or history. It carries the Word of God; and we (under grace, with attention to tradition and to interpreters wiser than ourselves, and with the use of such intelligence and learning as we may have) receive that word from it not by using it as an encyclopedia or an encyclical but by steeping ourselves in its tone or temper and so learning its overall message…"

I’m not sure how inspiration or revelation worked in the authors – but I don’t picture them as being perfect or impartial conduits – in some trance-like state as God took over and flipped the override switch on their cognitive abilities – if he did do that, then I might expect him to correct any errors that might creep into the message as far as their current knowledge of the world is concerned - you know, as if the whole process was along the lines of taking dictation or something; but as CS Lewis suggested we don’t see that happening; they all had different experiences and backgrounds, vocabularies, writing styles, imperfections, etc. in other words they were human!

I’ll even take it a step further – the Word became flesh. How does that work? I don’t know but I’ll take a stab at it – my speculation may be way off base – but it’s just speculation, anyway ...so don't anyone have a cow over this :rolleyes: . What if Jesus Christ was a hybrid – being both human and divine…For kicks I once did a little Internet search on how much digital storage you would need to hold your entire mind…purely a sci-fi doodling whim – didn’t try to calculate all the memories, images, languages, routines, habits, etc. nor did I address consciousness or the soul…anyway I found some research already being done on this…I think one estimate just for our memories was at something like 2.5 petabytes (1 petabyte = 1,000 terabytes)…man, do you know how much music and movies that could hold? a lot !!! :biglaugh:

Now if we assume Jesus Christ’s physical body was perfect in every respect – perhaps we could up the overall capacity and “processor speed” somewhat – but I wonder – if God is infinite and all knowing – then how could the body and mind of Jesus Christ “house” all that? Again, just speculation here – maybe Luke 3:22 giving the account of the spirit descending on him like a dove might be relevant to understanding how there was a way to exceed his physical and mental limitations…After all I Corinthians 5:19 does say that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself…

...circling back to the issue – the Word became flesh – how does that work? How can that which is invisible and perfect be revealed to man? I don’t know…but if I had to guess I’d say God is never hampered by what "limited resources" (people) he has to work with – like Paul’s thorn in the flesh (whatever it was) 8 Three times I pleaded with the Lord about this, that it should leave me. 9 But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 10 For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities. For when I am weak, then I am strong. II Corinthians 12: 8 – 10.

 

One way or another God managed to get his spiritual message across to our physical world; whether it was in oral or written form…or in the person of Jesus Christ.

Edited by T-Bone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, T-Bone said:

On the spiritual vs physical you might be right; me on the other hand - a few years ago, I did some reading on superstring theories and other dimensions – so I kind of went in a different direction; if there’s anything to that stuff – it’s possible the spiritual realm is wrapped up within our physical realm…multiple dimensions folded up on each other – some theories speculate there might be at least 10 dimensions ( the basic theory suggests there’s 3D regular space + 6D hyperspace + 1 of time) that make up the fabric of reality …so maybe the spiritual realm is right here and now

Okay, seems I need to clarify something.  When I spoke of a (spiritual) reality "beyond" the reality that is common to all men, I don't think (and didn't mean) that it is on some far off ethereal place in heaven or anything apart from or removed from what is common to all.  The context of the statement concerns itself with how reality (whatever it is) is perceived.  So, it's not necessarily "a different direction" that you went in... maybe just a significantly less complicated one.  For instance, I don't see or think or speak of the world around us in 3 (or 4) dimensional terms.  Generally speaking, thoughts of it in my mind are molded into "a view"... which seems to be best stated as "a picture" of what is real.  Likewise, regardless of whether "the spiritual perspective" encompasses 6, 8 or ten (pick any number you want) dimensions, it still makes sense that they would all be molded together into "a picture" of what is real.  What I don't see, is some number of other ways to bring it all together, or to see or think of it (i.e., reality.)   

13 hours ago, T-Bone said:

I’m not sure how inspiration or revelation worked in the authors – but I don’t picture them as being perfect or impartial conduits – in some trance-like state as God took over and flipped the override switch on their cognitive abilities –

Nor am I sure. Nor do I believe it was through some "trance-like" state.  And while I don't picture the men themselves as being perfect, I can picture their initial revealing of it being exactly how God intended for it to be revealed (regardless of any other conditions or circumstances surrounding the man at the time.)

13 hours ago, T-Bone said:

What if Jesus Christ was a hybrid – being both human and divine…

Then what (if any) change do you think happened in (or with) his resurrection?

 

Edited by TLC
more or less the same, eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, TLC said:

...(Snip)

Then what (if any) change do you think happened in (or with) his resurrection?

 

Oh yeah - I think there was quite a significant change - in ways that I can’t even imagine! ...please review first part of my post that got into superstring theory and our new bodies...of course - there might also be other things that changed differently for Christ just because of who he is.

Edited by T-Bone
Clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, T-Bone said:

Oh yeah - I think there was quite a significant change - in ways that I can’t even imagine! ...please review first part of my post that got into superstring theory and our new bodies...of course - there might also be other things that changed differently for Christ just because of who he is.

So how is going through walls any different than walking on water?  I don't really see that you're making any distinction by pointing at this superstring theory you mentioned.

Edited by TLC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn’t know since I’ve never walked through walls or on water....however if I were to hazard a guess - before Christ had his resurrected body miracles could have been accomplished in any number of miraculous ways - for instance to walk on water: change the consistency of the surface water to support his weight, change the molecular weight of his body, generate some gravity-defying force, strap on Iron Man’s repulsor-jet boots (hidden under his robe of course - and he remembers to bring an extra pair for Peter too :rolleyes:).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, T-Bone said:
2 hours ago, TLC said:

...(Snip)

Then what (if any) change do you think happened in (or with) his resurrection?

 

Oh yeah - I think there was quite a significant change - in ways that I can’t even imagine! ...

Then why suppose any change is "significant" if you (apparently) don't know, can't guess, or can't even imagine what changed? 

(sorry to be so blunt, but certain things you said just don't fit together or make any sense, and I'm not sure of any better way to point it out to you...)

I could be wrong, but I'm guessing that you probably accept (or believe in) some sort of pre-existence of Christ.  Yes?
(I'm trying to figure out how you might have arrived at this "hybrid" idea of Jesus Christ in your mind, and what that might actually mean to you ...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

your question about how he did miraculous things kind of puzzles me ; and makes me want to ask you what difference does it really make as to HOW Jesus Christ was able to do miraculous things before or after his resurrection ...he’s Jesus Christ! Just curious - Do you have an issue with that - or why is it so hard to believe he could do all that?

 

I simply imagine the changes to his physical body after the resurrection were quite significant- going on the testimony in the Gospels and what Paul said in Corinthians about the new body. I assume you are familiar with those details, no?

 

You are correct in assuming I believe in the pre-existence of Christ - as conveyed in John 1 - in the beginning was the word & etc. as far as being a hybrid - i am simply speculating what John 1:14 means by “the only begotten” the Greek is monogenes - which can mean “one of a kind” or “the one and only”. Now because it says “the word became flesh” I see a twofold entity - or hybrid - a dual nature - - Jesus Christ - who is the word - became flesh -  preexistent implied from John 1:1 - - human existence implied from verse 14.

What does that mean to me? Jesus Christ is everything to me! he is my Lord and Savior !!!

Edited by T-Bone
A lotta some more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, T-Bone said:

your question about how he did miraculous things kind of puzzles me ; and makes me want to ask you what difference does it really make as to HOW Jesus Christ was able to do miraculous things before or after his resurrection ...he’s Jesus Christ! Just curious - Do you have an issue with that - or why is it so hard to believe he could do all that?

I wasn't so much interested in how he did it as I was in your thoughts on how or why it was any different from what he did after his resurrection.  Which, I supposed, would help reveal what, if any, change you think did (or didn't) occur as a result of his resurrection.  For the record, I have no issue whatsoever with believing any of the miraculous things before his resurrection.  Nor do I have any issue believing what he did after his resurrection, regardless of whether they do or don't fit into that exact same category.  The only difference (for me) that it makes, is the (rather stunning, mind numbing) change that I believe happened at his resurrection.  Mind numbing... because of how it is so easily and so often subdued, skipped over, or completely missed.

1 hour ago, T-Bone said:

I simply imagine the changes to his physical body after the resurrection were quite significant- going on the testimony in the Gospels and what Paul said in Corinthians about the new body. I assume you are familiar with those details, no?

Quite familiar.  And yourself... by any chance are you as familiar with this line (and its meaning), from Acts 13:33?

 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

1 hour ago, T-Bone said:

You are correct in assuming I believe in the pre-existence of Christ - as conveyed in John 1 - in the beginning was the word & etc. as far as being a hybrid - i am simply speculating what John 1:14 means by “the only begotten” the Greek is monogenes - which can mean “one of a kind” or “the one and only”.

Well then, that's no surprise.  Like it probably doesn't surprise you that I don't... as I see his birth and life before Calgary being like (though, not exactly) that of Adam, and I relate his becoming (the only) "begotten" specifically to the day of his resurrection and his being the firstborn (and only one thus far) raised (such as he was) from the dead.  After which he most certainly is "one of a kind."  In light of that, and from this perspective, he's passed on... from what Adam may have once been, unto a new, never been before, second man (aka, "the Lord from heaven.")

Edited by TLC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess I should ask what you think Acts 13:33 means...I can only assume - since you have debated other points I brought up - you might think his resurrection had something to do with his Sonship - but you can clarify or correct me if I’ve got it wrong...if that is what you are getting at - that only after the resurrection did he have Sonship in the true sense - then I would disagree.

V33 seems to carry the idea of an already present reality being manifested for all to see...similar to Romans 1:4 - he was DECLARED (or proved) to be the son of God with power...it says declared - not made...he was the son of God from the beginning of his earthly life - as John 1:14 indicates ...and also see Isaiah 9:6  - unto us  a child is BORN, unto us a SON is given...

 

So let me know why you brought up Acts 13:33

Edited by T-Bone
The part you ordered is on the slow-boat from China

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, T-Bone said:

Guess I should ask what you think Acts 13:33 means...I can only assume - since you have debated other points I brought up - you might think his resurrection had something to do with his Sonship - but you can clarify or correct me if I’ve got it wrong...

Sonship, but in what sense?  (seems you left that part off...)

The language of Acts 13:33 actually appears to be quite clear in this regard, in my opinion.   It calls to mind a specific prophecy that was written in the second psalm (Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee ) and  tells us the exactly event (i.e., in resurrection day) which fulfilled that very prophecy .  But, you obviously don't agree. 

42 minutes ago, T-Bone said:

V33 seems to carry the idea of an already present reality being manifested for all to see..

So, it appears that we have arrived at an impasse... as this, for me, is an irreducible belief.  For I have, for a long time now (and far too many years), seen the simplicity and beauty of it fit perfectly with all else that I know and understand of scripture... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmmm....on Sonship i left off the part about in what sense ...???...- Well ok - whatever floats your boat.

 

Feel free to clarify in what sense you’re talking about...

Edited by T-Bone
Maybe I ordered the wrong part from the wrong company on the wrong day for the wrong customer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, T-Bone said:

hmmmm....on Sonship i left off the part about in what sense ...???...- Well ok - whatever floats your boat.

 

Feel free to clarify in what sense you’re talking about...

in the sense of "This day have I begotten thee."

Do you suppose that the life in the resurrected Christ was the very same life that was in the blood (which was poured out at Calgary)?
If so, why is there no mention of there being any blood in his new body after resurrection?
If not, what happened to that life that was in the blood? And where did the life that replaced or superseded it come from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok - isn’t Acts 13:33 referring to Psalm 2...which appears to be a song celebrating the king’s victory over the enemies. The resurrection is perhaps an antitype or symbol - in that like Psalm 2 is a song celebrating the victory of the Son of God...maybe along the same lines as a reigning king who finally vanquishes all the enemies over his countrymen and to the people he has proved his mettle - he truly is their king

if you’re trying to prove Jesus wasn’t considered the Son of God until after he was resurrected - you may want to consider passages in the Gospels where a voice from heaven declared he was the Son of God.

 

As far as what was the life-force in Christ’s new body or it’s origin - - I don’t know - but feel free to share what you think...anything goes here.

Edited by T-Bone
Shoulda shopped at Amazon Prime instead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, T-Bone said:

if you’re trying to prove Jesus wasn’t considered the Son of God until after he was resurrected - you may want to consider passages in the Gospels where a voice from heaven declared he was the Son of God.

Nope. I never said (and don't think) that.
(And any effort to move it over to that comes across as little more than setting up the ole' straw man punching bag.  Seriously? After all that I've posted in various places around here - that I'm sure you've read at least once -  you really think I'd think like that?)

52 minutes ago, T-Bone said:

As far as what was the life-force in Christ’s new body or it’s origin - - I don’t know - but feel free to share what you think...anything goes here.

Well, I've actually said or alluded to it some number of times already.

Whatever it is, it is clearly and plainly marked out as being "brand new."
Never been before.
First (and only one thus far) of its kind.
"Birthed" (or begotten) of God for the very first time on "this day" of the resurrection.
It's stunning.  So "mind numbing" that most simply pass over or miss the significance of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here's another thought for you:

that which is born of the flesh (think, in Bethlehem) is flesh; and
that which is born of the Spirit (think, resurrection day) is spirit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, TLC said:

here's another thought for you:

that which is born of the flesh (think, in Bethlehem) is flesh; and
that which is born of the Spirit (think, resurrection day) is spirit.

Yeah but then there’s Luke 1:35

And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, TLC said:

Nope. I never said (and don't think) that.
(And any effort to move it over to that comes across as little more than setting up the ole' straw man punching bag.  Seriously? After all that I've posted in various places around here - that I'm sure you've read at least once -  

Well guess either you were not clear or I’m dense - probably a combination of the 2 :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×