Grandstand discussion: "Ghost's Views on The Nature of Christ"

[nicholsmom]

Steko--Even the Chalcedonian creed really does not say all the weird stuff that is in AMR's post about Jesus and Man having two spirits. That is what gives me heartburn. It just sounds very bizarre to me.

I have no problem with Jesus being Son of God and Son of Man.

How can He do that? There are only two ways that I can see for Him to be both god and man:
1) half God, half man :shocked:
2) fully God, fully man - which is a supernatural paradox, that is, only possible for God

Do you see another way?

 

[ghost]

But you did protest, ghost. You claimed that you are no Docetist, in so many words. So I think it's rather generous of AMR to focus the one-on-one on the core of the Docetism heresy which, as I read it (though I'm no theologian) is the same as the core of the Apolllinarian heresy and the reason that Docetism is related to, or draws its heretical teachings from Apollinarianism.

There is absolutely no affiliation between Apollinarianism and Docetism. They are not even close. Again, it would be like him accusing me of being a Mormon, and then accusing me of being a Jehovah's Witness. The similarities on lie in the fact that they both teach a false idea about the identity of Jesus.

It simply amazes me how ignorant everyone on this site is.

So, partly because you hate the theological labels, partly because you, like any individual, cannot be fully pigeon-holed (are not in total agreement with any one theology or doctrine but your own), AMR has reduced the argument to the one heresy common to these two that you seem to share.

That's not even close to what happened. AMR changed the subject.

All he had to do is say... "I want to discuss your beliefs about the nature of Jesus. That you teach that Jesus does not have two natures". He did not do that. He has accused me of two beliefs (Docetism and the Keswick movement) in which I have no affiliation. He makes those two accusations in nearly every post where he speaks to me or about me. He offered to prove that I teach those things in light of my denials. I agreed and even gave him the choice to discuss either one in a One on One debate.

He then started the debate accusing me of something completely unrelated. And no one on this site has the integrity or intelligence to hold him accountable.

Are you or are you not willing to discuss this one aspect of Docetism (the nature of Christ)?

Absolutely! But, that is not what he is discussing. He changed the subject. How dense are you?

 

[graceandpeace]

I am very interested in the truth. I think that Calvinism is a distortion of the truth of the truth. I think that some of your interpretations of the gospel are also distortions of the truth. I think that the one-on-one will be an interesting discussion but I seriously doubt it will end in a definitive statement of what the truth really is.

That is just my opinion because I am also rather sure that some of my understanding regarding the truth of the Gospel is also distorted. There is no single man nor organized religion on Earth today that has perfect understanding of the truth. To claim otherwise is foolishness.

I agree, and it is pride in man that would claim otherwise. Knowledge puffeth up, everyone wants to believe that their form of 'knowledge' of the gospel is THE TRUTH; and then they want to judge the others outside of their form of truth as unsaved.. I think Jesus has a different idea......instead of judging us by knowledge, He judges our hearts...as we see written. Sincerity goes a long way with God, for love covers the multitude of sin...if we simply believe in Jesus Christ and that He died for our sins...and, was raised the third day; to glory, in order to make the way open for us, too. (He never lost the power to take His life back again...for He was God, in whom all power dwelled...this to me means, He could never of sinned.) Even in His fully man, state, what man seems to forget, is that at the SAME time, He was FULLY GOD. God cannot sin, and God cannot be tempted with sin.

Most of the time, those whom uphold 'knowledge' as the way to be saved; miss the forest for the trees...I know, I once did it, too.

There comes a time in a person's walk with God that you ultimately have to admit you do not know it all, and it is then you can find peace, among men.

Let God judge, I say; and stop making His simple and basic message such a hard thing to figure out.

Men and their creeds...that judge sincere hearts as outside of the faith that saves....get's on me nerves....:drum:

 

[ghost]

From Here

Docetism, (from Greek dokein, “to seem”), Christian heresy and one of the earliest Christian sectarian doctrines, affirming that Christ did not have a real or natural body during his life on earth but only an apparent or phantom one. Though its incipient forms are alluded to in the New Testament, such as in the Letters of John (e.g., 1 John 4:1–3; 2 John 7), Docetism became more fully developed as an important doctrinal position of Gnosticism, a religious dualist system of belief arising in the 2nd century ad which held that matter was evil and the spirit good and claimed that salvation was attained only through esoteric knowledge, or gnosis. The heresy developed from speculations about the imperfection or essential impurity of matter. More thoroughgoing Docetists asserted that Christ was born without any participation of matter and that all the acts and sufferings of his life, including the Crucifixion, were mere appearances. They consequently denied Christ’s Resurrection and Ascension into heaven. Milder Docetists attributed to Christ an ethereal and heavenly body but disagreed on the degree to which it shared the real actions and sufferings of Christ. Docetism was attacked by all opponents of Gnosticism, especially by Bishop Ignatius of Antioch in the 2nd century.

Here is one definition of Docetism, which is inline with many other definitions as I will take the next several days to provide to all of you morons.

AMR accused me of teaching these false doctrines. I agreed to defend myself against his accusation that I teach these false doctrines. He changed the subject, and no one on this site has the integrity to hold him accountable.

 

[Sherman]

How can He do that? There are only two ways that I can see for Him to be both god and man:
1) half God, half man :shocked:
2) fully God, fully man - which is a supernatural paradox, that is, only possible for God

Do you see another way?

Number one is just bone headed. 2 is correct. Have two souls is not a perquisite for 2 to be correct.:dizzy: That is just bizarre human reasoning. People need to stop trying to anyalize God and just take His word for what it says.:mmph:

Here is my belief--Jesus is God incarnate. He did not have a human sin nature.

 

[graceandpeace]

It has been my experience that we all get 'judged' as teaching false doctrine, by those whom do not read and comprehend our words in context of what and how we would believe them in our own mind.

Everyone on this board is guilty of it; at one time or other, in mho..IF they have posted on this board and been a part of a discussion at all.

If we could all agree we ALL do this; this place would be a better place, in mho.


We all get mad and leave, then we come back, LOL.

 

[ghost]

It has been my experience that we all get 'judged' as teaching false doctrine, by those whom do not read and comprehend our words in context of what and how we would believe them in our own mind.

That's fine, but that's not what AMR is doing.

 

[bybee]

:

The post proves that AMR never mentioned Apolloinarianism, which is what he chose to accuse me of teaching in the one on one. The post you quoted discusses ONLY Keswick, Docetism or Calvinism.

In the chatbox AMR chose to discuss Docetism READ THE POST, IDIOT. He has not done that. That is what we agreed to.

What's amazing to me is how many of you people on TOL side with messengers instead of the truth. I find that very interesting considering that you all put such an emphasis on character, and then you prove yourselves to have none.

Not only do I have character but, I am a character, and so are you.

 

[ghost]

Evidence # 2 Here

Docetism was an error with several variations concerning the nature of Christ. Generally, it taught that Jesus only appeared to have a body, that he was not really incarnate, (Greek, "dokeo" = "to seem"). This error developed out of the dualistic philosophy which viewed matter as inherently evil, that God could not be associated with matter, and that God, being perfect and infinite, could not suffer. Therefore, God as the word, could not have become flesh per John 1:1,14, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God...And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us.. " This denial of a true incarnation meant that Jesus did not truly suffer on the cross and that He did not rise from the dead.

The basic principle of Docetism was refuted by the Apostle John in 1 John 4:2-3. "By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God; 3and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; and this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world." Also, 2 John 7, "For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist."

Ignatius of Antioch (died 98/117) and Irenaeus (115-190), and Hippolatus (170-235) wrote against the error in the early part of the second century.

Docetism was condemned at the Council of Chalcedon in 451.

 

[ghost]

"The first known advocate of docetism was Cerinthus (circa 85 AD). He held that Jesus differed from other men only in that He was better and wiser than they, and that the divine Christ descended upon Him at the baptism and left Him at the cross."

Based on what AMR says, it would appear that he is much closer to Docetism than I am.

I am almost certain that you misunderstood gr. God, the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, in no way died on the Cross. Who did die? The Son of Man, Jesus, the man.

Gr, are you claiming that the Son of God, who is God, died on the cross? I hope not.

 

[Sherman]

Originally Posted by Ask Mr. Religion
I am almost certain that you misunderstood gr. God, the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, in no way died on the Cross. Who did die? The Son of Man, Jesus, the man.

Gr, are you claiming that the Son of God, who is God, died on the cross? I hope not.

I think we just entered the twilight zone! I cannot see any scriptural evidence for this kind of hair splitting. Again it's this bizarre two spirits doctrine rearing its head. :dead: It creates all kinds of weird conclusions.

 

[Nang]

Originally Posted by Ask Mr. Religion
I am almost certain that you misunderstood gr. God, the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, in no way died on the Cross. Who did die? The Son of Man, Jesus, the man.

Gr, are you claiming that the Son of God, who is God, died on the cross? I hope not.

I think we just entered the twilight zone! I cannot see any scriptural evidence for this kind of hair splitting. Again it's this bizarre two spirits doctrine rearing its head. :dead: It creates all kinds of weird conclusions.

This is not "hair-splitting" but a delving into a study of Christology, which is sorely needed on this ~theological~ website.

A denial of the humanity of Christ is as serious as denying His divinity.

Jesus Christ died on the cross as the Son of Man; Mediator and representative of His people; bearing their sins in His BODY.

He suffered a substitutional judgment for their sins and a substitional death in their stead, in His BODY.

Then by His own power, He overcame death and resurrected from the grave, in His BODY.

Meanwhile, God the Son remained in paradise with the thief who died on his cross the same day the Son of Man died on His cross.

This is the gospel of Jesus Christ, people. We all should be eager to learn what we can about this miracle of grace, and be less eager to ignorantly impose our finite thinking upon the greatest work of God Almighty!

I consider it very sinful for any to attempt to distract from learning about our Lord, who gave His human life for us humans, by silly whining, complaining, and throwing up smoke screens in order to avoid discussing vital biblical truths.

Nang

 

[Sherman]

Nang I am not denying the humanity of Christ--I am denying the two spirits doctrine. Jesus never had a corruptible mind like you or I. He didn't have two souls--no one does. This whole argument stems from a human attempt to understand the dichotomy of Jesus becoming flesh. It's like a baby trying to analyse a car. We won't have all the answers until we get to heaven.

I just don't accept the notion that anyone can have two souls or spirits. There is one caveat though, There is a second Spirit, though and I wasn't born with Him--the Holy Spirit. He came into my life when I accepted Jesus as my Savior.

 

[Nang]

Nang I am not denying the humanity of Christ--I am denying the two spirits doctrine.

(I consider the spirit and the soul to be the same.)

Jesus Christ was filled with the Holy Spirit, plus He possessed a human spirit. Both were in union in His one Person.

Jesus never had a corruptible mind like you or I.

Agreed.

He didn't have two souls--no one does.

Perhaps this was the purpose of the incarnation? To reconcile and harmonize the human spirit with the Spirit of God?

I just don't accept the notion that anyone can have two souls or spirits. There is one caveat though, There is a second Spirit, though and I wasn't born with Him--the Holy Spirit. He came into my life when I accepted Jesus as my Savior.

Indeed. You remain one and the same person, but now your human spirit abides alongside with the Holy Spirit.

This is why a serious discussion of the nature of Jesus Christ is so important for us to grasp.

There are some wonderful truths for all of us to learn, if we can just get past ourselves and our prideful egos.

Nang

 

[ghost]

Nang I am not denying the humanity of Christ--I am denying the two spirits doctrine. Jesus never had a corruptible mind like you or I. He didn't have two souls--no one does. This whole argument stems from a human attempt to understand the dichotomy of Jesus becoming flesh. It's like a baby trying to analyse a car. We won't have all the answers until we get to heaven.

I just don't accept the notion that anyone can have two souls or spirits. There is one caveat though, There is a second Spirit, though and I wasn't born with Him--the Holy Spirit. He came into my life when I accepted Jesus as my Savior.

You are absolutely correct. They do teach that Jesus has two minds and two spirits.

Jesus is every bit as much a human man as the rest of us, but not double-minded or multiple spirits. They would have you believe that when Jesus died on the cross, the one spirit (as God the Son) departed the other spirit (as Son of Man) and only the man tasted death, not God. They have two distinct persons in one body, which logically leads to Jesus being two distinct persons in one body for all of eternity. The reason they worship a double-minded Jesus, is because they are double-minded themselves.

 

[Guyver]

Well basically ghost is paranoid of AMR's intellect. And instead of actually defending himself against AMR's accusations by spending some time reading up on the the things he's being accused of and thinking about how his views may differ, he's simply denying the claims by attacking AMR's character and motives.

I partly agree with this. While the debate itself is not that compelling to me....one of the participants suffers from APD(antisocial personality disorder) and displays a classic textbook example of sociopathy.

So, it's interesting to observe the interactions from that standpoint.

 

[godrulz]

Godrulz,

Those verses do not prove the bizarre theology of Man and Jesus having two spirits.

The Two spirits idea is greek in origin from Plato. It doesn't come from the bible.

He has two natures, not two human or two divine spirits. He is fully God, fully man, one person with two natures, not two spirits and two minds (Schizo).

 

[godrulz]

The post proves that AMR never mentioned Apolloinarianism, which is what he chose to accuse me of teaching in the one on one. The post you quoted discusses ONLY Keswick, Docetism or Calvinism.

In the chatbox AMR chose to discuss Docetism READ THE POST, IDIOT. He has not done that. That is what we agreed to.

What's amazing to me is how many of you people on TOL side with messengers instead of the truth. I find that very interesting considering that you all put such an emphasis on character, and then you prove yourselves to have none.

In the past, he has labeled you as Apo (which you admit is partially true). His Docetic accusation is newer and unfair in my mind.

 

[ghost]

He has two natures, not two human or two divine spirits. He is fully God, fully man, one person with two natures, not two spirits and two minds (Schizo).

Define your version of "nature"

 

[ghost]

In the past, he has labeled you as Apo (which you admit is partially true). His Docetic accusation if newer and unfair in my mind.

Thank you William.