Chili

Exactly and we are [still] created in the image of God. Yes, just as we are our father's son and a chip of the old block. This relation exists in our own mind where we are predestined by the father (our sub conscious mind).In a world of absolutes called heaven.Exactly, until the convergence of the right and left brain wherein we are divided. This [divine] union would make the HS redundant. This is where the veil is rent and so on.

Thomas II

:wave: High fives!!!

Chili

It is just that simple. :wave:

wyrdwillows

Hmmm. I take it this is one of those issues that can only be solved by the answer "mystery." Which also explains why [insert non-Christian god here] has allowed Christianity to develop for so long without stopping it.

Here is JP Holding's take on the issue. He basically says that the Son and Spirit are in fact subordinate to the Father in some way or another, and there is also talk of voluntary "emptying" of divine powers, such that their dealings with the Earth do not destroy it. The Son's ignorance of the end times is because the Son is the "Word" of the Father, and since the Father has not yet spoken the time of the second coming, the Son can't possibly know it (since the Son himself is the Word). I think that's how it goes... you may want to look at the page yourself.

Ultimately, no matter how you dress it up, the Father is superior to the Son and Spirit. Logically, he has to be. Holding says that if the Father disappeared, Jesus would cease to exist. Presumably, then, if the Son were destroyed somehow, the Father would be unaffected, at least in terms of existence.

Unfortunately, my interest in this topic has gone down considerably since it mainly seems to hinge upon semantics and definitions of what it means to be "God." It all seems unimportant somehow. But if I had to answer the question: who is more God? The Father or Son? I would have to go with the Father.

Chili

Yes the father is greater but his actions are contingent upon ours in the form of justice. This same is true in our civil courts where judges are responders to the stuff we feed them except that here we are dealing with our own integrity wherein our inner man gains recognition by God. Hence the "born from above" is a faith only issue that is incipient from God via the Annunciation by Gabriel who is God's only angel and only God's angel (or Mary would have to be a virgin at least twice in the same life-time). In other words, metamorphosis comes our way in response to our actions in Gods time.

NOGO

Christ is a title not a name.
It means the "anointed one"
David was anointed.

1 Sam 16:13-14
Then Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the midst of his brothers; and the Spirit of the LORD came mightily upon David from that day forward. And Samuel arose and went to Ramah.
Now the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul,

With the anointing came the spirit of the lord which departed from the ex-king. Compare with Jesus' baptism

Mark 1:10-12
10 Immediately coming up out of the water, He saw the heavens opening, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon Him;
12 Immediately the Spirit impelled Him to go out into the wilderness.


You are confused. A doctrine is what every member of a religious group must believe whether it makes sense or not. And usually it doesn't.

Dogma is a doctrine.

Chili

Christmas is about the birth of Christ and not Jesus. The Christ identity is the divine nature of Jesus who himself was also human.

Yes but my distinction was made to show that dogma is like an icon in its likeness of reality which is not necessarily true about a doctrine. But you could be right.

Myrion

So basically a god divided cannot stand.

NOGO

Dogma has nothing to do with icons.
Instead of telling me "I could be right" why don't you spend two minutes and look it up and then you will know.

Christmas is a fairy tale.
As I told you Christ is a title given to the one selected by God to lead his people, at least if we were to believe the bible. That took place when the person was an adult. For example Saul, David and others. Jesus received the spirit at his baptism so I conclude that the author intented this to be his anointing. Therefore Jesus could not have been born with the title of Christ.
That is part of the fairy tale. That is the reason Matthew's birth story is so different than Luke's. They are both fanciful creations.

NOGO

Dogma.

If I were to take this seriously I would say that Jesus received this Divine entity at his baptism and not at his birth.