Heresy?

[Billy Cox]

He couldn't because He wouldn't. He would never leave the Father's will and thus He couldn't save Himself(because it would me leaving the will of the Father). In His flesh he didn't want to go to the cross, but in Spirit he did. Spirit wins. Semantics.

As far as heretics of old I care not. The neo-heretics are the ones that concern me.

If you believe that Jesus on the cross was man and not God, then you are one of those neo-heretics. That should concern you.

[Randy Wise]

He couldn't because He wouldn't. He would never leave the Father's will and thus He couldn't save Himself(because it would me leaving the will of the Father). In His flesh he didn't want to go to the cross, but in Spirit he did. Spirit wins. Semantics.

As far as heretics of old I care not. The neo-heretics are the ones that concern me.

I think His body (flesh) doesn't have a mind. Jesus wasn't looking forward to being tortured to death. Very reasonable if you ask me as human bodies experience pain. But Jesus kept in mind the Fathers will not His own will.

I do also believe as you that Jesus could call on the Father and have 12 legions of angels at His disposal. Matthew 26:52-54

52“Put your sword back in its place,”</SPAN> Jesus said to him,(peter) “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. 53Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?</SPAN> 54But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?”</SPAN>

[Randy Wise]

If you believe that Jesus on the cross was man and not God, then you are one of those neo-heretics. That should concern you.

I don't believe Dale stated Jesus was JUST a man even though the body He wore was fully human.

R.

[Kevin Rector]

Yes, my point being, that in a discussion of atonement, this concept plays center stage for the "Protestant" side.

Yeah, except it doesn't for all Protestants (maybe not even most Protestants). I'm a Protestant and his description of the "Protestant" understanding of atonement is NOTHING like what I believe.

[Benjamin Burch]

Yeah, except it doesn't for all Protestants (maybe not even most Protestants). I'm a Protestant and his description of the "Protestant" understanding of atonement is NOTHING like what I believe.

If you don't count Anglicans as Protestants, but as Anglicans, I can guarantee you that it is true for most Protestants.

[Benjamin Burch]

I don't believe Dale stated Jesus was JUST a man even though the body He wore was fully human.

I think His body (flesh) doesn't have a mind.

Body he wore!?!?!?!?!
Flesh doesn't have a mind!?!?!?!?

While you may not mean to blatantly state Appolinarian doctrine, I would suggest taking a bit more care in constructing what you mean, in any way other than the way you have stated it here. As it is here, this is Appolinarian heresy right out of the textbook.

[Shea Zellweger]

Body he wore!?!?!?!?!
Flesh doesn't have a mind!?!?!?!?

While you may not mean to blatantly state Appolinarian doctrine, I would suggest taking a bit more care in constructing what you mean, in any way other than the way you have stated it here. As it is here, this is Appolinarian heresy right out of the textbook.

Just a Caution: Hans, Randy, and some others went 100 rounds on this particular distinction a few years back (before the crash), and couldn't really reach an agreement (I think the thread was ultimately closed). I'd HIGHLY recommend starting another thread, rather than taking this one down that particular rabbit trail.

Hans- the simple answer to your question is that any view which does not uphold Jesus as 100% Human AND 100% God is by definition heresy within Nicene Christianity. However, the dual-nature of Christ and the nature of the Trinity are both such great mysteries of the faith that nearly everyone has some measure of heresy in his/her understanding thereof, and every attempt to explain these natures in any kind of detail tends to end up being rejected as heresy by the Church. So, while you were well within the bounds of orthodoxy, and your critic's statements were not, I'd recommend getting used to hearing unorthodox views on what, exactly, Jesus was/is, as they are, in my experience, more common than orthodox ones.

[Todd Erickson]

Another way of saying what Shea just said that I've heard repeatedly is that any attempt to explain either A. the trinity or B. the divinity and humanity of Christ enters into heresy within a step or two. We are forced to accept them as mystery, because they are too dangerous to try to explain.

Which doesn't mean it isn't worth continuing to try. *grin*

[Benjamin Burch]

Just a Caution: Hans, Randy, and some others went 100 rounds on this particular distinction a few years back (before the crash), and couldn't really reach an agreement (I think the thread was ultimately closed). I'd HIGHLY recommend starting another thread, rather than taking this one down that particular rabbit trail.

Hans- the simple answer to your question is that any view which does not uphold Jesus as 100% Human AND 100% God is by definition heresy within Nicene Christianity. However, the dual-nature of Christ and the nature of the Trinity are both such great mysteries of the faith that nearly everyone has some measure of heresy in his/her understanding thereof, and every attempt to explain these natures in any kind of detail tends to end up being rejected as heresy by the Church. So, while you were well within the bounds of orthodoxy, and your critic's statements were not, I'd recommend getting used to hearing unorthodox views on what, exactly, Jesus was/is, as they are, in my experience, more common than orthodox ones.

I was giving some advice and making a statement, and am more than comfortable ending my end of that conversation with the single post. Thank you for the caution.

[Randy Wise]

Body he wore!?!?!?!?!
Flesh doesn't have a mind!?!?!?!?

While you may not mean to blatantly state Appolinarian doctrine, I would suggest taking a bit more care in constructing what you mean, in any way other than the way you have stated it here. As it is here, this is Appolinarian heresy right out of the textbook.

I hold that Jesus is the Son not a God who always was. Gods Firstborn. I also hold that Jesus is all that the Father is because God gave the Spirit without limit to Jesus. "The fullness was pleased to dwell in Him" I can't speak to the quality of the Him without the fullness as in lower soul but God never left Jesus so its a moot point. Jesus taught the Father was in Him. They are and always shall be one. But also Jesus was, is and always shall be Gods Son. That is why Jesus calls the Father His God.

Yes my mind won't change on that.

Randy

[Benjamin Burch]

I hold that Jesus is the Son not a God who always was. Gods Firstborn. I also hold that Jesus is all that the Father is because God gave the Spirit without limit to Jesus. "The fullness was pleased to dwell in Him" I can't speak to the quality of the Him without the fullness as in lower soul but God never left Jesus so its a moot point. Jesus taught the Father was in Him. They are and always shall be one. But also Jesus was, is and always shall be Gods Son. That is why Jesus calls the Father His God.

Yes my mind won't change on that.

Randy

Wow. Okay. That places you firmly outside of orthodox Nicene-Constantinople Christianity in a way that the Nestorians would even be uncomfortable with. Fair enough, I will leave it at that! Thank you for your explanation, Randy.

[Randy Wise]

Wow. Okay. That places you firmly outside of orthodox Nicene-Constantinople Christianity in a way that the Nestorians would even be uncomfortable with. Fair enough, I will leave it at that! Thank you for your explanation, Randy.

I wasn't there but my vote would have been Jesus is the firstborn of God.

Randy

[Todd Erickson]

I wasn't there but my vote would have been Jesus is the firstborn of God.

Randy

"firstborn of God" seems to mean something very different to you than it did to them.

[Billy Cox]

I hold that Jesus is the Son not a God who always was. Gods Firstborn. I also hold that Jesus is all that the Father is because God gave the Spirit without limit to Jesus. "The fullness was pleased to dwell in Him" I can't speak to the quality of the Him without the fullness as in lower soul but God never left Jesus so its a moot point. Jesus taught the Father was in Him. They are and always shall be one. But also Jesus was, is and always shall be Gods Son. That is why Jesus calls the Father His God.

Yes my mind won't change on that.

Randy

Fortunately for you, the church doesn't murder heretics these days.

[Randy Wise]

Fortunately for you, the church doesn't murder heretics these days.

No one who belonged to Jesus would have murdered me in any age.

Randy

[Randy Wise]

"firstborn of God" seems to mean something very different to you than it did to them.

Maybe as my source isn't history but the NT.

Randy

[Benjamin Burch]

Maybe as my source isn't history but the NT.

Randy

Well, so is their source.... point being, as I've said before, this is why there is something called "heresy." The Church, together, as the Body of Christ, is the final arbiter of Scripture, not any individual.

[Paul DeBaufer]

Well, so is their source.... point being, as I've said before, this is why there is something called "heresy." The Church, together, as the Body of Christ, is the final arbiter of Scripture, not any individual.

Maybe it's time that the church re-examined their interpretations. I mean that should always be an on-going effort IMHO. Like your premise in another thread, the one that says that the Bible is wrong concerning the sinfulness of homosexuality, that new times lend themselves to new interpretations. I think that the Bible itself points to this.

[Benjamin Burch]

Maybe it's time that the church re-examined their interpretations. I mean that should always be an on-going effort IMHO. Like your premise in another thread, the one that says that the Bible is wrong concerning the sinfulness of homosexuality, that new times lend themselves to new interpretations. I think that the Bible itself points to this.

I can agree with that, but this happens anyways. The Church is always doing this, but change takes a long time -- and that's a good thing. I do not think, however, that the issues of heresy (Trinity) should be up for discussion.

[Paul DeBaufer]

I can agree with that, but this happens anyways. The Church is always doing this, but change takes a long time -- and that's a good thing. I do not think, however, that the issues of heresy (Trinity) should be up for discussion.

Is Randy denying the Trinity or is he dancing with denying Christ's full divinity while incarnate?

[Benjamin Burch]

Is Randy denying the Trinity or is he dancing with denying Christ's full divinity while incarnate?

Both. He is espousing a combination of Arianism and Appolinarianism. Appolinarianism downllays the human element in Jesus, most particularly in terms of the human brain/intellect. That is, the Logos didn't become flesh, simply occupied it Arianism says Jesus is not co-eternal with the Father, but instead created by/after the Father.

[Randy Wise]

Is Randy denying the Trinity or is he dancing with denying Christ's full divinity while incarnate?

Let me know too

Is Jesus God?

Yes, He is all that the Father is.
No ,He has always been the Son. Firstborn of all creation.
Jesus never dies as He lives forever by the living Father in Him.

Who occupied that human body? The Jesus who was. (The Son). The Father was in Him doing His work. So we can see "God with us through the Son"

Father, SON, Holy Spirit (Trinity)

Randy

[Todd Erickson]

No one who belonged to Jesus would have murdered me in any age.

Randy

I would argue that many followers of christ have murdered each other over the ages, sadly enough. Conviction is a **** of a drug, to paraphrase a wise man.

[Randy Wise]

I would argue that many followers of christ have murdered each other over the ages, sadly enough. Conviction is a **** of a drug, to paraphrase a wise man.

Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life in him.



“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

21“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

[Steven Burton]

Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life in him.



“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

21“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

So can a assume that soldiers are murders due to their fruit?

[Randy Wise]

So can a assume that soldiers are murders due to their fruit?

In itself no? But didn't you already know that?

At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion in what was known as the Italian Regiment. 2 He and all his family were devout and God-fearing; he gave generously to those in need and prayed to God regularly

R.

[Andy Mistak]

In itself no? But didn't you already know that?

At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion in what was known as the Italian Regiment. 2 He and all his family were devout and God-fearing; he gave generously to those in need and prayed to God regularly

R.

That's a bit of a reach, if you ask me...

[Chris Easton]

Maybe it is too simple to believe? Article II is so clear to me. I am reminded in this lengthy discusion on heresy that faith is indeed a gift. My faith has never been something I have created in myself. It has been given to me. God doesn't withhold Himself from those who seek Him! (He realy is cool isn't he?)

2. We believe in Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Triune Godhead; that He was eternally one with the Father; that He became incarnate by the Holy Spirit and was born of the Virgin Mary, so that two whole and perfect natures, that is to say the Godhead and manhood, are thus united in one Person very God and very man, the God-man.
We believe that Jesus Christ died for our sins, and that He truly arose from the dead and took again His body, together with all things appertaining to the perfection of man’s nature, wherewith He ascended into heaven and is there engaged in intercession for us.

The verses below say all that is being said above.

(Matthew 1:20–25; 16:15–16; Luke 1:26–35; John 1:1–18; Acts 2:22–36; Romans 8:3, 32–34; Galatians 4:4–5; Philippians 2:5–11; Colossians 1:12–22; 1 Timothy 6:14–16; Hebrews 1:1–5; 7:22–28; 9:24–28; 1 John 1:1–3; 4:2–3, 15)

[Randy Wise]

Maybe it is too simple to believe? Article II is so clear to me. I am reminded in this lengthy discusion on heresy that faith is indeed a gift. My faith has never been something I have created in myself. It has been given to me. God doesn't withhold Himself from those who seek Him! (He realy is cool isn't he?)

2. We believe in Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Triune Godhead; that He was eternally one with the Father; that He became incarnate by the Holy Spirit and was born of the Virgin Mary, so that two whole and perfect natures, that is to say the Godhead and manhood, are thus united in one Person very God and very man, the God-man.
We believe that Jesus Christ died for our sins, and that He truly arose from the dead and took again His body, together with all things appertaining to the perfection of man’s nature, wherewith He ascended into heaven and is there engaged in intercession for us.

The verses below say all that is being said above.

(Matthew 1:20–25; 16:15–16; Luke 1:26–35; John 1:1–18; Acts 2:22–36; Romans 8:3, 32–34; Galatians 4:4–5; Philippians 2:5–11; Colossians 1:12–22; 1 Timothy 6:14–16; Hebrews 1:1–5; 7:22–28; 9:24–28; 1 John 1:1–3; 4:2–3, 15)

I think the only difference in what you state and what I state is you state Jesus had no beginning and was always God. I believe Jesus is the Fathers firstborn (a beginning). Before the angels of God , before creation but a beginning. A Son.

God's fullness, all wisdom and knowledge, and authority were all given to Jesus by His God and Father by our God and Father. Jesus remains in His Fathers love by obeying the Fathers commands. Jesus works within the frame work set by the Fathers will. That is Jesus can't go off and do His creation etc. Jesus is a High Priest in His Fathers house forever. Jesus is Christ the Lord. I believe that is supported by scripture as well.

Randy

[Hans Deventer]

[LEFT]Maybe it is too simple to believe? Article II is so clear to me.

Is IS clear.

[Paul DeBaufer]

I think the only difference in what you state and what I state is you state Jesus had no beginning and was always God. I believe Jesus is the Fathers firstborn (a beginning). Before the angels of God , before creation but a beginning. A Son.

God's fullness, all wisdom and knowledge, and authority were all given to Jesus by His God and Father by our God and Father. Jesus remains in His Fathers love by obeying the Fathers commands. Jesus works within the frame work set by the Fathers will. That is Jesus can't go off and do His creation etc. Jesus is a High Priest in His Fathers house forever. Jesus is Christ the Lord. I believe that is supported by scripture as well.

Randy

I know your position has been called heretical, but the ancient creeds not withstanding, MY read of the biblical witness has me more in this camp of thought.

[Todd Erickson]

Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life in him.



“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

21“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

Which mean any member of the Children of Israel who killed somebody from a different land on the order of God as part of their Genocidal purge is going to hell, right? David, beloved of God, is roasting in hell, right?

Or is jesus maybe saying something different than what we'd assume here?

Maybe when jesus talks about Murderers not having eternal life, he's not talking about where they are going when they die, but rather talking about the Aeon Zoe, the state of life of those inhabiting the Kingdom here and now, who are sources of water and life to those around them?

Nah, they're in hell. Glad we settled that.

[Shea Zellweger]

I know your position has been called heretical, but the ancient creeds not withstanding, MY read of the biblical witness has me more in this camp of thought.

Oh, Paul... I know you're inclined to give more credence to your namesake and whatnot, but one must include John at least a teensy bit . Also, I'd suggest that while this view is clearly heretical (in the technical definition of the word), holding a heretical view isn't necessarily equitable with being excluded from the kingdom of God. I think people are in the habit of hearing "that's heretical" and mentally adding "and therefore not a Christian." The history of Christianity is filled with saints who struggled with certain aspects of orthodoxy.

[Shea Zellweger]

2. We believe in Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Triune Godhead; that He was eternally one with the Father; that He became incarnate by the Holy Spirit and was born of the Virgin Mary, so that two whole and perfect natures, that is to say the Godhead and manhood, are thus united in one Person very God and very man, the God-man.

I've gone over the AoF dozens of time, but somehow never caught this little tidbit- "two whole and perfect natures." Is this meant to imply that Jesus was somehow exempted from the consequences of the fall of humanity? I have a bit of a problem with that, and my good friend Greg from Nazianzus probably said it best: "That which is not assumed is not healed."

[Hans Deventer]

The history of Christianity is filled with saints who struggled with certain aspects of orthodoxy.

Thank you, Shea. That is the most helpful remark in the entire thread so far. (Still thanking others for their contributions as well!)

[Steven Burton]

In itself no? But didn't you already know that?

At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion in what was known as the Italian Regiment. 2 He and all his family were devout and God-fearing; he gave generously to those in need and prayed to God regularly

R.

The assumption was pertaining to what Todd was indicating as old christian. Much what happened during the crusades and I say crusades because they did not stop after the fall of Byzantium. They carried out crusades on each other, protestant armies fighting catholic armies and vice versa. We don't call them crusades but that is what they would have been called in that day by both sides. So brother agianst brother or christian against christian.

[Doug Kitchen]

I've gone over the AoF dozens of time, but somehow never caught this little tidbit- "two whole and perfect natures." Is this meant to imply that Jesus was somehow exempted from the consequences of the fall of humanity? I have a bit of a problem with that, and my good friend Greg from Nazianzus probably said it best: "That which is not assumed is not healed."

Shea,

My experience is that nazarene's have a pretty flexible definition of perfect.

maybe Jesus having a perfect human nature is used in the same manner as a sanctified Nazarene is "perfect". We can still sin and still be tempted even in our sanctified perfection.

I think it should probably be reworded -

Doug

[Randy Wise]

Which mean any member of the Children of Israel who killed somebody from a different land on the order of God as part of their Genocidal purge is going to hell, right? David, beloved of God, is roasting in hell, right?

Or is jesus maybe saying something different than what we'd assume here?

Maybe when jesus talks about Murderers not having eternal life, he's not talking about where they are going when they die, but rather talking about the Aeon Zoe, the state of life of those inhabiting the Kingdom here and now, who are sources of water and life to those around them?

Nah, they're in hell. Glad we settled that.

I think Israel obeying Gods orders would not have guilt.

Jesus showed us the Father. Follow Him and you should do well.

John's use of murderers (1john) was in relation to hating others. Its difficult to love when you kill your enimies or those who disagree with you.

Didn't God make Israel wait 400 years in egypt until the sins of those living in the land God gave Israel reached full measure? And I don't see soul death in that judgment. Also Israel sought safe passage to that land. Were they threatened and attacked so we amight also see self defense.



Randy

[Randy Wise]

Oh, Paul... I know you're inclined to give more credence to your namesake and whatnot, but one must include John at least a teensy bit . .

Jesus was before the beginning (creation)
The creation was created through Jesus.
Jesus has Gods fullness. All that the Father is.

I see Johns statements as fitting with Paul's.

I think we need to include Jesus's statements as well.

Randy

[Paul DeBaufer]

Oh, Paul... I know you're inclined to give more credence to your namesake and whatnot, but one must include John at least a teensy bit . Also, I'd suggest that while this view is clearly heretical (in the technical definition of the word), holding a heretical view isn't necessarily equitable with being excluded from the kingdom of God. I think people are in the habit of hearing "that's heretical" and mentally adding "and therefore not a Christian." The history of Christianity is filled with saints who struggled with certain aspects of orthodoxy.

I may actually give more credence to John than Paul more times than not.