truthseeker63's Corner in Comparative religion

[YieldedOne]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

This is JUST what it is...

In Eastern Orthodox theology, God the Father is the "arche" or "principium" (beginning), the "source" or "origin" of both the Son and the Holy Spirit (which gives intuitive emphasis to the threeness of persons); by comparison, Catholic theology explains the "origin" of all three Hypostases or Persons as being in the divine nature (which gives intuitive emphasis to the oneness of God's being) while still maintaining God the Father as the Source of both the Son and the Spirit.

I've been localizing YHWH to God the Father as absolute "origin" of the Uncreated Trinitarian Movement of God. To me, that makes sense. Biblically and historically. The deity inherent in both the Word/Son of God and the Spirit of God are grounded in God the Father Himself. At the same time, the Father is NEVER without his Word or His Spirit...hence the oneness of the Trinity is grounded utterly in God the Father. (It is the OFFICIAL VIEW of the Eastern Orthodox that the unity of the Trinity is God the Father...not the common nature, per se.) GS and Sol seem much more of the Catholic approach saying YHWH (as divine nature) is all three divine persons. So, because God the Father is YHWH, and Jesus is YHWH, and the Spirit is YHWH, they are all one being. And that seems to be how GS is reading the Nicene Creed.

Like I said before, it's about EMPHASIS, not utter difference.

The following is formal Eastern Orthodox teaching...

One God, One Father
First of all, it is the Church's teaching and its deepest experience that there is only one God because there is only one Father.

In the Bible the term "God" with very few exceptions is used primarily as a name for the Father. Thus, the Son is the "Son of God," and the Spirit is the "Spirit of God." The Son is born from the Father, and the Spirit proceeds from the Father -- both in the same timeless and eternal action of the Father's own being.

In this view, the Son and the Spirit are both one with God and in no way separated from Him. Thus, the Divine Unity consists of the Father, with His Son and His Spirit distinct from Himself and yet perfectly united together in Him.

This is what I've been TRYING to tell GS and Sol. I'm NOT some heretic. We just DISAGREE on this point.

Now, I don't even know if we can get BACK to the whole hypostatic union conversation at all. Sheesh.

Hope everyone's happy. :hiding:

 

[Sol Invictus]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

Sol, I asked a yes or no question, homie. You didn't even answer it.

Again...Does YHWH create anything without his Word/Memra? Yes or no.

(Oh, and I'll see your Isaiah 44...and raise you Proverbs 8:22-31.)

sorry, i thought i had answered it but i can see how my post could be unclear. what i meant to imply was that you could not even believe what you claim (i.e. Doesn't the bible say that it was through His Word that God created all things?) if you would posit a distinction between YHWH and christ and hope to stay faithful to the isaiah passage. if christ is both a person and is not YHWH, then he was with YHWH when he created everything and yet YHWH says that he was alone and derisively asks who in fact was with him? so no, as formulated, you could not claim what you do and remain faithful to the isaiah text.

as it regards proverbs 8:22-31, i would say that it isn't problematic at all. notice that in my zech. 2:10 two different persons are identified as YHWH. it isn't a problem if in the proverbs text one YWH calls the other YHWh because this is precisely what happens in the zechariah passage! one YHWH says that he will come to dwell with his people and then identifies another who is also YHWH as being the one who sent him. it's not unlike the father calling christ god when he says "they throne o god is from everlasting to everlasting" etc. (too lazy to find the citation).

how's that sound, yielded?

 

[Sol Invictus]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

The following is formal Eastern Orthodox teaching...

i knew something smelled fishy. and i thought that you were a nice young man yielded, lol.

This is what I've been TRYING to tell GS and Sol. I'm NOT some heretic. We just DISAGREE on this point.

Now, I don't even know if we can get BACK to the whole hypostatic union conversation at all. Sheesh.

Hope everyone's happy.

no worries yielded. like i said earlier, i never considered you a heretic and all the 'right' parts of the doctrine are there. what we have is just a minor difference in opinion and i doubt that we'll be able to bridge this minor gap--well at least not on this side of eternity (but be sure to expect a monumental, "i told you so" when the matter will inevitably be settled by the being whom this all concerns).

 

[Grace Seeker]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

Dealing with the Jeremiah passage...

Sol:
notice that YHWH claims to be the sole creator. if christ is distinct from YHWH then he could not have created everything in existence as well.

Biblically speaking, Does YHWH create anything without his Word/Memra? Yes or no.

Doesn't the bible say that it was through His Word that God created all things?

Are you using YHWH as a synonym for Father here?


I'm going to not use it that way, remember I said that YHWH is NOT one of the three hypostases but the totallity of God's three-in-one being. Understood this way, then it makes perfect sense to say that YHWH is the sole creator, for there is no other creator than God. And in the sense that the Trinity is really a perichoresis, that is a mutual inter-penetration and indwelling of each of the divine persons in the persons of the others, if one is the creator then all are.

But if one uses the term YHWH as a synonym for the Father alone and thus also uses it to distinguish YHWH from the Son, then I can't answer your question for you said, "Biblically speaking..." and I think that you have quit speaking Biblically to make such a distinction when we know that the Father is in the Son, and the Son in the Father (see John 14:11 & 17:21).

Not only does the Bible say that all things were created through the Son, but also that all things were created for him. If YHWH is to be distinguished as NOT including the Son but the Father alone, then YHWH (God the Father) is not the creator and the Nicene Creed is in error.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

I would just like to note that this whole thread got moved. I'm betting because NOW the conversation is MUCH MORE about the Trinity than the original topic.

:shakes head:

Oh, well. It just is what it is.

Actually, while this discussion appears to be about the Trinity, it really is less about the articulations of the Trinity than about the Chalcedonian Definition regarding the hypostatic union and whether or not Jesus, as the Son, was truly both God and man. That's why I haven't objected to this as being off topic.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

The same person......wonder what u're up to!!?

I think just this one last question and I'll let you in on it. How do you define "immortality"? The dictionary says it is "unending existence." Is that definition good enough, or do you have a better one?

 

[missy]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

I think just this one last question and I'll let you in on it. How do you define "immortality"? The dictionary says it is "unending existence." Is that definition good enough, or do you have a better one?

That suffices…but to add to it I would define immortality as: eternal life, the ability of not being affected by death…

------------------
Islam teaches us that in this worldly life no man is immortal; every person born on earth will have to suffer death, it is inevitable…

"And We granted not to any human being immortality before you (O Muhammad SAW), then if you die, would they live forever?"
"Every soul must taste of death, and We try you with evil and with good, for ordeal. And unto Us ye will be returned."
(Surah al-Anbiya (The Prophets) - 21:34-35)

God Alone is immortal….without a beginning and without an end…

"Whatsoever is on it (the earth) will perish"
"There remaineth but the Countenance of thy Lord of Might and Glory."
(Surah ar-Rahman (The Benificient) – 55:26-27)

He created Jesus just like He created the others, with His Command "Be!"….and something that is created is bound to be destroyed, before being resurrected for the Final Judgment.

The Quran says;
" Lo! the likeness of Jesus with Allah is as the likeness of Adam. He created him of dust, then He said unto him: Be! and he is."
(Surah ale Imran (The Family of Imran) – 3:59)

Exegesis of this verse…
"........Therefore, He Who created Adam without a father or a mother is able to create Jesus, as well, without a father. If the claim is made that Jesus is God's son because he was created without a father, then the same claim befits Adam even more. However, since such a claim regarding Adam is obviously false, then making the same claim about Jesus is even more false.
Furthermore, by mentioning these facts, God emphasizes His ability, by creating Adam without a male or female, Eve from a male without a female, and Jesus from a mother without a father, compared to His creating the rest of creation from both male and female."
(Tafseer ibn Katheer)

 

[YieldedOne]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

Ok, GraceSeeker. This will determine how much we ACTUALLY disagree, ok? I figured we've gone this far. May as well keep goin. So, the 3 "Only"s...

1) The ONLY reason for God the Father being "YHWH" is his simple identity: God the Father is "YHWH". As such, God The Father is underivatively YHWH (aka the "Unbegotten God" )

2) The ONLY reason for Jesus being "YHWH" is that he is the Son/Word of God the Father, being the "exact representation" of God the Father's nature and being. As such, the Son/Word of God the Father is derivatively YHWH (aka the "Only-begotten God" ), because He is an self-disclosing image of who God the Father is.

3) The ONLY divine Hypostasis that a) has aseity and thus b) is complete underivative is God the Father. That is to say, only God the Father contains within himself the source/"origin" of himself. Both the Word and the Spirit have their source/origin in God the Father.

Let's see how far apart we really are. If you agree to the 3 ideas, then we're pretty much dealing with semantics here.

-----------------------

Hmmmm...I see something, too, GraceSeeker. I took a look at a post from the "The Central Flaw of Christianity" thread where you gave your description of God. I noticed something right off. You said...

Let us begin with the nature of God in his eternal state. This would be to seek to understand God's nature outside of time and space, completely unrelated to any aspect of creation. In this state, which would include the conditions before the creation of the world, before the creation of time, before the creation of anything, God exists. But even then, God exists (in the Christian view, no need to argue that you believe or the Qur'an teachers otherwise, for you have asked clarification with regard to understand Christian teachings) as a tri-personal being: Father, Son, and Spirit. Using technical language the three persons exist in a perichoresis in which while they are distinguishable from one another, they are inseperable and are one being. So we speak of just one God, not three. Thus when one says that God is eternal, one is saying that God the Father is eternal and uncreated, God the Son is eternal and uncreated, and God the Spirit is eternal and uncreated. But internal to their relationship with one another there is a generation of the Son by the Father and the Spirit proceeds from this relationship between the two of them.

Your focus clearly seems to be the unity of the Trinity in the eternal, uncreated nature...NOT the unity of the Trinity being God the Father.

Just like they said...

In Eastern Orthodox theology, God the Father is the "arche" or "principium" (beginning), the "source" or "origin" of both the Son and the Holy Spirit (which gives intuitive emphasis to the threeness of persons); by comparison, Catholic theology explains the "origin" of all three Hypostases or Persons as being in the divine nature (which gives intuitive emphasis to the oneness of God's being) while still maintaining God the Father as the Source of both the Son and the Spirit.

This confirms to me even more that THIS has been our issue.

 

[YieldedOne]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

Immortality (as I've understood it in this thread) is the inability to experience death, while mortality was the ability to experience death.

My whole deal was that, insofar as Jesus is the uncreated Word/Memra of God "enhypostasizing" a human being, the Word/Memra of God was incapable of experiencing death, being uncreated--whereas the human nature taken on by the Word/Memra was capable of experiencing death, being created.

 

[ProudMuslimSis]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

I believe that Jesus Christ was a man, who walked this Earth, sent by God as a messenger. Yes, he was a son of God, but not begotten. Go ahead and say I'm not a real Christian, an infidel, but that's just the way I see it.

Well said. What really matters is what he stood for and preached, right?

But, was Jesus asked before he was crucified about why his "God" did not rescue him and didn't he then yell out for help to "God"...outside himself?

 

[YieldedOne]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

GraceSeeker in another thread...

In the same way we must think of the Son always, so to speak, streaming forth from the Father, like light from a lamp or thoughts from a mind. He, the Son, is the self-expression of the Father--the Word the Father has to say. And there never was a time when the Father was not saying it. And since this whole time we have been talking about God, when the Bible speaks of the Word it declares that the Word is with God and the Word was God. And further, in perfect concert with Genesis 1, it declares that all things are created through this eternal divine Word (John 1:1-3). Note: we are not referring to the historical Jesus at all, but to the pre-incarnate Son who in time (meaning entering into time and nature) becomes flesh and dwells among humanity. This Son comes from the Father and is himself God (John 1:14 & 18).

I thought that was absolutely well stated. And it's in NO WAY CONFLICTING what anything I've said just above. I said this before...

Just like the Uncreated God has ETERNALLY been "Father of the Unique Son/Image" by His Spirit, He also has ETERNALLY been "Speaker of His Self-Disclosing Word/Memra" by His Spirit. Actually, Christianly speaking, God the Father's Son/Image and Word/Memra are one and the same, the Lord Jesus Christ.

Basically, Jesus of Nazareth is human "embodiment" the self-disclosing, self-expressive "uncreated speech" of God the Father.

 

[YieldedOne]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

ProudMuslimSis:
What really matters is what he stood for and preached, right?

Sho nuff.

"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”


"A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another."


"This is my command: Love each other."


Pretty simple, huh?




**********************************

ProudMuslimSis:
But, was Jesus asked before he was crucified about why his "God" did not rescue him and didn't he then yell out for help to "God"...outside himself?

My take:
He did ask his God (His Father) for help and received it...

In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence.
Hebrews 5:7

 

[YieldedOne]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

For ease of recall...

Eternal or Created Speech: Muslim Interpretations of God's Word
by Amanda Elizabeth Propst

From the work...

John of Damascus, active in the eighth century AD, is traditionally considered to have been aware of the significance of God's speech to Muslims as an eternal attribute and theological concept in the new discourse between Christians and Muslims. John, in his Disputatio Christiani et Saraceni, if it is correctly attributed to him, presents idealized debates between Muslims and Christians in the century after the Muslim conquest of Syria in 635.18 In one of his debates, he bases the entire argument on the premise that an orthodox Muslim will not admit that the pre-existent Word of God was created. The result was that the Muslim, refusing the createdness of the Word, would hopefully be convinced that the pre-existent Christ, referred to also as the Word of God in the Qur'ān, is coeternal with God since any Word of God must be uncreated. If the veracity of the text can be confirmed, then by the time of John of Damascus the theory was that the Qur'ān, as the Word of God, was uncreated.

----------------------------

Whole thread in glances

 

[Grace Seeker]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

YieldedOne, I've gone on to read the rest of the thread to date, but I'm going to come back to this post to bring some sort of closure to our discussion:

Ok, GraceSeeker. This will determine how much we ACTUALLY disagree, ok? I figured we've gone this far. May as well keep goin. So, the 3 "Only"s...

1) The ONLY reason for God the Father being "YHWH" is his simple identity: God the Father is "YHWH". As such, God The Father is underivatively YHWH (aka the "Unbegotten God" )

2) The ONLY reason for Jesus being "YHWH" is that he is the Son/Word of God the Father, being the "exact representation" of God the Father's nature and being. As such, the Son/Word of God the Father is derivatively YHWH (aka the "Only-begotten God"), because He is an self-disclosing image of who God the Father is.

3) The ONLY divine Hypostasis that a) has aseity and thus b) is complete underivative is God the Father. That is to say, only God the Father contains within himself the source/"origin" of himself. Both the Word and the Spirit have their source/origin in God the Father.

Let's see how far apart we really are. If you agree to the 3 ideas, then we're pretty much dealing with semantics here.

On those three points we are in sync. AMAZING!!

As for the disagreements being over semantics, you are right on, our disagreements were over the meaning of certain words. for instance, I still don't like the way you phrase this: "Your focus clearly seems to be the unity of the Trinity in the eternal, uncreated nature...NOT the unity of the Trinity being God the Father." But I think trying to explain why will just produce a rerun of all our prior discussions.

I see that you have a couple of times alluded to appreciating eastern Orthodox thought in terms of understanding the Trinity. If so, you might want to delve more into this idea of perichoresis I mentioned. I continue to find that construct increasingly helpful.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

After I don't know how many days and posts over this relatively minor different way of expressing essentially the same thought, is it any wonder that the early ecumenical councils last it for years. This discussion has not only been a good exercise in learning how to better distill and present my thoughts, but quite experientially educational too as I reflect on how these discussions must have gone the first time for people who really had very limited opportunity to compare notes with one another prior to the holding of these great councils.


YieldedOne, I also want to affirm you in the way you carried yourself and presented your views in this discussion. Always respectful and presenting one's self as willing to hear differences with an open mind.

 

[YieldedOne]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

GraceSeeker:
On those three points we are in sync. AMAZING!!

PRAISE be to God!

**************************
GraceSeeker:
I see that you have a couple of times alluded to appreciating eastern Orthodox thought in terms of understanding the Trinity. If so, you might want to delve more into this idea of perichoresis I mentioned. I continue to find that construct increasingly helpful.

Agreed. That's exactly why I use the term trinitarian movement when talking about the triunity in God.


************************

GraceSeeker:
After I don't know how many days and posts over this relatively minor different way of expressing essentially the same thought, is it any wonder that the early ecumenical councils last it for years. This discussion has not only been a good exercise in learning how to better distill and present my thoughts, but quite experientially educational too as I reflect on how these discussions must have gone the first time for people who really had very limited opportunity to compare notes with one another prior to the holding of these great councils.

I feel ya on this. Who knows how many councils would have been shortened (and misunderstandings cleared up) if they'd have had the Internet or even email. HA! ;D

*****************************

GraceSeeker:
YieldedOne, I also want to affirm you in the way you carried yourself and presented your views in this discussion. Always respectful and presenting one's self as willing to hear differences with an open mind.

Thanks for the kudos. Means a lot comin' from you, bro. And it takes multiple minds for great discussion...such much thanks to you as well. It wouldn't have been what it was without your demeanor as well. I'd say this was an excellent example of "iron sharpening iron"! :statisfie

 

[YieldedOne]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

So... I decided to visit Yahya Sulaiman's (a.k.a. Ziggy Zag) website. And I came across this...

The Koran's Challenge to Christians Who Believe in the Incarnation


He said...

I have asked Christian after Christian after Christian (the ones who believe in the incarnation, anyway, this being the party which constitutes the majority of the religion) the following question, and just as I expected, not a single one of them actually answered the question. I have yet to hear any Christian actually give a straight answer.

and...

Like I’ve said, no Christian I’ve yet asked has answered this question, and that does not surprise me at all. The Koran is always right, and as such I don’t think that a real answer to the question is even possible. If you, dear reader, are a Christian who believes in the incarnation, and you actually have an answer—a real answer, a straight answer, and not an evasion—then feel free to tell me in an e-mail ... or in this site’s shoutbox. But I am not holding my breath for such an event to happen. Like I said, the challenge cannot be met, because this question, this challenge, unravels the doctrine of the incarnation completely.

HA! I just couldn't pass it up. And since I'm on the Incarnation anyways, I decided "What the heck!"

So here's the actual question...

If Jesus (on whom be peace) was God incarnate, then who could stop God the Father from wiping him out of existence? After all, he was, according to Christians who believe in the incarnation, human as well as divine, and God the Father can destroy any human being.

and...

The question, once again, is “Who…shall override God in any way if He desires to destroy the Messiah, Mary’s son, and his mother, and all those who are on earth?” This is the Koran’s challenge to Christians who believe in the incarnation; I can only hope that if such a Christian is reading this, he or she will realize that the Koran has him or her trapped, and subsequently do the right thing and give up their belief in the incarnation.


My personal answer to this question is as follows:
Anything that is created can theoretically be "destroyed" by it's Uncreated Creator. This would include the incorporeal and corporeal human aspects of the Incarnate Word/Memra of God the Father. The Uncreated Word/Memra of God the Father that permeates and enlivens that human soul and body is "uncreated speech" from God is indestructible (being uncreated)...while the human soul and body that is "enhypostasized" by the Word/Memra of God the Father is destructible.

So, if, for some weird reason, God wanted to destroy the human aspect of the Incarnate Word/Memra, it is definitely theoretically possible that he could do it. Just like it is said that the Quran, as "uncreated speech", is indestructible...while the paper, ink, and writing on the pages of the Quran are destructible.

“And He speaks, not as our speech. We speak with tools and letters while Allah, High is He, speaks without a tool and without letters. The letters are created. And the speech of Allah, High is He, is uncreated.”
--Abu Hanifa

“The Qur’an is Allah’s word, High is He, in pages transcribed, in hearts protected, on tongues recited, and on the Prophet (PBUH) and His family revealed. Our utterance of the Qur’an is created. Our writing of it is created. Our recitation of it is created. And the Qur’an is uncreated.”
--Abu Hanifa

So, Yahya Sulaiman, that's my response. I'd like to know what you think. I am fully prepared to defend the idea.

Holla back.

 

[YieldedOne]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

I'm missin' your response you said you made, Yahya. Technical issue, maybe?

 

[YieldedOne]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

Yahya:
Well I don't want to have to bother retyping the whole thing and I've already done way more typing today than is good for me so I'll just sum up (my apologies for whatever in the holy h might have happened): the question is whether or not the "Father" could utterly annihilate the "Son"--not just his body but everything that he is.


Hmmm...the quranic verse says this...

They are unbelievers who say, “God is the Messiah, Mary’s son.” Say: “Who then shall override God in any way if He desires to destroy the Messiah, Mary’s son, and his mother, and all those who are on earth?”

1) This question specifically deals with Mary's son, Jesus. We are talking about a HUMAN BEING here, more specifically about the INCARNATE Word/Son of God, the human Messiah. We are NOT talking about the uncreated Word/Son pre-incarnation...because the quranic text itself is not saying that.

2) The argument by the text seems to be simple: How can Christ be Allah (supposed to be indestructible) if he can be DESTROYED by Allah, like all other creatures on earth? It is THIS question that I'm responding to.

3) Judeo-Christianly speaking, God could no more utterly annihilate his uncreated Word/Memra than, Islamically speaking, Allah could ever utterly annihilate his "uncreated speech" of the Quran. But this serves as no problem for answering the question posed.

 

[IAmZamzam]

Re: Christians think that Jesus can be Immortal and Mortal at the sametime they say w

The quranic verse says this...

They are unbelievers who say, “God is the Messiah, Mary’s son.” Say: “Who then shall override God in any way if He desires to destroy the Messiah, Mary’s son, and his mother, and all those who are on earth?”

1) This question specifically deals with Mary's son, Jesus. We are talking about a HUMAN BEING here, more specifically about the INCARNATE Word/Son of God, the human Messiah. We are NOT talking about the uncreated Word/Son pre-incarnation...because the quranic text itself is not saying that.

2) The argument by the text seems to be simple: How can Christ be Allah (supposed to be indestructible) if he can be DESTROYED by Allah, like all other creatures on earth? It is THIS question that I'm responding to.

Oh, come on! You're the one who claims that he was the "uncreated Word". If the Koran had meant "only the human part of him" then it would have said "only the human part of him". Not to mention how resolutely it denies that there were any non-human parts of him. You're splitting hairs to dodge the issue.

3) Judeo-Christianly speaking, God could no more utterly annihilate his uncreated Word/Memra than, Islamically speaking, Allah could ever utterly annihilate his "uncreated speech" of the Quran. But this serves as no problem for answering the question posed.

Ah, so there is something He can't do! And don't try to weasel out in the predictable fashion like everyone always does by committing an equivocation fallacy by completely redefining "omnipotence" from its universally accepted meaning of "being able to do anything, period" to "being able to do anything that's 'logically possible'", a phrase which really always seems to just mean "anything that doesn't go against my own dogma". The Bible says, "With God all things are possible." It does not include any qualifiers nor does any human being on any occasion other than people responding to logical arguments like this with that shopworn cop-out. So don't even try.