Comments on assignments for Understanding the Christian World, Fall 2009.
This thread is reserved for your comments and ongoing discussion regarding the assignments posted in the previous thread.
30 comments:
max pierre
said...
I want to comment on Jacob Moody, You said that the ultimate prevailing decision that Christ is fully human and fully God by that He has experienced the same pains and sufferings with us; however, I don’t think so. If fully human means to be fully spiritual, He might not suffer the same like us. When He asked God something, God would give it to him because of his faith; I agree with you in some ways that when you are praying through a difficult time, God understand in a very personal way, but the best things in life have been provide before we were born or Christ death.
I want to comment on Keenan, You said we can become fully human when we are glorified; however, we need to glorify right here and right now! When Christ comes, we will die or still on earth. We are justified, sanctify and glorify by his sacrifice on the cross, not our deed. I like your idea that human being can’t be human unless they are in healthy relationship with God, but we need to be careful when we are talking about Trinity because we have no good analogy. By example, One person of the trinity can’t existed without the other, but husband can live when his wife died or children, ect.
I want to comment on Max Pierre's #4 I think I understand what you are saying about Adam bringing about the Fall but it was really Satan who instigated Adam's sin . Your comments made me think that because of Adam and Eve's fall all mankind was put into a fallen state. We also know that it is through Christ that all mankind can be redeemed from that fallen nature. Both the fall and the salvation of all men are tied back to two separate events that we had no control over. What we do have control over, however, are our own actions and sins. I feel that it is for these things that we will be held accountable for, not Adam's sin(s). We have the everyday choice to follow Satan or to follow Christ. I agree that Satan and Christ continued their battles here on earth and would say that it still goes on. We now have to choose on who's side are we fighting. While our fallen nature will still need to be reversed I think it is for our own actions that we will be held accountable.
To be Subhuman: Keenan mentions that after the fall we became subhuman. It does not sound right to say that. We usually do not consider ourselves subhuman. So I wondered about such condition and what it meant. And while reading a book: "Gangs and Girls: Understanding Juvenile Prostitution” by Michel Dorais and Patrice Corriveau, I came across something that helped me. Speaking about girls that have fallen into such a terrible condition, they said, “traumatized by their experience, terrorized by the prospect of being beaten or raped, they become zombies to themselves and subhumans to their pimps. They become property to be used as the owner sees fit and all that matters to him is their earning power… Once a girl has reached this status, it is extremely difficult for her to recover. Her self-esteem is gone and she is subjugated to the men who use her (p.49). Isn’t that our fallen situation in the hands of Satan and without God?
Response to Max #5 paper Max I agree that there is no scriptural evidence that John was actually in the water when Jesus was baptized. However I think that we must be careful and not take a dogmatic approach to this because there is no scriptural evidence that says John wasn’t in the water with Jesus. This is a subject that you brought up in another class and I do believe that it should be looked at some more. Good post! Keenan
Keenan brought up the issue (on the main post blog) again that being fully human means being fully spiritual. With respect to Christ, that connects his humanity with divinity. But the capacity of humanity to be in touch with God is also perverted, allowing a person to be in touch with fallen angels as well. We are exposed to all sorts of influences.
I want to respond briefly to Jacob's observation that several modern problems are not directly addressed in the Bible. I just want to say that there really is nothing new under the sun. The Bible may not address nuclear weapons, but it does address genocide and war. It may not address smoking, but it does address gluttony and health.
I want to comment on Keenan! You said, Was Jesus Divine foreknowledge limited? The maracles were not what makes Him the Savior or God; eventhough, He knew beforehand the woman at the well would be there, He was positioned Himself to heal people- thousands, he knew the woman with blood issue was going to touch Him before hand and He even predicted the future, but we can do better than that if we have faith. Many prophets did a lot of these too. You said “that give you a lot of problem,” but you have the answer –Holy Ghost and The Bible!
I want to comment on Roberto Atencio! I agree with you on Malachi is God Mercy, God eternal purposes - salvation for mankind stand forever. When the Bible said “God change,” it is the circumstance that is change not God. The problem is, God is dealing with human – feeble mind, human changes; therefore, God changes too. God is always open his Arms for us to get back to Him. Ellen White said, He may punish us, discipline and correct us but all of this is for the purpose of bringing repentance and salvation to us.
Max Pierre said... I want to comment on Keenan! You said, Was Jesus Divine foreknowledge limited? The miracles were not what makes Him the Savior or God; even though He knew beforehand the woman at the well would be there, He was positioned Himself to heal people- thousands, he knew the woman with blood issue was going to touch Him before hand and He even predicted the future, but we can do better than that if we have faith. Many prophets did a lot of these too. You said “that give you a lot of problem,” but you have the answer –Holy Ghost and The Bible!
I want to comment on Keenan's first comment. I agreed with what you said. I feel that if we define humanity as what God intended it to be, it will change our perspective on our own lives and what it means to live the type of lives that God intended. Furthermore, as we discussed in class, the humanity we experience is much more of an example of the experience of heaven than we sometimes realize and consequently we can learn a lot about the mysteries of Christianity by examining the mysteries of our own relationships. Of course that does not make our relationships the norm by which understand heavenly mysteries, but it can be a helpful place to start.
I think when it comes to youth, it is very difficult to explain how Christ allows us free will, yet still knows what we are going to choose. This concept has always been quite confusing to me, especially when I was younger. How is it free will if God already knows what we are going to choose in a situation? And how are we able to allow God to change us, if He knows we aren't going to be saved anyway? What's the point? So does predestination exist? What would I say to a young person that presents these legitimate questions?
I like what Jason HInes said about how "the Bible does not necessarily cover all issues, but it covers all principles and so we should be searching for those principles in order to inform our worldview." I agree with this 100% It is like I mentioned in an earlier post about how even though the Bible may not address modern issues the principles behind these issues are addressed. I truly believe that an answer to any question can be found by a careful and prayerful study of Scripture.
I am commenting on Jacob's post on soteriology. I am in total agreement Jacob. It seems we like to talk about the same things. Despite the many ways in which we can talk about salvation, I think it's important to realize that all of them have validity, and as you said Jacob, that Christ must be at the center of all discussion.
Brandon made an interesting comment about how strong Jesus was connected with the Father to keep from sinning. I was thinking that in light of His own nature, He was one with divinity in and of himself. So there was not a struggle to connect to divinity because He was divine. Yet it seems the divine side and human side are at odds so the struggle continues.
Jason Hines was writing about the views on soteriology reflected in McKim's historical survey. It seems at times that we are struggling with semantics to explain what we mean by salvation. If salvation is so many different things to so many different people, perhaps it is not salvation that is so complicated as the people's various definitions. This is probably one of those examples of imprecise language.
Comment on Jason Hines post on Ecclesiology I also find it interesting that the early Church fathers didn’t really base their views off of scripture. So therefore what they practiced wound up turning into tradition. That is why it is so critical that we have scripture replace tradition. Good post.
I want to comment on Brandon Smith, Brandon said in September Assignment # 2 that Christ was living in flesh for 33 years without sinning that made him marvel for the connections Christ had with his father; however, I respectfully disagree. Christ was a babe who could not talk then how could he have a relationship with his father. I agree with you “living in flesh means fully human, but not sinners.”
I want to comment on Jacob Moody – soteriological controversy on September 29, 2009, You said that every form of real salvation comes about because of Jesus Christ. That is true in some ways! Excuse me for some O.J. Simpsons expressions: Christ could not, should not, would not and did not give us any salvation by the cross without our full participation. The Bible said, we (human being) choose salvation, but God provided the way by which we get it.
Robert Best gives a good perspective on the four gospels and the reason for there being four. I agree that by God giving four it speaks to His value in diversity. He wants to be able to relate to various people in various ways so that they can see Him more clear.
Brandon asked the question, “what strategies have you used that keep a strong communion with God and foster a more dependent relationship with him?” I wish to respond to that. Some things that help me Brandon are: to take some time each day to do personal study in the Scriptures and to not just read them but to actively search for answers or understanding on a specific topic. I also pray for the strength each morning to overcome my sins that I have trouble with and I say what those are out loud. I know God already knows what these sins are but it means more to me and is more personal to openly confront them with and before God. Then as I pray before I go to sleep I look at it like a “return and report” to God on what I accomplished that day that might have been pleasing to Him. I find I have more strength to overcome things when I know I am going to have to knee before my Father in prayer that night and account for my actions. I am far from perfect and I find myself struggling daily too on my walk with Christ, but I have found strength in a daily immersion in the Scriptures and by using daily prayer for strength and real communication with God. Jacob Moody
Roberto, you wrote about the lack of debate over dualism in the anthropological crisis in the 4th and 5th century. I think there is a certain sense in which you are right in what you are saying; that is, dualism vs. monism was not really the issue. Yet various ideas regarding the nature of man relate to the concept of sin. Some earlier authors such as Origen influenced by Neo-platonic thought mentioned by McKim saw dualism as a way that the pure created soul is brought into contact with sin, or that a preexistent soul would be incarnated because of sin.
In response to Keenan’s comment regarding being a “Mission Minded Church”: I totally agree with the idea that in general the church has lost its passion for mission, though there are some exception, here in North America; and that persecution is the solution. But I am not sure about comparing our slumbering state to that of the Catholic Church. Every time I hear something about the Catholic Church it does not seem to be in slumber. It may look like it is. But somehow they keep growing and changing something to look more like the original, pure church of Christ. Just today I hear about an infant baptism that took place in Panama, Central America: An infant being baptized by immersion. I thought they baptize infants by pouring only. My mother’s comment was that they finally got the way of doing it right, but not the age of the individual. A while back I heard of the Catholic Church having small groups and Bible studies in these groups. It used to be said that Catholics did not read their Bible. That is all changing, although their fundamental doctrines are not. Roberto.
I really enjoyed Jacob's comment on seeing God in the world around us. Even in our modern/postmodern world God is still moving and is still present with us. I also agree that Scripture will help us in this process. Sometimes we are so busy being in the world and not of the world that we do not realize that God is also in that world and we should be seeking Him there as well.
In Response to Brandon Smith Sept Assignment #1 I can resonate with your post. The nature of Jesus is very complex. How can Jesus be 100% human and 100% man at the same time is something that will be studied throughout eternity. I think as Christians we need to be clear on exactly what our position is on this topic. When we communicate with other religions who don’t believe in the trinity or that Jesus is divine we need to be very clear on what we believe. Good post! Keenan Tyler
This comment is from the book, Understanding Scripture, chapter two, page 16. In this chapter, I read a quote from Ellen G. White about believes. Because this is the topic of my research paper, it is the reason why it got my attention. In this quote, she says that “God never ask us to believe without giving sufficient evidence upon which to base our faith.” If you notice, this comment is in opposition to the idea that God needs to gives a miraculous sign to proof his existence. We tend to believe that God is supposed to convince us according to our won desires. However, God has given enough evidence for us to believe. We just need to discover that evidence. It already exists. I quote from Ellen, “His existence, his character, the truthfulness of His word, are all established by testimony that appeals to our reason; and this testimony is abundant.” To doubt is normal for humans. God knows this. However, he has given enough evidence so doubt can be dissipated through his revelation. I am desperate to see that day when doubt will be no more. This doubt will disappear in its totality when Jesus comes for the Second Time.
Concerning the remark, “even though the Bible is commonly present in our homes and churches it is sometimes not allowed to speak for itself. We often treat the Bible like a child instead of treating it like the word of our divine Father.” In my humble opinion, we tend to deal Holy Scripture with thoughtlessness. When we share our daily talk, there come Holy words without any attention. Acting out like people who do not know Jesus is the other way showing we are treating His words heedlessly. What about ignoring somebody’s preaching? We easily look up other verses, thinking of him as anyone who do not know much about Bible. More than often, we memorize Bible verses and do not follow the way of teaching what we must go with our mind. If there is no change in our lives, couldn’t that mean we are not showing our respect to His words? Bible can work far more in us when we live in accordance with our beliefs. His words are only powerful in the people who believe, “for the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.” (Hebrews 4:12)
Comment about Keenan's comment on "TO BE FULLY HUMAN MEANS TO BE FULLY SPIRITUAL"
Actually, this was the issue that I raised in class. Before I came to the seminary to study, I've heard of this from one of the pastors I know. And I couldn't understand what it really meant. Reading Keenan's comment on this issue, I thought that Keenan understood and explained it so well, and described the concept very well using the realtionships among three persons of Godhead, a husband and wife, and the interpersonal realtionship. To be fully human and spiritual we need to experience God's redeeming power. So now I ask myself. How am I supposed to live to be fully spiritual after I've learned this knowledge? What kind of efforts do I need to put in my daily life? The same question should be asked to the Christians who want to live their earthly life like Jesus did and to live an eternal life with God in heaven.
Max wrote that "We might accepted it or not, but we all have biases that affect the way we behave and live in this society that means our reality is different from some others."
I agree in Max' understanding of a lot of complexed factors in building up our worldview. And also I understand that, as a "positive psychology", prof.Martin Seligman insists on genetic influence of the tendency to happiness of oneself is up to 50%. However, I want to say that however the powerful and reasonable the theories of the learned or the authorities, that's from the human level which is the level from the educational knowledge and the spiritual level can do miraculous things realistically.
So I want to go for Paul's recommendation too.Because when we walk in teh light of the Holy Spirit, our life will be able to find the real meaning and happiness in life.
I think Roberto throws a really good question to us.
He wrote that "So I wonder if God’s transcendence refers only to his Character." He's asking that God sent His Son, Jesus to this earth as a baby and Jesus had to go through physical change. He's basically asking about God's transcendence that He doesn't change. So it seems that he understands that the trascendence is limitted in God's character.
Actually I don't think I can understand that clearly but I agree with His assumption that God's transcendence is limitted in His unchanging character through eternity.
However, in other way of thinking, I think that "transcendence" can mean it is beyond the modification or transformation.
In my understanding,it transcends a physical shape or a frame. So even though Jesus had to go through the change during his growth, it doesn't necessarily mean that God is not the God of transcendence. Regardless of the change of growth, the unchanging Spirit of God's character was always unchanging in Jesus. So I think God is still the God of transcendence.
30 comments:
I want to comment on Jacob Moody,
You said that the ultimate prevailing decision that Christ is fully human and fully God by that He has experienced the same pains and sufferings with us; however, I don’t think so. If fully human means to be fully spiritual, He might not suffer the same like us. When He asked God something, God would give it to him because of his faith; I agree with you in some ways that when you are praying through a difficult time, God understand in a very personal way, but the best things in life have been provide before we were born or Christ death.
I want to comment on Keenan,
You said we can become fully human when we are glorified; however, we need to glorify right here and right now! When Christ comes, we will die or still on earth. We are justified, sanctify and glorify by his sacrifice on the cross, not our deed. I like your idea that human being can’t be human unless they are in healthy relationship with God, but we need to be careful when we are talking about Trinity because we have no good analogy. By example, One person of the trinity can’t existed without the other, but husband can live when his wife died or children, ect.
I want to comment on Max Pierre's #4
I think I understand what you are saying about Adam bringing about the Fall but it was really Satan who instigated Adam's sin . Your comments made me think that because of Adam and Eve's fall all mankind was put into a fallen state. We also know that it is through Christ that all mankind can be redeemed from that fallen nature. Both the fall and the salvation of all men are tied back to two separate events that we had no control over. What we do have control over, however, are our own actions and sins. I feel that it is for these things that we will be held accountable for, not Adam's sin(s). We have the everyday choice to follow Satan or to follow Christ. I agree that Satan and Christ continued their battles here on earth and would say that it still goes on. We now have to choose on who's side are we fighting. While our fallen nature will still need to be reversed I think it is for our own actions that we will be held accountable.
To be Subhuman: Keenan mentions that after the fall we became subhuman. It does not sound right to say that. We usually do not consider ourselves subhuman. So I wondered about such condition and what it meant. And while reading a book: "Gangs and Girls: Understanding Juvenile Prostitution” by Michel Dorais and Patrice Corriveau, I came across something that helped me. Speaking about girls that have fallen into such a terrible condition, they said, “traumatized by their experience, terrorized by the prospect of being beaten or raped, they become zombies to themselves and subhumans to their pimps. They become property to be used as the owner sees fit and all that matters to him is their earning power… Once a girl has reached this status, it is extremely difficult for her to recover. Her self-esteem is gone and she is subjugated to the men who use her (p.49). Isn’t that our fallen situation in the hands of Satan and without God?
Response to Max #5 paper
Max I agree that there is no scriptural evidence that John was actually in the water when Jesus was baptized. However I think that we must be careful and not take a dogmatic approach to this because there is no scriptural evidence that says John wasn’t in the water with Jesus. This is a subject that you brought up in another class and I do believe that it should be looked at some more.
Good post!
Keenan
Keenan brought up the issue (on the main post blog) again that being fully human means being fully spiritual. With respect to Christ, that connects his humanity with divinity. But the capacity of humanity to be in touch with God is also perverted, allowing a person to be in touch with fallen angels as well. We are exposed to all sorts of influences.
I want to respond briefly to Jacob's observation that several modern problems are not directly addressed in the Bible. I just want to say that there really is nothing new under the sun. The Bible may not address nuclear weapons, but it does address genocide and war. It may not address smoking, but it does address gluttony and health.
I want to comment on Keenan!
You said, Was Jesus Divine foreknowledge limited?
The maracles were not what makes Him the Savior or God; eventhough, He knew beforehand the woman at the well would be there, He was positioned Himself to heal people- thousands, he knew the woman with blood issue was going to touch Him before hand and He even predicted the future, but we can do better than that if we have faith. Many prophets did a lot of these too. You said “that give you a lot of problem,” but you have the answer –Holy Ghost and The Bible!
I want to comment on Roberto Atencio!
I agree with you on Malachi is God Mercy, God eternal purposes - salvation for mankind stand forever. When the Bible said “God change,” it is the circumstance that is change not God. The problem is, God is dealing with human – feeble mind, human changes; therefore, God changes too. God is always open his Arms for us to get back to Him. Ellen White said, He may punish us, discipline and correct us but all of this is for the purpose of bringing repentance and salvation to us.
Max Pierre said...
I want to comment on Keenan!
You said, Was Jesus Divine foreknowledge limited?
The miracles were not what makes Him the Savior or God; even though He knew beforehand the woman at the well would be there, He was positioned Himself to heal people- thousands, he knew the woman with blood issue was going to touch Him before hand and He even predicted the future, but we can do better than that if we have faith. Many prophets did a lot of these too. You said “that give you a lot of problem,” but you have the answer –Holy Ghost and The Bible!
I want to comment on Keenan's first comment. I agreed with what you said. I feel that if we define humanity as what God intended it to be, it will change our perspective on our own lives and what it means to live the type of lives that God intended. Furthermore, as we discussed in class, the humanity we experience is much more of an example of the experience of heaven than we sometimes realize and consequently we can learn a lot about the mysteries of Christianity by examining the mysteries of our own relationships. Of course that does not make our relationships the norm by which understand heavenly mysteries, but it can be a helpful place to start.
I think when it comes to youth, it is very difficult to explain how Christ allows us free will, yet still knows what we are going to choose. This concept has always been quite confusing to me, especially when I was younger. How is it free will if God already knows what we are going to choose in a situation? And how are we able to allow God to change us, if He knows we aren't going to be saved anyway? What's the point? So does predestination exist? What would I say to a young person that presents these legitimate questions?
I like what Jason HInes said about how "the Bible does not necessarily cover all issues, but it covers all principles and so we should be searching for those principles in order to inform our worldview." I agree with this 100% It is like I mentioned in an earlier post about how even though the Bible may not address modern issues the principles behind these issues are addressed. I truly believe that an answer to any question can be found by a careful and prayerful study of Scripture.
I am commenting on Jacob's post on soteriology. I am in total agreement Jacob. It seems we like to talk about the same things. Despite the many ways in which we can talk about salvation, I think it's important to realize that all of them have validity, and as you said Jacob, that Christ must be at the center of all discussion.
Brandon made an interesting comment about how strong Jesus was connected with the Father to keep from sinning. I was thinking that in light of His own nature, He was one with divinity in and of himself. So there was not a struggle to connect to divinity because He was divine. Yet it seems the divine side and human side are at odds so the struggle continues.
Jason Hines was writing about the views on soteriology reflected in McKim's historical survey. It seems at times that we are struggling with semantics to explain what we mean by salvation. If salvation is so many different things to so many different people, perhaps it is not salvation that is so complicated as the people's various definitions. This is probably one of those examples of imprecise language.
Comment on Jason Hines post on Ecclesiology
I also find it interesting that the early Church fathers didn’t really base their views off of scripture. So therefore what they practiced wound up turning into tradition. That is why it is so critical that we have scripture replace tradition. Good post.
Keenan
I want to comment on Brandon Smith,
Brandon said in September Assignment # 2 that Christ was living in flesh for 33 years without sinning that made him marvel for the connections Christ had with his father; however, I respectfully disagree. Christ was a babe who could not talk then how could he have a relationship with his father. I agree with you “living in flesh means fully human, but not sinners.”
I want to comment on Jacob Moody – soteriological controversy on September 29, 2009,
You said that every form of real salvation comes about because of Jesus Christ. That is true in some ways! Excuse me for some O.J. Simpsons expressions: Christ could not, should not, would not and did not give us any salvation by the cross without our full participation. The Bible said, we (human being) choose salvation, but God provided the way by which we get it.
Robert Best gives a good perspective on the four gospels and the reason for there being four. I agree that by God giving four it speaks to His value in diversity. He wants to be able to relate to various people in various ways so that they can see Him more clear.
Brandon asked the question, “what strategies have you used that keep a strong communion with God and foster a more dependent relationship with him?” I wish to respond to that. Some things that help me Brandon are: to take some time each day to do personal study in the Scriptures and to not just read them but to actively search for answers or understanding on a specific topic. I also pray for the strength each morning to overcome my sins that I have trouble with and I say what those are out loud. I know God already knows what these sins are but it means more to me and is more personal to openly confront them with and before God. Then as I pray before I go to sleep I look at it like a “return and report” to God on what I accomplished that day that might have been pleasing to Him. I find I have more strength to overcome things when I know I am going to have to knee before my Father in prayer that night and account for my actions. I am far from perfect and I find myself struggling daily too on my walk with Christ, but I have found strength in a daily immersion in the Scriptures and by using daily prayer for strength and real communication with God.
Jacob Moody
Roberto, you wrote about the lack of debate over dualism in the anthropological crisis in the 4th and 5th century. I think there is a certain sense in which you are right in what you are saying; that is, dualism vs. monism was not really the issue. Yet various ideas regarding the nature of man relate to the concept of sin. Some earlier authors such as Origen influenced by Neo-platonic thought mentioned by McKim saw dualism as a way that the pure created soul is brought into contact with sin, or that a preexistent soul would be incarnated because of sin.
In response to Keenan’s comment regarding being a “Mission Minded Church”: I totally agree with the idea that in general the church has lost its passion for mission, though there are some exception, here in North America; and that persecution is the solution. But I am not sure about comparing our slumbering state to that of the Catholic Church. Every time I hear something about the Catholic Church it does not seem to be in slumber. It may look like it is. But somehow they keep growing and changing something to look more like the original, pure church of Christ. Just today I hear about an infant baptism that took place in Panama, Central America: An infant being baptized by immersion. I thought they baptize infants by pouring only. My mother’s comment was that they finally got the way of doing it right, but not the age of the individual. A while back I heard of the Catholic Church having small groups and Bible studies in these groups. It used to be said that Catholics did not read their Bible. That is all changing, although their fundamental doctrines are not.
Roberto.
I really enjoyed Jacob's comment on seeing God in the world around us. Even in our modern/postmodern world God is still moving and is still present with us. I also agree that Scripture will help us in this process. Sometimes we are so busy being in the world and not of the world that we do not realize that God is also in that world and we should be seeking Him there as well.
In Response to Brandon Smith Sept Assignment #1
I can resonate with your post. The nature of Jesus is very complex. How can Jesus be 100% human and 100% man at the same time is something that will be studied throughout eternity. I think as Christians we need to be clear on exactly what our position is on this topic. When we communicate with other religions who don’t believe in the trinity or that Jesus is divine we need to be very clear on what we believe. Good post!
Keenan Tyler
This comment is from the book, Understanding Scripture, chapter two, page 16. In this chapter, I read a quote from Ellen G. White about believes. Because this is the topic of my research paper, it is the reason why it got my attention. In this quote, she says that “God never ask us to believe without giving sufficient evidence upon which to base our faith.” If you notice, this comment is in opposition to the idea that God needs to gives a miraculous sign to proof his existence. We tend to believe that God is supposed to convince us according to our won desires. However, God has given enough evidence for us to believe. We just need to discover that evidence. It already exists. I quote from Ellen, “His existence, his character, the truthfulness of His word, are all established by testimony that appeals to our reason; and this testimony is abundant.” To doubt is normal for humans. God knows this. However, he has given enough evidence so doubt can be dissipated through his revelation. I am desperate to see that day when doubt will be no more. This doubt will disappear in its totality when Jesus comes for the Second Time.
Concerning the remark, “even though the Bible is commonly present in our homes and churches it is sometimes not allowed to speak for itself. We often treat the Bible like a child instead of treating it like the word of our divine Father.” In my humble opinion, we tend to deal Holy Scripture with thoughtlessness. When we share our daily talk, there come Holy words without any attention. Acting out like people who do not know Jesus is the other way showing we are treating His words heedlessly. What about ignoring somebody’s preaching? We easily look up other verses, thinking of him as anyone who do not know much about Bible. More than often, we memorize Bible verses and do not follow the way of teaching what we must go with our mind. If there is no change in our lives, couldn’t that mean we are not showing our respect to His words? Bible can work far more in us when we live in accordance with our beliefs. His words are only powerful in the people who believe, “for the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.” (Hebrews 4:12)
Comment about Keenan's comment on "TO BE FULLY HUMAN MEANS TO BE FULLY SPIRITUAL"
Actually, this was the issue that I raised in class. Before I came to the seminary to study, I've heard of this from one of the pastors I know. And I couldn't understand what it really meant.
Reading Keenan's comment on this issue, I thought that Keenan understood and explained it so well, and described the concept very well using the realtionships among three persons of Godhead, a husband and wife, and the interpersonal realtionship.
To be fully human and spiritual we need to experience God's redeeming power.
So now I ask myself. How am I supposed to live to be fully spiritual after I've learned this knowledge? What kind of efforts do I need to put in my daily life?
The same question should be asked to the Christians who want to live their earthly life like Jesus did and to live an eternal life with God in heaven.
The comment
about Max' #2 Reflection paper -
Max wrote that "We might accepted it or not, but we all have biases that affect the way we behave and live in this society that means our reality is different from some others."
I agree in Max' understanding of a lot of complexed factors in building up our worldview.
And also I understand that, as a "positive psychology", prof.Martin Seligman insists on genetic influence of the tendency to happiness of oneself is up to 50%.
However, I want to say that however the powerful and reasonable the theories of the learned or the authorities, that's from the human level which is the level from the educational knowledge and the spiritual level can do miraculous things realistically.
So I want to go for Paul's recommendation too.Because when we walk in teh light of the Holy Spirit, our life will be able to find the real meaning and happiness in life.
-Comment on the comment of Roberto Atencio
I think Roberto throws a really good question to us.
He wrote that "So I wonder if God’s transcendence refers only to his Character."
He's asking that God sent His Son, Jesus to this earth as a baby and Jesus had to go through physical change. He's basically asking about God's transcendence that He doesn't change.
So it seems that he understands that the trascendence is limitted in God's character.
Actually I don't think I can understand that clearly but I agree with His assumption that God's transcendence is limitted in His unchanging character through eternity.
However, in other way of thinking, I think that "transcendence" can mean it is beyond the modification or transformation.
In my understanding,it transcends a physical shape or a frame. So even though Jesus had to go through the change during his growth, it doesn't necessarily mean that God is not the God of transcendence. Regardless of the change of growth, the unchanging Spirit of God's character was always unchanging in Jesus.
So I think God is still the God of transcendence.
Post a Comment