Leaderboard

? Love thy neighbor ? Mark 12:31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.

Gustave, You are truly a gentleman and a scholar. Being a former Catholic, I respect what you post. I also admire the respect you show for others. I pray we are showing you the same. I watched the video; and agree with its message.

I had already read or heard most everything Boonstra talked about. Thank you. I am glad to understand the subtil differences between Catholic, Easter Orthodox, and SDA. Many writings of Mrs White certainly support the idea that only God the Father and His Son planned the rescue of their creation. I don't read about a third divine being in Mrs White's writings during the first 50 years of her ministry. It's not as if Constantine really understood exactly what the bishops were teaching. He even brought Arius back after 3 years in exile. Then he exiled Athenasius, after Arius died suddenly and mysteriously. I have said that my views are not "pure Arian". I believe "the Son" was "begotten" of God the Father - not created by God the Father. I believe the Son was equal in divinity and power to His Father. He accepted the subordinate role because He chose to, not because He had less power than His Father. Think of a human son who respects his Father, even when He has equal size and strength. Just for example, let's compare "the substance" to human DNA. A human shares only half the DNA (substance) of his "father". A clone on the other hand shares 100% of the DNA (substance) of the "parent" cell. A clone is an exact copy. A cloned animal is even the same biological age as the "parent" animal. Sort of like perfectly identical twins. The "Son" of God the Father was "the express image" (the exact copy) of His Father. An "image" is a copy. An "image" is not the original. Which means that the Son had 100% the divine "substance" or DNA, as His divine Father. They were equal in divinity and power. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John Cpt 1 The Son was "with" the Father, and was divine (exactly like His Father). Exactly how God beget another divine being from Himself, we cannot know.

How does one grow up like this? How does one become perfect and mature? It is very simple, we are saved, we are healed, by faith. And faith, as we’ve discussed earlier, means trust. It means love. It means admiration. And that means a willingness to listen. It is a law in this orderly universe, […] The post You Become Like the God(s) You Worship (14:6) appeared first on Jon Paulien's Blog. View the full article

8thdaypriest, I agree with the description Gregory gave as to his understanding of the Trinity and also agree with his assessment that much of what Catholic & Orthodox people say (specifically religiously educated) is devoted to what God is NOT. I also can say i completely agree with JoeMo - that we as finite creations of an Infinite God can't fathom the Nature of the One who set everything we can observe, into motion. I can't over stress this point JoeMo accurately stated. My own understanding of this subject is, as a Catholic, I'm at liberty to believe ANYTHING - provided it doesn't contradict Official Church Teaching, Because Official Church Teaching has communicated that Jesus' two Natures were NOT BLENDED or Mixed any statement to the contrary of that would generate a reaction from someone who accepts the historic Christian Councils. Lutherans & Methodists accept the first 7 Christian Councils - not because they believe the Pope can't make a mistake, but because they recognize the theological statements coming out of those Councils as systematizing Sacred Scripture. Your Question: I'll "try" to address your question about the difference between Catholic and SDA teaching on the Trinity. My admitted limited understanding is this. The SDA's have a "statement" about God that can be be used to justify heretical positions. Understand, I agreed with what Gregory said about 'The Substance' of God and from what I could tell he would subscribe to the fairly articulate position Shawn Boonstra of the SDA "It Is Written" program promulgated. If you want to better understand what Gregory said I think he said I would strongly encourage you to watch the following (fairly short) video on the Trinity. Now, because of the way the SDA Church is set up I can't confirm that Boonstra's stated views are "Official SDA Church Teaching". He clearly states the Council of Nicaea was VALID and ORTHODOX thereby according to Boonstra, systematized Sacred Scripture. Boonstra goes through quoting many Scriptures in support of the conclusions of both the Catholic Synod of 269 and the Council of Nicaea. Boonstra is explicit that both the Synod and Nicaea 'reflected the Tradition of the Apostles & compliant with Scripture'. If Gregory agrees with Boonstra as to the Oneness of God being The Substance I can easily say I agree with Gregory in this. The issue as I see is that the SDA statement of Fundamental Belief would allow a Mormon to be able to say they are Trinitarian. I'll try to illustrate what I mean by this by referring you to an article in the Review and Herald (which is the general SDA Church Paper). On page 6 there is an article titled, "Our Source of Confidence and Hope" , which states: "A plan of salvation was encompassed in the covenant made by the Three Persons of the Godhead, who possessed the attributes of Deity equally. In order to eradicate sin and rebellion from the universe and to restore harmony and peace, one of the divine Beings accepted, AND entered into, the role of the Father, ANOTHER the role of the Son. The remaining divine Being, the Holy Spirit, was also to participate in effecting the plan of salvation. All of this took place before sin and rebellion transpired in heaven. By accepting the roles that the plan entailed, the divine Beings lost none of the powers of Deity. With regard to their eternal existence and other attributes, they were one and equal. But with regard to the plan of salvation, there was, in a sense, a submission on the part of the Son to the Father." http://documents.adventistarchives.org/Periodicals/RH/RH19961031-V173-44.pdf#view=fit This article describes the "Three Persons of the Godhead, who possessed the attributes of Deity equally" This is describing 3 God's, who ADOPTED "alien roles" (to eradicate sin & rebellion from the universe] to restore harmony and peace. The article claims that all of this took place prior to sin. The God who adopted the role of Son "in a sense" became subservient (submitted) to the Father. This description cannot be reconciled in anyway to be complaint with the Doctrine of the Trinity. The article goes on to attribute the oneness to the incredible degree on which the 3 god's put themselves into character and were able to hold everything together - i.e. they were one in purpose and mind: "The Father / Son relationship involved great responsibilities and sacrifices on the part of both. The Father would be called upon to permit His Son to be humiliated...……." Official Church Teaching would prevent a Catholic or Eastern Orthodox Christian from being able to accept that as anything other than a heretical teaching. A Lutheran, Baptist or Methodist (Churches that accept the 1st several Christian Councils) would be horrified by that article. Because the Official Teaching of the SDA Church allows such belief it's my understanding that the author of that article is at total liberty to assert what he did. You also questioned the belief of the Eastern Church whereas the text I quoted from the book "The Christian Faith" illustrates the difference between the Western & Eastern views with the Eastern view. \ "In the patristic theology of the East the idea prevailed that the one God is God the Father, and that the Son and the Spirit share with him his divine life. This conception had the merit of being based on Scripture, but it could lend itself to misinterpretations." was the above what you had a question about? If it was I'll try to answer it the best I can. The conception that the one God is God the Father, and that the Son and the Spirit share with him his divine life DOES have merit of being based in the Scriptures with the caveat that concepting of it in that way COULD (not does) lend itself to misinterpretation. God the Father IS the source of ALL and the Son and Holy Spirit DO SHARE with the Father His Divine Life (This was the general Eastern Church View). OR (not verses) The Father has always been the Father, ETERNALLY. The Son has always been the Son, ETERNALLY. The Holy Spirit has always been the Holy Spirit, ETERNALLY. The Son is ETERNALLY begotten of the Father by an act of eternal generation and the Holy Spirit has always proceeded ETERNALLY from the Father & The Son. (Western Church view) View / Understand the ways the Eastern and Western Church explained the same thing using different way to explain it. The Eastern way of "explaining it" seemed to be more responsible for giving birth to heresies than did the Western and as time progressed and additional views which contradicted the Tradition of the Apostles rose their heads more specific theological terms were made to set up what essentially were marker buoys to keep the faithful from led astray into odd teachings which were contrary to the Tradition of the Apostles. Of course an Eastern Orthodox would probably take issue with my statement that the Eastern view was responsible for more heretical views than the Roman Catholic (Western Church ways of explaining it) but until an Eastern Orthodox shows up and takes me to task this is the way I'll say it is 8thdaypriest, was this your question and did this answer your question?

? Rich in faith ? James 2:5 Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?

5 Things You Didn't Know About Giovanni Versace On this day in 1997 the Italian fashion designer Giovanni Versace was shot and killed outside his Miami Beach mansion by Andrew Cunanan. Here are five things you didn't know about Versace... Gianni Versace's Death Was One of Several in a Killing Spree Andrew Cunanan, the man who killed Gianni Versace, had already killed a few people and was wanted by the FBI. In fact, a worker recognized Cunanan when he made it to Florida, and that worker tried to contact the FBI, but agents were unable to reach the area until after Cunanan had left. Versace's death boosted the search simply because of how high profile Versace was. The Motive Behind Gianni Versace's Murder Is Still Unknown Even now, no one knows why Cunanan shot Gianni Versace. Theories have ranged from Cunanan trying to kill gay men in general to odd revenge theories. It's generally accepted that Versace and Cunanan did not know each other. Cunanan left no note before he killed himself, and there appeared to be no obvious reason why he was even at Versace's home. While some of the people murdered by Cunanan appeared to be old acquaintances or people unlucky enough to have vehicles that Cunanan wanted as getaway cars, Versace's death stands out as inexplicable. We Wouldn't Have Supermodels if It Hadn't Been for Versace Gianni Versace's death shocked a vast swathe of the public. The Versace fashion house's influence on the world of fashion can't be overstated. Versace was the first brand to really promote specific models and present them as living this glamorous life; without Versace's influence, the "supermodel" would not exist, and several famous names likely wouldn't be as famous, even if they had still been successful as models. The Versace Family Inspired Google's Image Search Function Google created its image search engine in response to the brouhaha surrounding the infamous dress that Jennifer Lopez wore to the 2000 Grammys. This was the diaphanous green dress with the neckline that more than plunged (and oddly, it turned out that the dress was a mistake; Lopez was supposed to receive a different dress). The fashion house that sent that dress? Versace. Had they not sent the wrong dress, or had Lopez declined to wear it, Google could have looked very different in the years after those Grammys. Fifty Percent of the Versace Fashion House Went to Donatella Versace's Daughter After Gianni Versace died, his sister Donatella took over the fashion house. But her leadership was actually a temporary measure. Gianni had left much of the house to Donatella's daughter, and Donatella led the house simply because, at the time, her daughter was only 11 years old.