Posted by CB on 8/15/2001, 1:03 pm

Some more thoughts... Posted by Steve B. on 6/23/2001, 10:10 am , in reply to "Re: pre-existence" Dave, You write ...if this gospel message is simply that God the Son became a human, and that human life died on the cross and then He went back to where He was before, that, in my mind is no sacrifice. I myself do not see why not. Why should a picture of man suffering for us be more powerful than (in some sense) God himself suffering and dying for us? Unlike yourself, many people find the second picture more powerful and more emotionally satisfying than the first. In any case, the efficacy of the sacrifice comes not from the degree to which it lines up with our own understanding of the way things should be, but from the fact that God has declared it is the sacrifice He has provided. Also, as I've asked before, why does pre-existence represent such a radically different concept to you than the virgin birth? In either case, Christ could be said to have an advantage that we don't. Having God himself physically conceive one is supposed to be totally without effect? Why then was it necessary? You say that you believe in the deity of Christ. That is another advantage he had that we don't, isn't it? In either case (trinitarian or Oneness), would not that imply that he had inherent powers and an inherent advantage in facing death that we ourselves would not? Am I supposed to decide which doctrine is true on the basis the degree to which I can feel Christ's humanity is like my own, and not on what I see revealed in scripture about his humanity? No, I don't think so. As you say, I do find myself back considering the viability of the trinity, but unlike you I think this a very good thing. I found myself off the track, I need to get back on track. The prolonged deterioration and subsequent collapse of the Chapel has made me aware of the issues really at stake. I'm asking a lot of questions now that I should have asked then. You appear to put all the importance of the gospel message on whether you can emotionally or intellectually empathize with the life of Christ, not on God's declaration that acceptance of his sacrifice does bring forgiveness of sin and eternal life. The Oneness doctrine, in my opinion, asks us to ignore signficant portions of God's Word in order to preserve a certain interpretation of the gospel message that is emotionally satisfying to ourselves. In a word, it puts feeling over truth. Additionally, it appeals to man's pride. It places too much stress on man's exaltation, and also gets the basis for it wrong. (This comes out not in your own posting, but in Lanny's postings and in the postings of the "Jesus is not God" folks.) It jumps straight to man's exaltation, emphasizing that we can be exalted like Christ, and tends to forget that this exaltation occurs only with and because of Christ, it's not really like Christ's own exaltation. He is the source, we are only the recipients. It goes back to what I said before, that it turns out in the end to be a man-centered and a man-exalting doctrine. It demotes Christ (who is the real source of our salvation) and exalts man (who has no ability to save himself). The really ironic thing is that the group which probably tried harder than anyplace else to put this theology into practice, Community Chapel, came to a more degrading end than anyplace else. Instead of exalting man, it ended up degrading him. This ought to be a tip-off—false doctrine sooner or later always delivers the opposite of what it promises. As I've noted before on this board: The Christ of UROG theology (a man who was God only because God dwelt in him) turned out to be a Pied Piper, a man who supposedly manifested himself gloriously among us in “spiritual unions,” but then disappeared when the church began to drown in its own flesh. Then nobody could find him, because he didn't exist. The crash of the Chapel caused an indelible stain that UROG will never wash from its garments, a stain due not primarily to sin but to falsehood. I have had to open my eyes to this and realize that UROG was not a great last-day truth which would spiritually awaken millions and draw them out of trinitarian churches into the light. Instead, the saints from the Chapel that survived the adultery and the divorces and are still going on with God are largely doing so in trinitarian churches. Just as we were falsely taught that the love manifested in connections would cause a thirsty world to flock to the Chapel, so we were also falsely taught that UROG is a truth other believers need to fully come into the bride of Christ. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to suggest there's a relationship there. Sincerely, Steve ---------- Posted by Dave Kenady on 6/23/2001, 2:17 pm , in reply to "Some more thoughts..." ... God himself suffering and dying for us? Someone please pinch me. Are we really having this discussion? God can't die. And if He did, we're all in trouble. In any case, the efficacy of the sacrifice comes not from the degree to which it lines up with our own understanding of the way things should be, but from the fact that God has declared it is the sacrifice He has provided. Then He can have it. I don't want it because it appears to me to be a sham. It is no sacrifice. It is an immortal God pretending to be mortal so He can then show us our elder "brother" who has become the acceptable sacrifice because He was without sin (oh yeah, He was also God who pretended to be like us -- no wonder He didn't sin. I suppose God is pleased with Himself). And the righteous Judge who does right wasted His time sprinkled the entire OT with types and shadows and prophecies that foreshadowed the Lamb of God, the suffering Servant and the whole sacrifice system that would be fulfilled by the One who was the perfect sacrifice. Though my understanding makes perfect sense to me, I should go back to believing in a God who pretended to be a man and THAT was the perfect sacrifice. And though it not only doesn't make sense, it offends me -- I should simply believe it because "... God has declared it is the sacrifice He has provided." In other words, because He said so. The bottom line, which takes me all the way back to 1975 when nothing made sense, was my pastor telling me that it is not for me to understand, just believe it by faith. This can't possibly be what God wants, even if He took a vote and the majority won. As far as pre-existence goes, I have always seen Trinitarianism mistakenly placing the "separateness" of Jesus from the Father in the Godhead rather than realizing that the "separateness" seen in the Bible is simply the Son (human) talking to the Father (Deity). Pre-existence is an extension of that understanding; (ie.-Jesus isn't seen in the OT because He is YHWH, He is seen because He is the pre-existant Son.) And it brings us right back to God [the Son] becoming a man. At least the Jesus I see truly was human, born of a woman, not only that but conceived in a woman (Mtt 1:20), maybe even by sperm and egg. Sure, Jesus was without a sin nature because He was the last Adam. But I can relate to Him as a brother and see the magnificent thing He did as a human being who was perfectly plugged into God and chose not to sin. And again, the sacrifice then makes sense. It follows all the OT sacrifices -- the lamb slain and the Judge accepting the sacrifice as payment. In your view, the Judge becomes the payment, then goes back to heaven. It's comical. I think that the whole "spiritual connections" error can be seen as something completely apart from UROG. For example, where did we ever get the idea that Jesus would manifest through our eyes?? In all my years at the Chapel, I never heard anything even similar to this until it supposedly happened. And even then, I had a lot of trouble with it. I didn't enter into connections because I saw the theology of it. I entered in because 1)all the Big Guys were doing it, so it must be right,and 2)because of peer pressure from my friends. Then later on, I went to the Bible looking for connections. I thought I found connections, but it had nothing to do with UROG as far as I know. This thought never entered my mind until you started writing about it. I think the isolation, the spiritual pride, and yes, the never-ending search for the next "wave of the Spirit" had far more to do with our demise because all these other things took our eyes off the scriptures and prevented any correction from the outside (aargh; I never thought I'd hear myself say that). UROG always had me IN the scriptures and understanding the scriptures. But the last couple of years at the Chapel, most people left their Bibles at home.