Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

JXL said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

JXL said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

DC, Your claim that Christ is the Son of God because the Incarnation is a supernatural occurrence is a false premise.
Jesus is the Son of God for several reasons. One is Jesus' perfect obedience in love to His Father. Another is the Eucharist in which Jesus becomes incarnate in the wine and bread. Jesus , also, becomes incarnate in the poor, sick, imprisoned, the hungry.

---

I do not claim that Jesus is the Son of God because of the Incarnation. Indeed, Jesus was the Son of God before the Incarnation. False Premise - you are reading the NT back into the OT. The OT was written is a particular time and place.

Nevertheless, it is not a "false premise" to say that the following combination of statements are incompatible with rational thought:
1. There is no supernatural. (You have repeatedly made this claim).
2. Jesus, a physical person, is God in the flesh. (A necessary but not sufficient belief to be identified as a Christian).False Premise. It is not necessary claim to be a Christian. The claim of Jesus on our lives is to Love Jesus and to feed his lambs.(John 21 "Simon son of John, do you love me?"

Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, "Do you love me?" He said, "Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you."

Both of these statements can be false, but they cannot both be true.

If you believe the first, you cannot be a Christian because you must believe the second (and more) to be a Christian and the two statement are logically incompatible. Mixing the supernatural with the natural is well...unnatural. The natural - Jesus the human as God's perfection reflection of God's love which is spiritual is logical. The commonality is love not supernatural.

---

I

---

So who was Jesus? Just some random guy who went around talking about "love," or more than that?

---

JXL I have not the patience or time to review my Christology with you, especially one who mischaracterizes my argument as "Jesus is some guy". That's just lazy thinking
Read back a couple pages

---

Great! Since Jesus is the Son of God, sent by God to earth, then we see that God can affect the physical world (by sending His Son into it), which is what you have been demanding proof of.

So there we go - you have the proof you wanted, from the best possible source - you yourself.

---

It is all spiritual not physical.

---

Talking about Jesus and saying "It is all spiritual not physical" is logically incompatible with the statement that Jesus walked the earth "a real physical man." Both of these are your statements and they are irreconcilable.

---

Jesus, Connection, the God the spiritual.

---

Sorry, that series of four nouns is just nonsensical. There is no verb, there's no statement.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

JXL said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

JXL said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

JXL said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

DC, Your claim that Christ is the Son of God because the Incarnation is a supernatural occurrence is a false premise.
Jesus is the Son of God for several reasons. One is Jesus' perfect obedience in love to His Father. Another is the Eucharist in which Jesus becomes incarnate in the wine and bread. Jesus , also, becomes incarnate in the poor, sick, imprisoned, the hungry.

---

I do not claim that Jesus is the Son of God because of the Incarnation. Indeed, Jesus was the Son of God before the Incarnation. False Premise - you are reading the NT back into the OT. The OT was written is a particular time and place.

Nevertheless, it is not a "false premise" to say that the following combination of statements are incompatible with rational thought:
1. There is no supernatural. (You have repeatedly made this claim).
2. Jesus, a physical person, is God in the flesh. (A necessary but not sufficient belief to be identified as a Christian).False Premise. It is not necessary claim to be a Christian. The claim of Jesus on our lives is to Love Jesus and to feed his lambs.(John 21 "Simon son of John, do you love me?"

Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, "Do you love me?" He said, "Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you."

Both of these statements can be false, but they cannot both be true.

If you believe the first, you cannot be a Christian because you must believe the second (and more) to be a Christian and the two statement are logically incompatible. Mixing the supernatural with the natural is well...unnatural. The natural - Jesus the human as God's perfection reflection of God's love which is spiritual is logical. The commonality is love not supernatural.

---

I

---

So who was Jesus? Just some random guy who went around talking about "love," or more than that?

---

JXL I have not the patience or time to review my Christology with you, especially one who mischaracterizes my argument as "Jesus is some guy". That's just lazy thinking
Read back a couple pages

---

Great! Since Jesus is the Son of God, sent by God to earth, then we see that God can affect the physical world (by sending His Son into it), which is what you have been demanding proof of.

So there we go - you have the proof you wanted, from the best possible source - you yourself.

---

It is all spiritual not physical.

---

So Jesus was a spiritual being, not a physical human?

---

you are being obtuse. Of course Jesus is a physical being, but its connection to people and to God is spiritual, and the Scriptures prove me up.

---

No, you are the one who is being obtuse. You are arguing in a circle to get around the obvious contradiction in your belief. You are saying God sent a physical Jesus, which means God achieved a physical act. But then you say it wasn't physical, it was all spiritual. It can't be all spiritual, if it was physical too.

You know this. You just aren't being honest about it.

---

It is illogical to argue for a non existent "super natural power" for which you have no proof. Most of us live in a scientific world in which the scientific method determines the existence of the supernatural. It fails tests.

Waco1947 said:

Jesus' Connection to God is spiritual.

Waco1947 said:

---

JXL said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

JXL said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

JXL said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

DC, Your claim that Christ is the Son of God because the Incarnation is a supernatural occurrence is a false premise.
Jesus is the Son of God for several reasons. One is Jesus' perfect obedience in love to His Father. Another is the Eucharist in which Jesus becomes incarnate in the wine and bread. Jesus , also, becomes incarnate in the poor, sick, imprisoned, the hungry.

---

I do not claim that Jesus is the Son of God because of the Incarnation. Indeed, Jesus was the Son of God before the Incarnation. False Premise - you are reading the NT back into the OT. The OT was written is a particular time and place.

Nevertheless, it is not a "false premise" to say that the following combination of statements are incompatible with rational thought:
1. There is no supernatural. (You have repeatedly made this claim).
2. Jesus, a physical person, is God in the flesh. (A necessary but not sufficient belief to be identified as a Christian).False Premise. It is not necessary claim to be a Christian. The claim of Jesus on our lives is to Love Jesus and to feed his lambs.(John 21 "Simon son of John, do you love me?"

Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, "Do you love me?" He said, "Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you."

Both of these statements can be false, but they cannot both be true.

If you believe the first, you cannot be a Christian because you must believe the second (and more) to be a Christian and the two statement are logically incompatible. Mixing the supernatural with the natural is well...unnatural. The natural - Jesus the human as God's perfection reflection of God's love which is spiritual is logical. The commonality is love not supernatural.

---

I

---

So who was Jesus? Just some random guy who went around talking about "love," or more than that?

---

JXL I have not the patience or time to review my Christology with you, especially one who mischaracterizes my argument as "Jesus is some guy". That's just lazy thinking
Read back a couple pages

---

Great! Since Jesus is the Son of God, sent by God to earth, then we see that God can affect the physical world (by sending His Son into it), which is what you have been demanding proof of.

So there we go - you have the proof you wanted, from the best possible source - you yourself.

---

It is all spiritual not physical.

---

So Jesus was a spiritual being, not a physical human?

---

you are being obtuse. Of course Jesus is a physical being, but its connection to people and to God is spiritual, and the Scriptures prove me up.

---

Since you say Jesus was a physical man then you have proven that God can affect the physical world, which He did by sending Jesus into it.

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

JXL said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

JXL said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

JXL said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

DC, Your claim that Christ is the Son of God because the Incarnation is a supernatural occurrence is a false premise.
Jesus is the Son of God for several reasons. One is Jesus' perfect obedience in love to His Father. Another is the Eucharist in which Jesus becomes incarnate in the wine and bread. Jesus , also, becomes incarnate in the poor, sick, imprisoned, the hungry.

---

I do not claim that Jesus is the Son of God because of the Incarnation. Indeed, Jesus was the Son of God before the Incarnation. False Premise - you are reading the NT back into the OT. The OT was written is a particular time and place.

Nevertheless, it is not a "false premise" to say that the following combination of statements are incompatible with rational thought:
1. There is no supernatural. (You have repeatedly made this claim).
2. Jesus, a physical person, is God in the flesh. (A necessary but not sufficient belief to be identified as a Christian).False Premise. It is not necessary claim to be a Christian. The claim of Jesus on our lives is to Love Jesus and to feed his lambs.(John 21 "Simon son of John, do you love me?"

Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, "Do you love me?" He said, "Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you."

Both of these statements can be false, but they cannot both be true.

If you believe the first, you cannot be a Christian because you must believe the second (and more) to be a Christian and the two statement are logically incompatible. Mixing the supernatural with the natural is well...unnatural. The natural - Jesus the human as God's perfection reflection of God's love which is spiritual is logical. The commonality is love not supernatural.

---

I

---

So who was Jesus? Just some random guy who went around talking about "love," or more than that?

---

JXL I have not the patience or time to review my Christology with you, especially one who mischaracterizes my argument as "Jesus is some guy". That's just lazy thinking
Read back a couple pages

---

Great! Since Jesus is the Son of God, sent by God to earth, then we see that God can affect the physical world (by sending His Son into it), which is what you have been demanding proof of.

So there we go - you have the proof you wanted, from the best possible source - you yourself.

---

It is all spiritual not physical.

---

So Jesus was a spiritual being, not a physical human?

---

you are being obtuse. Of course Jesus is a physical being, but its connection to people and to God is spiritual, and the Scriptures prove me up.

---

No, you are the one who is being obtuse. You are arguing in a circle to get around the obvious contradiction in your belief. You are saying God sent a physical Jesus, which means God achieved a physical act. But then you say it wasn't physical, it was all spiritual. It can't be all spiritual, if it was physical too.

You know this. You just aren't being honest about it.

---

It is illogical to argue for a non existent "super natural power" for which you have no proof. Most of us live in a scientific world in which the scientific method determines the existence of the supernatural. It fails tests.

---

Science doesn't draw conclusions about supernatural explanations

Do gods exist? Do supernatural entities intervene in human affairs? These questions may be important, but science won't help you answer them. Questions that deal with supernatural explanations are, by definition, beyond the realm of nature and hence, also beyond the realm of what can be studied by science. For many, such questions are matters of personal faith and spirituality.

conclusions about the supernatural are outside the realm of science

Science dept at Berkeley disagrees with you boss.

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

JXL said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

JXL said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

JXL said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

DC, Your claim that Christ is the Son of God because the Incarnation is a supernatural occurrence is a false premise.
Jesus is the Son of God for several reasons. One is Jesus' perfect obedience in love to His Father. Another is the Eucharist in which Jesus becomes incarnate in the wine and bread. Jesus , also, becomes incarnate in the poor, sick, imprisoned, the hungry.

---

I do not claim that Jesus is the Son of God because of the Incarnation. Indeed, Jesus was the Son of God before the Incarnation. False Premise - you are reading the NT back into the OT. The OT was written is a particular time and place.

Nevertheless, it is not a "false premise" to say that the following combination of statements are incompatible with rational thought:
1. There is no supernatural. (You have repeatedly made this claim).
2. Jesus, a physical person, is God in the flesh. (A necessary but not sufficient belief to be identified as a Christian).False Premise. It is not necessary claim to be a Christian. The claim of Jesus on our lives is to Love Jesus and to feed his lambs.(John 21 "Simon son of John, do you love me?"

Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, "Do you love me?" He said, "Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you."

Both of these statements can be false, but they cannot both be true.

If you believe the first, you cannot be a Christian because you must believe the second (and more) to be a Christian and the two statement are logically incompatible. Mixing the supernatural with the natural is well...unnatural. The natural - Jesus the human as God's perfection reflection of God's love which is spiritual is logical. The commonality is love not supernatural.

---

I

---

So who was Jesus? Just some random guy who went around talking about "love," or more than that?

---

JXL I have not the patience or time to review my Christology with you, especially one who mischaracterizes my argument as "Jesus is some guy". That's just lazy thinking
Read back a couple pages

---

Great! Since Jesus is the Son of God, sent by God to earth, then we see that God can affect the physical world (by sending His Son into it), which is what you have been demanding proof of.

So there we go - you have the proof you wanted, from the best possible source - you yourself.

---

It is all spiritual not physical.

---

So Jesus was a spiritual being, not a physical human?

---

you are being obtuse. Of course Jesus is a physical being, but its connection to people and to God is spiritual, and the Scriptures prove me up.

---

No, you are the one who is being obtuse. You are arguing in a circle to get around the obvious contradiction in your belief. You are saying God sent a physical Jesus, which means God achieved a physical act. But then you say it wasn't physical, it was all spiritual. It can't be all spiritual, if it was physical too.

You know this. You just aren't being honest about it.

---

It is illogical to argue for a non existent "super natural power" for which you have no proof. Most of us live in a scientific world in which the scientific method determines the existence of the supernatural. It fails tests.

---

If it's non-existent, illogical and without scientific proof, then why are arguing FOR it?

Waco1947 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

Jesus' Connection to God is spiritual.

---

Do you believe that Jesus spoke and did things physically as a direct result of this connection?

Waco1947 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

Jesus' Connection to God is spiritual.

---

If Jesus was physical, what you are describing is supernatural.

Of course, Christians also believe that Jesus was NOT simply an ordinary physical man who was "spiritually connected to God," Christians believe that he walked the earth as God in the flesh.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

Jesus' Connection to God is spiritual.

---

Do you believe that Jesus spoke and did things physically as a direct result of this connection?

---

Reflections on Richard Rohr's Sacred Cosmology:
Sacred Cosmology and Physical Cosmology
"I live in both cosmologies as you and all of us do. It's not a dualism where I switch back and forth. There is a basic unity. As I live in the physical cosmology my heart and soul and interior life, live in a Sacred Cosmology of love and grace and forgiveness and justice.
The problem for us secular (physical Cosmology) /sacred Christians is blending the two as if the sacred acts on the physical forces of our shared Cosmology.
But in reality God is powerless over the physical cosmology. So my faith is that God is active in love, grace, etc. in the Sacred Cosmology. We have come to believe that physical forces - weather, wind, rain, earthquakes, etc. are beyond ours and God's control. And if they are beyond our control then how do I "respond" as a Christian with a sacred Cosmology? It was a difficult task given my orthodox and fundamentalist background which taught God is all powerful in a physics way but I came to believe in an all powerful God of love as in I John "God is love." It's soinds foolish to the orthodox/fundamentalist/evangelical but to those of my fsith it is the power of the cross. In the weakness of the cross is the power of God for love and new life in Christ. Surely I sound foolish to my more conservative brothers and sisters but God's saving power in the weakness of the cross is my my faith in an all powerful God of love (I Corinthians 1).
My God's love and presence go with me through this physical Cosmology. The cross reassures me. My task is to hold fast in faith to this God. That faith is wavering but God forgives and I launch myself again into this world. I believe my Sacred Cosmology wins the day for love, grace, etc. The Sacred God of my faith is my final hope. Faith, hope, love abide in this physical Cosmology but the greatest of these is love.

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

Jesus' Connection to God is spiritual.

---

If Jesus was physical, what you are describing is supernatural.

Of course, Christians also believe that Jesus was NOT simply an ordinary physical man who was "spiritually connected to God," Christians believe that he walked the earth as God in the flesh.

---

Reflections on Richard Rohr's Sacred Cosmology:
Sacred Cosmology and Physical Cosmology
"I live in both cosmologies as you and all of us do. It's not a dualism where I switch back and forth. There is a basic unity. As I live in the physical cosmology my heart and soul and interior life, live in a Sacred Cosmology of love and grace and forgiveness and justice.
The problem for us secular (physical Cosmology) /sacred Christians is blending the two as if the sacred acts on the physical forces of our shared Cosmology.
But in reality God is powerless over the physical cosmology. So my faith is that God is active in love, grace, etc. in the Sacred Cosmology. We have come to believe that physical forces - weather, wind, rain, earthquakes, etc. are beyond ours and God's control. And if they are beyond our control then how do I "respond" as a Christian with a sacred Cosmology? It was a difficult task given my orthodox and fundamentalist background which taught God is all powerful in a physics way but I came to believe in an all powerful God of love as in I John "God is love." It's soinds foolish to the orthodox/fundamentalist/evangelical but to those of my fsith it is the power of the cross. In the weakness of the cross is the power of God for love and new life in Christ. Surely I sound foolish to my more conservative brothers and sisters but God's saving power in the weakness of the cross is my my faith in an all powerful God of love (I Corinthians 1).
My God's love and presence go with me through this physical Cosmology. The cross reassures me. My task is to hold fast in faith to this God. That faith is wavering but God forgives and I launch myself again into this world. I believe my Sacred Cosmology wins the day for love, grace, etc. The Sacred God of my faith is my final hope. Faith, hope, love abide in this physical Cosmology but the greatest of these is love.

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

Jesus' Connection to God is spiritual.

---

Do you believe that Jesus spoke and did things physically as a direct result of this connection?

---

Reflections on Richard Rohr's Sacred Cosmology:
Sacred Cosmology and Physical Cosmology
"I live in both cosmologies as you and all of us do. It's not a dualism where I switch back and forth. There is a basic unity. As I live in the physical cosmology my heart and soul and interior life, live in a Sacred Cosmology of love and grace and forgiveness and justice.
The problem for us secular (physical Cosmology) /sacred Christians is blending the two as if the sacred acts on the physical forces of our shared Cosmology.
But in reality God is powerless over the physical cosmology. So my faith is that God is active in love, grace, etc. in the Sacred Cosmology. We have come to believe that physical forces - weather, wind, rain, earthquakes, etc. are beyond ours and God's control. And if they are beyond our control then how do I "respond" as a Christian with a sacred Cosmology? It was a difficult task given my orthodox and fundamentalist background which taught God is all powerful in a physics way but I came to believe in an all powerful God of love as in I John "God is love." It's soinds foolish to the orthodox/fundamentalist/evangelical but to those of my fsith it is the power of the cross. In the weakness of the cross is the power of God for love and new life in Christ. Surely I sound foolish to my more conservative brothers and sisters but God's saving power in the weakness of the cross is my my faith in an all powerful God of love (I Corinthians 1).
My God's love and presence go with me through this physical Cosmology. The cross reassures me. My task is to hold fast in faith to this God. That faith is wavering but God forgives and I launch myself again into this world. I believe my Sacred Cosmology wins the day for love, grace, etc. The Sacred God of my faith is my final hope. Faith, hope, love abide in this physical Cosmology but the greatest of these is love.

---

Instead of posting a quote which doesn't answer my question, why not just answer my question? Do you or do you not believe Jesus physically spoke and did things as a direct result of the "connection" he had with God?

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

Jesus' Connection to God is spiritual.

---

If Jesus was physical, what you are describing is supernatural.

Of course, Christians also believe that Jesus was NOT simply an ordinary physical man who was "spiritually connected to God," Christians believe that he walked the earth as God in the flesh.

---

Reflections on Richard Rohr's Sacred Cosmology:
Sacred Cosmology and Physical Cosmology
"I live in both cosmologies as you and all of us do. It's not a dualism where I switch back and forth. There is a basic unity. As I live in the physical cosmology my heart and soul and interior life, live in a Sacred Cosmology of love and grace and forgiveness and justice.
The problem for us secular (physical Cosmology) /sacred Christians is blending the two as if the sacred acts on the physical forces of our shared Cosmology.
But in reality God is powerless over the physical cosmology. So my faith is that God is active in love, grace, etc. in the Sacred Cosmology. We have come to believe that physical forces - weather, wind, rain, earthquakes, etc. are beyond ours and God's control. And if they are beyond our control then how do I "respond" as a Christian with a sacred Cosmology? It was a difficult task given my orthodox and fundamentalist background which taught God is all powerful in a physics way but I came to believe in an all powerful God of love as in I John "God is love." It's soinds foolish to the orthodox/fundamentalist/evangelical but to those of my fsith it is the power of the cross. In the weakness of the cross is the power of God for love and new life in Christ. Surely I sound foolish to my more conservative brothers and sisters but God's saving power in the weakness of the cross is my my faith in an all powerful God of love (I Corinthians 1).
My God's love and presence go with me through this physical Cosmology. The cross reassures me. My task is to hold fast in faith to this God. That faith is wavering but God forgives and I launch myself again into this world. I believe my Sacred Cosmology wins the day for love, grace, etc. The Sacred God of my faith is my final hope. Faith, hope, love abide in this physical Cosmology but the greatest of these is love.

---

No so much.

This is basically Gnosticism wrapped in a new package.

For the Christian, God is all powerful in all ways, including the physical universe that He created. The Word became flesh and dwelt among us is not allegorical. Jesus, as you say, walked the earth as a physical man. Jesus, as you say, was sent from God. For God to come to earth as a physical man requires power over the physical universe.

It is more than a little strange that someone who wants to call themselves a Christian, a follower of the Son of God, would want to argue that the Creator of the universe is powerless over creation when power over creation is required for the incarnation to happen.

historian said:

---

I don't know who Richard Rohr is but the only resource one needs to understand God is the Bible. Well that, and a willingness to believe.

"Because if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." Romans 10:9

---

Richard Rohr is a well known false teacher.

https://crossexamined.org/heres-why-christians-should-avoid-the-teachings-of-richard-rohr/

Unfortunately, there are lots of false teachers.

Oh look, ANOTHER fat white woman w/no Dad in sight transitioning her son into a daughter before they get to Kindergarten.

This is so sad. This kid didn’t feel like a boy and liked being a princess at age 2 so his mother started transitioning him. She claims she had to transition him or he would commit suicide. pic.twitter.com/Uq5vbd2eDL

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) February 19, 2024

Truth is truth. The quote in and of itself is true

Amen. These people need help, not someone playing with and removing their genitals. Save that for the pedophiles.

One of the reasons these people are SO fierce about their belief is that if they are wrong then they have destroyed their child. Mutilated them. They cannot afford to be wrong. So no matter what they will stick to their decisions and convictions.

Waco1947 said:

---

Truth is truth. The quote in and of itself is true

---

If the quote is true, that "in reality God is powerless over the physical cosmology.... We have come to believe that physical forces - weather, wind, rain, earthquakes, etc. are beyond ours and God's control".....

then how did God "send" the physical Jesus to the earth?

You aren't answering this question that's being repeatedly asked. You are talking about "connection" with the Spirit, but you're not explaining how, then, a spirit can make something happen in the physical world without supernatural power. Did this Spirit cause Jesus to think, speak, or perform a physical action? If you continue to dodge these questions, then that is an indicator to everyone that you can't defend your theology because it is false.

God is omnipotent. That means He is not "powerless" over anything. Anyone who says otherwise worships a false god.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Truth is truth. The quote in and of itself is true

---

If the quote is true, that "in reality God is powerless over the physical cosmology.... We have come to believe that physical forces - weather, wind, rain, earthquakes, etc. are beyond ours and God's control".....

then how did God "send" the physical Jesus to the earth?

You aren't answering this question that's being repeatedly asked. You are talking about "connection" with the Spirit, but you're not explaining how, then, a spirit can make something happen in the physical world without supernatural power. Did this Spirit cause Jesus to think, speak, or perform a physical action? If you continue to dodge these questions, then that is an indicator to everyone that you can't defend your theology because it is false.

---

The Rohr comment that I posted gives you great clarity. But you have to read it first.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

Jesus' Connection to God is spiritual.

---

Do you believe that Jesus spoke and did things physically as a direct result of this connection?

---

Reflections on Richard Rohr's Sacred Cosmology:
Sacred Cosmology and Physical Cosmology
"I live in both cosmologies as you and all of us do. It's not a dualism where I switch back and forth. There is a basic unity. As I live in the physical cosmology my heart and soul and interior life, live in a Sacred Cosmology of love and grace and forgiveness and justice.
The problem for us secular (physical Cosmology) /sacred Christians is blending the two as if the sacred acts on the physical forces of our shared Cosmology.
But in reality God is powerless over the physical cosmology. So my faith is that God is active in love, grace, etc. in the Sacred Cosmology. We have come to believe that physical forces - weather, wind, rain, earthquakes, etc. are beyond ours and God's control. And if they are beyond our control then how do I "respond" as a Christian with a sacred Cosmology? It was a difficult task given my orthodox and fundamentalist background which taught God is all powerful in a physics way but I came to believe in an all powerful God of love as in I John "God is love." It's soinds foolish to the orthodox/fundamentalist/evangelical but to those of my fsith it is the power of the cross. In the weakness of the cross is the power of God for love and new life in Christ. Surely I sound foolish to my more conservative brothers and sisters but God's saving power in the weakness of the cross is my my faith in an all powerful God of love (I Corinthians 1).
My God's love and presence go with me through this physical Cosmology. The cross reassures me. My task is to hold fast in faith to this God. That faith is wavering but God forgives and I launch myself again into this world. I believe my Sacred Cosmology wins the day for love, grace, etc. The Sacred God of my faith is my final hope. Faith, hope, love abide in this physical Cosmology but the greatest of these is love.

---

Instead of posting a quote which doesn't answer my question, why not just answer my question? Do you or do you not believe Jesus physically spoke and did things as a direct result of the "connection" he had with God?

---

You're being silly. Rohr captures my beliefs as the physical and the sacred

Assertion without evidence DC

I made a separate post. So respond there.

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

Jesus' Connection to God is spiritual.

---

Do you believe that Jesus spoke and did things physically as a direct result of this connection?

---

Reflections on Richard Rohr's Sacred Cosmology:
Sacred Cosmology and Physical Cosmology
"I live in both cosmologies as you and all of us do. It's not a dualism where I switch back and forth. There is a basic unity. As I live in the physical cosmology my heart and soul and interior life, live in a Sacred Cosmology of love and grace and forgiveness and justice.
The problem for us secular (physical Cosmology) /sacred Christians is blending the two as if the sacred acts on the physical forces of our shared Cosmology.
But in reality God is powerless over the physical cosmology. So my faith is that God is active in love, grace, etc. in the Sacred Cosmology. We have come to believe that physical forces - weather, wind, rain, earthquakes, etc. are beyond ours and God's control. And if they are beyond our control then how do I "respond" as a Christian with a sacred Cosmology? It was a difficult task given my orthodox and fundamentalist background which taught God is all powerful in a physics way but I came to believe in an all powerful God of love as in I John "God is love." It's soinds foolish to the orthodox/fundamentalist/evangelical but to those of my fsith it is the power of the cross. In the weakness of the cross is the power of God for love and new life in Christ. Surely I sound foolish to my more conservative brothers and sisters but God's saving power in the weakness of the cross is my my faith in an all powerful God of love (I Corinthians 1).
My God's love and presence go with me through this physical Cosmology. The cross reassures me. My task is to hold fast in faith to this God. That faith is wavering but God forgives and I launch myself again into this world. I believe my Sacred Cosmology wins the day for love, grace, etc. The Sacred God of my faith is my final hope. Faith, hope, love abide in this physical Cosmology but the greatest of these is love.

---

Instead of posting a quote which doesn't answer my question, why not just answer my question? Do you or do you not believe Jesus physically spoke and did things as a direct result of the "connection" he had with God?

---

You're being silly. Rohr captures my beliefs as the physical and the sacred

---

I don't doubt that Rohr's beliefs resonate with someone like you.

But you're still dodging the question. "Silliness" isn't an answer. The more you keep dodging, the worse you and your theology looks. Everyone is noticing this, pastor. Please choose to engage in honest conversation rather than BS your way through. Don't you care about your ministry, and how this looks?

Waco1947 said:

---

Assertion without evidence DC

---

I don't need any of my own evidence here. I am using your evidence. Your claims cannot be supported by reason. It is nonsensical to say that Jesus walked the earth as a physical man AND that Jesus was sent by God AND that God cannot intervene in the physical universe BECAUSE if God sent a physical man into the physical universe then the ability to intervene in the physical universe is required.

It does not require an advanced degree to understand this.

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Truth is truth. The quote in and of itself is true

---

If the quote is true, that "in reality God is powerless over the physical cosmology.... We have come to believe that physical forces - weather, wind, rain, earthquakes, etc. are beyond ours and God's control".....

then how did God "send" the physical Jesus to the earth?

You aren't answering this question that's being repeatedly asked. You are talking about "connection" with the Spirit, but you're not explaining how, then, a spirit can make something happen in the physical world without supernatural power. Did this Spirit cause Jesus to think, speak, or perform a physical action? If you continue to dodge these questions, then that is an indicator to everyone that you can't defend your theology because it is false.

---

The Rohr comment that I posted gives you great clarity.

---

Assertion without evidence.

Oh look, it's the trans Jussie Smollet.

F Nancy Pelosi

.@CommunityNotes the police determined that she did not die as a result of trauma from the fight in the school bathroom. https://t.co/b3icdkfT12 pic.twitter.com/It3sVigC4a

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) February 21, 2024

Ah. So Waco worships Rohr as his god. I prefer the One first known as YHWH and yes, He is both Nature and Supernature. As Scriptures affirm ... But you have to read the Scriptures to grasp that truth.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

Jesus' Connection to God is spiritual.

---

Do you believe that Jesus spoke and did things physically as a direct result of this connection?

---

Reflections on Richard Rohr's Sacred Cosmology:
Sacred Cosmology and Physical Cosmology
"I live in both cosmologies as you and all of us do. It's not a dualism where I switch back and forth. There is a basic unity. As I live in the physical cosmology my heart and soul and interior life, live in a Sacred Cosmology of love and grace and forgiveness and justice.
The problem for us secular (physical Cosmology) /sacred Christians is blending the two as if the sacred acts on the physical forces of our shared Cosmology.
But in reality God is powerless over the physical cosmology. So my faith is that God is active in love, grace, etc. in the Sacred Cosmology. We have come to believe that physical forces - weather, wind, rain, earthquakes, etc. are beyond ours and God's control. And if they are beyond our control then how do I "respond" as a Christian with a sacred Cosmology? It was a difficult task given my orthodox and fundamentalist background which taught God is all powerful in a physics way but I came to believe in an all powerful God of love as in I John "God is love." It's soinds foolish to the orthodox/fundamentalist/evangelical but to those of my fsith it is the power of the cross. In the weakness of the cross is the power of God for love and new life in Christ. Surely I sound foolish to my more conservative brothers and sisters but God's saving power in the weakness of the cross is my my faith in an all powerful God of love (I Corinthians 1).
My God's love and presence go with me through this physical Cosmology. The cross reassures me. My task is to hold fast in faith to this God. That faith is wavering but God forgives and I launch myself again into this world. I believe my Sacred Cosmology wins the day for love, grace, etc. The Sacred God of my faith is my final hope. Faith, hope, love abide in this physical Cosmology but the greatest of these is love.

---

Instead of posting a quote which doesn't answer my question, why not just answer my question? Do you or do you not believe Jesus physically spoke and did things as a direct result of the "connection" he had with God?

---

You're being silly. Rohr captures my beliefs as the physical and the sacred

---

I don't doubt that Rohr's beliefs resonate with someone like you.

But you're still dodging the question. "Silliness" isn't an answer. The more you keep dodging, the worse you and your theology looks. Everyone is noticing this, pastor. Please choose to engage in honest conversation rather than BS your way through. Don't you care about your ministry, and how this looks?

---

I made a separate thread

I made a separate thread Respond there. I am done here

Waco1947 said:

---

I made a separate thread Respond there. I am done here

---

Cue the Monty Python knights:

"Run away! Run away!"