What does it mean that God is sovereign?

[Roymond]

On 12/1/2022 at 8:38 AM, Mr. M said:

What Paul is saying is that the Christ is the seed of Abraham, and this pertains solely to man, and not ALL creation.

Galatians 3:15 Brethren, I speak in the manner of men: Though it is only a man’s covenant, yet if it is confirmed, no one annuls or adds to it. 

The seed of Abraham did not exist before the foundation of the world, Christ began with a promise and an oath made to Abraham. If God spoke a promise to a man, that promise was fulfilled with the speaking of it!

John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.

It is impossible that Abraham could have seen the day of Son of God, before the foundation of the world. What he saw was Messiah, the seed of Abraham, that would fulfill the promises.

Hebrews 1:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

The Son of God took on Christ at His baptism, when John saw the Spirit descend upon Him. It is this Spirit of Christ that was perfected on the cross.

Hebrews 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; 9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him. 

Whose obedience was made perfect, the Son of God? or the son of man and Christ, to perfect that which pertains to man, not all creation.

Hebrews 12:22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, 23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect.

The Son of God is much more than the seed of Abraham, and He became a man precisely so that he could take this upon Himself. Angels are not of the seed of man or Abraham, but they are subject to the Son.

Galatians 3:29 And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

A full study of Hebrews chapters 1 and 2 as a minimum to fully exhaust this topic?

 

The assertion I put in bold and red needs some serious explaining; as it stands, it is the ancient heresy of Adoptionism.

The Son of God took on flesh at the moment Gabriel announced His birth to Mary the virgin.  Christ is none other than the Person of the enfleshed Word, as John wrote in his Gospel.

What's in purple may redeem the post so long as it is remembered that He became man in the virgin's womb.  Concerning this the ancient Fathers declared that "what He did not take on, He could not redeem", thus if God the Son did not become man in the womb, He did not take on our human nature and there is no redemption, for a redeemer must be close kin to those he is to redeem, and if He did not take on humanity in the womb then He is no kin to us.

This is why the ancient church ascribed to Mary the title Θεοτόκος, "Theotokos", which means "God-bearer", to make clear that the One she carried in her womb was God. 

Please explain further so we can know just what it is that you are asserting.

[Roymond]

On 12/1/2022 at 9:05 AM, kwikphilly said:

Blessings MrM

   Did I not say "the Promise of the Seed ?I thought I made it clear through the verses of Scripture that I was not talking about Abrahams seed but the Promise of the Seed,meaning Christ Jesus,as Paul Insisted

Well perhaps you are just emphasizing the fact that it is BOTH the Word of God- The Promise of the Seed that was yet to Cone(Jesus) and the Seed(of God) Jesus Immaculate Conception,God is Faithful!

Jesus can be called the "Immaculate Inception" as well, because at His birth that which was immaculate was planted in a fallen world.

[kwikphilly]

Well welcome to Worthy Roymind

So far you've accused us of sloppy theology at best,suggesting dangerous positions,Arianism,Adoptions,ancient heretic ideology..... Anything else you care to add?

So if you're counting on me to " trot it out"  .  Here goes:

We do respect each other here,we respect each other's perspectives & even though they may differ from our own we all agree with our SoF: God the Father,God the Son & God the Holy Spirit=One God

However you might word the Triune GodHead or define God's is Sovereign,those are your words..... Even your own word " enmaterialize' is just you expressing yourself!It doesn't matter what I might think of your grammar- you are not the Topic and neither is anyone else

If you like debate then debate the Topic without all the accusations -unless of course you won't mind very little interaction from others.

Just trotting along,making observations.   

[Mr. M]

8 hours ago, Roymond said:

The Son of God took on flesh at the moment Gabriel announced His birth to Mary the virgin. 

 

8 hours ago, Roymond said:

Hebrews 1:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

The Son of God took on Christ at His baptism, when John saw the Spirit descend upon Him. It is this Spirit of Christ that was perfected on the cross.

Hebrews 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; 9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him. 

Whose obedience was made perfect, the Son of God? or the son of man and Christ, to perfect that which pertains to man, not all creation.

Hebrews 12:22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, 23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect.

Why the baptism at age 30? To take on the spirit that was to be perfected at the

cross, which is the seed of Abraham, now the spirit of just men made perfect.

[Roymond]

12 hours ago, Mr. M said:

 

Why the baptism at age 30? To take on the spirit that was to be perfected at the

cross, which is the seed of Abraham, now the spirit of just men made perfect.

The Spirit Who descended on Jesus at His baptism was already perfect; He was and is God.

The "seed of Abraham" is Jesus; "seed" means "offspring" or "descendant".

[Roymond]

14 hours ago, kwikphilly said:

Well welcome to Worthy Roymind

So far you've accused us of sloppy theology at best,suggesting dangerous positions,Arianism,Adoptions,ancient heretic ideology..... Anything else you care to add?

So if you're counting on me to " trot it out"  .  Here goes:

We do respect each other here,we respect each other's perspectives & even though they may differ from our own we all agree with our SoF: God the Father,God the Son & God the Holy Spirit=One God

However you might word the Triune GodHead or define God's is Sovereign,those are your words..... Even your own word " enmaterialize' is just you expressing yourself!It doesn't matter what I might think of your grammar- you are not the Topic and neither is anyone else

"Enmaterialize" is not me expressing myself, it comes from the ancient church.

If I didn't respect someone, I wouldn't bother responding. 

If I didn't point out potentially heretical positions, I would be responsible for someone going astray because they weren't informed.

14 hours ago, kwikphilly said:

If you like debate then debate the Topic without all the accusations -unless of course you won't mind very little interaction from others.

Just trotting along,making observations.   

Where have I made any accusations?  I've made objective observations about positions, I haven't said a single word about any person.

I tend to write the way I learned in graduate school, as though addressing scholars, analyzing points objectively.  I really don't know any other way to write except for what I think of as "sermon mode".

[Mr. M]

15 minutes ago, Roymond said:

The Spirit Who descended on Jesus at His baptism was already perfect; He was and is God.

Wasn't Jesus already God, before His baptism?

[Roymond]

1 hour ago, Mr. M said:

Wasn't Jesus already God, before His baptism?

Yes, and so was the Spirit.

What happened at Jesus' Baptism was to -- I'm probably going to make a mess of the terminology, but this is from a Readings in the Church Fathers graduate course -- "energize the waters of Baptism", so that when the Apostles and their successors baptized people Jesus was already "in the waters".  We are commanded to baptize "in the Name of the Father ,and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit", and the Three were all there at Jesus' baptism.  Since Jesus had no sin to 'wash away', then (to use a trope from C.S. Lewis) "things ran backwards", and instead of the waters 'washing' Jesus, Jesus washed the waters, and by a connection we would call metaphysical all the water that would ever get used for a baptism those waters too, were "washed", so that when we get/got baptized we were washed.

BTW, in that Hebrews passage you've cited where the KJV (and far too many others!) translates "And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation...", the word there is τελειωθεὶς (te-lei-oh-THEIS), from τελεόω (te-leh-AH-oe) (or τελειόω), which really means "complete".  How could Jesus be made "complete"?   Jesus Himself uses the same verb at the pinacle of the New Testament when He declares "τετέλεσται" (teh-TEH-les0-tai):  "It is [now and forever, totally and completely] finished!"  or "It is completed".  By completing the task of Redemption, Jesus was "completed".  And we know this is what is meant because the inspired writer goes on to say, "He became the source of eternal salvation":  by completing His task, by being completed, "He became the source of eternal salvation".

[Mr. M]

5 hours ago, Roymond said:

"things ran backwards", and instead of the waters 'washing' Jesus, Jesus washed the waters, and by a connection we would call metaphysical all the water that would ever get used for a baptism those waters too, were "washed", so that when we get/got baptized we were washed.

He has washed us in His blood.

Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood.

The blood is conscience cleansing, for sin and for uncleanness.

Hebrews 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

1 Peter 3:

21 The like figure hereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

22 Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.

Healing and restoration flowing directly from the Throne,

to the conscience by the renewing of your transformed mind.

Zechariah 13:1 In that day a fountain shall be opened for the house of David

and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness.

Ephesians 4:23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; 

24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created

in righteousness and true holiness.

Acts 24:16 This being so, I myself always strive to have a conscience

without offense toward God and men.

[kwikphilly]

9 hours ago, Roymond said:

"Enmaterialize" is not me expressing myself, it comes from the ancient church.

If I didn't respect someone, I wouldn't bother responding. 

If I didn't point out potentially heretical positions, I would be responsible for someone going astray because they weren't informed.

Where have I made any accusations?  I've made objective observations about positions, I haven't said a single word about any person.

I tend to write the way I learned in graduate school, as though addressing scholars, analyzing points objectively.  I really don't know any other way to write except for what I think of as "sermon mode".

It's friendly advice dear,
you can take it or leave it....

Perhaps your idea of "sermon mode"is very different from ours ?

Objective observation,in simple language is " sticking to the facts" which means observing & documenting what one sees &/or hears without interpretation...... You've interpreted what others have said and gave accusatory opinions ..." Sloppy theology","asserting ancient heretical positions" etc etc..    not facts,your own assumptions

Your opinions are appreciated and its very simple,be nice- that's not difficult to do,right?👍