The egg and God

[AspiringSoul]

Yep! Jesus is God in the flesh but also human...why do you think He was begotten and a human mom gave birth to Him?

Its the mystical perspective that throws you off and makes it much different then its supposed to be.

What do you mean God is the lover?

God is not in the tree...He created the tree and the tree has properties that God gave it..such as with its leaves forming in spring and dropping in the fall when things die away for the winter..always coming back again in the spring. That can’t be changed because God created it to be like that.

Islam was brought up by you when you tried to say that islam is part of the many nations. That’s not true, which I have pointed out to you. I’m glad you take the NT seriously..but you don’t have it right..and that’s important.

ok so lisa, even if you dont, i hope you actually take some time to absorb what im saying, even if you dont 'accept' it, you should understand my beliefs here.

Lisa, sorry, but you dont really understand what i meant.
Mystical means to perceive God with your mind. Eg when Jesus said 'let your eye be single' he was not talking about the physical eyes but the minds eye..the 'eye of the heart' they call it. it is our inner perception.
it is about seeing ONE in all things..

Jesus said...
For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in,

this is not literally true, eg it is not 'logical perspective' but 'mystical perspective'.
The Son/Word/Logos is in ALL things..

secondly im talking about God's Immanence
you know what that means?

Immanence - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

it says
According to Christian theology, the transcendent God, who cannot be approached or seen in essence or being, becomes immanent primarily in the God-man Jesus the Christ, who is the incarnate Second Person of the Trinity.

what you dont seem to understand, is that The Son was a term adopted by the jewish philosopher, Philo, who used it to describe 'The Word/Logos' into a judaic context.
The Son, as you know, is symbolic biblical language eg God calls Israel 'my first born' eg this is not literally true for israel is it? but it is symbolic language illustrating the bond they have.
The LOGOS/WORD which the greeks came up with, is the EXPRESSION OF GOD basically.
It is by this Expression the whole of creation comes into being and this Expression is in ALL LEVELS of creation.
This is where the Transcendent Essence (the INVISIBLE Father) is 'made known' through the Expression..eg the Son/Logos.

Now Jesus being the incarnation of the Logos...it means that he embodies the IMMANENCE OF GOD...the expression etc.
It is actually based on this idea, that ST AUGUSTINE (your guy, he influenced the trinitarian doctrine btw) wrote
God is the lover, the beloved and Love itself
this is an understanding of how the Trancendent Essence is manifested on 3 levels of consciousness.
The Essence is Love
God is the beloved..and the 'lover' is the seeker of God eg the person.
in the mystical sense, that person seeking God...serving God, itself is the embodiment of God's Immanence.

This is what St Augustine wrote


. And this being so, let us direct our attention to those three things which we fancy we have found. We are not yet speaking of heavenly things, nor yet of God the Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit, but of that inadequate image, which yet is an image, that is, man; for our feeble mind perhaps can gaze upon this more familiarly and more easily. Well then, when I, who make this inquiry, love anything, there are three things concerned — myself, and that which I love, and love itself. For I do not love love, except I love a lover; for there is no love where nothing is loved. Therefore there are three things — he who loves, and that which is loved, and love. But what if I love none except myself? Will there not then be two things — that which I love, and love? For he who loves and that which is loved are the same when any one loves himself; just as to love and to be loved, in the same way, is the very same thing when any one loves himself. Since the same thing is said, when it is said, he loves himself, and he is loved by himself. For in that case to love and to be loved are not two different things: just as he who loves and he who is loved are not two different persons. But yet, even so, love and what is loved are still two things. For there is no love when any one loves himself, except when love itself is loved. But it is one thing to love one's self, another to love one's own love. For love is not loved, unless as already loving something; since where nothing is loved there is no love. Therefore there are two things when any one loves himself — love, and that which is loved. For then he that loves and that which is loved are one. Whence it seems that it does not follow that three things are to be understood wherever love is. For let us put aside from the inquiry all the other many things of which a man consists; and in order that we may discover clearly what we are now seeking, as far as in such a subject is possible, let us treat of the mind alone. The mind, then, when it loves itself, discloses two things — mind and love. But what is to love one's self, except to wish to help one's self to the enjoyment of self? And when any one wishes himself to be just as much as he is, then the will is on a par with the mind, and the love is equal to him who loves. And if love is a substance, it is certainly not body, but spirit; and the mind also is not body, but spirit. Yet love and mind are not two spirits, but one spirit; nor yet two essences, but one: and yet here are two things that are one, he that loves and love; or, if you like so to put it, that which is loved and love. And these two, indeed, are mutually said relatively. Since he who loves is referred to love, and love to him who loves. For he who loves, loves with some love, and love is the love of some one who loves. But mind and spirit are not said relatively, but express essence. For mind and spirit do not exist because the mind and spirit of some particular man exists. For if we subtract the body from that which is man, which is so called with the conjunction of body, the mind and spirit remain. But if we subtract him that loves, then there is no love; and if we subtract love, then there is no one that loves. And therefore, in so far as they are mutually referred to one another, they are two; but whereas they are spoken in respect to themselves, each are spirit, and both together also are one spirit; and each are mind, and both together one mind. Where, then, is the trinity? Let us attend as much as we can, and let us invoke the everlasting light, that He may illuminate our darkness, and that we may see in ourselves, as much as we are permitted, the image of God.

keep in mind here, that st Augustine's teachings were the biggest influence behind the formation of the trinitarian doctrine.
the problem is, that the church took what Augustine meant in mystical terminology, into literal terminology.
they didnt understand what he meant.
for all my faults...i understand it.
although, knowing something and it being effective is a diff thing.

 

[AspiringSoul]

Paul "to the pure, all things are pure"
is this literally true? is the toilet pure?
how can one be so pure that they dont see something as impure?
this is subjective/personal and mystical.

the same applies to the statements Paul made about Jesus. Jesus had emptied himself, no more ego, the serpent was dead..so what remains? only the WILL AND ACT OF GOD through Jesus.
in that sense, 'he was God'
but that is mystical, not literal.

 

[Kung Fu]

They are still the egg yolk and the egg shell that came from an egg.

Dear God. That was not the question. Are you mentally challenged? Are they still a part of the same egg they originally came from after being separated?

You're either not wanting to answer the question because you know it invalidates your stupid analogy or you really are mentally challenged and don't understand anything. Which one is it?

 

[Lisa]

ok so lisa, even if you dont, i hope you actually take some time to absorb what im saying, even if you dont 'accept' it, you should understand my beliefs here.

Lisa, sorry, but you dont really understand what i meant.
Mystical means to perceive God with your mind. Eg when Jesus said 'let your eye be single' he was not talking about the physical eyes but the minds eye..the 'eye of the heart' they call it. it is our inner perception.
it is about seeing ONE in all things..

Jesus said...
For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in,

this is not literally true, eg it is not 'logical perspective' but 'mystical perspective'.
The Son/Word/Logos is in ALL things..

secondly im talking about God's Immanence
you know what that means?

Immanence - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

it says
According to Christian theology, the transcendent God, who cannot be approached or seen in essence or being, becomes immanent primarily in the God-man Jesus the Christ, who is the incarnate Second Person of the Trinity.

what you dont seem to understand, is that The Son was a term adopted by the jewish philosopher, Philo, who used it to describe 'The Word/Logos' into a judaic context.
The Son, as you know, is symbolic biblical language eg God calls Israel 'my first born' eg this is not literally true for israel is it? but it is symbolic language illustrating the bond they have.
The LOGOS/WORD which the greeks came up with, is the EXPRESSION OF GOD basically.
It is by this Expression the whole of creation comes into being and this Expression is in ALL LEVELS of creation.
This is where the Transcendent Essence (the INVISIBLE Father) is 'made known' through the Expression..eg the Son/Logos.

Now Jesus being the incarnation of the Logos...it means that he embodies the IMMANENCE OF GOD...the expression etc.
It is actually based on this idea, that ST AUGUSTINE (your guy, he influenced the trinitarian doctrine btw) wrote
God is the lover, the beloved and Love itself
this is an understanding of how the Trancendent Essence is manifested on 3 levels of consciousness.
The Essence is Love
God is the beloved..and the 'lover' is the seeker of God eg the person.
in the mystical sense, that person seeking God...serving God, itself is the embodiment of God's Immanence.

This is what St Augustine wrote


. And this being so, let us direct our attention to those three things which we fancy we have found. We are not yet speaking of heavenly things, nor yet of God the Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit, but of that inadequate image, which yet is an image, that is, man; for our feeble mind perhaps can gaze upon this more familiarly and more easily. Well then, when I, who make this inquiry, love anything, there are three things concerned — myself, and that which I love, and love itself. For I do not love love, except I love a lover; for there is no love where nothing is loved. Therefore there are three things — he who loves, and that which is loved, and love. But what if I love none except myself? Will there not then be two things — that which I love, and love? For he who loves and that which is loved are the same when any one loves himself; just as to love and to be loved, in the same way, is the very same thing when any one loves himself. Since the same thing is said, when it is said, he loves himself, and he is loved by himself. For in that case to love and to be loved are not two different things: just as he who loves and he who is loved are not two different persons. But yet, even so, love and what is loved are still two things. For there is no love when any one loves himself, except when love itself is loved. But it is one thing to love one's self, another to love one's own love. For love is not loved, unless as already loving something; since where nothing is loved there is no love. Therefore there are two things when any one loves himself — love, and that which is loved. For then he that loves and that which is loved are one. Whence it seems that it does not follow that three things are to be understood wherever love is. For let us put aside from the inquiry all the other many things of which a man consists; and in order that we may discover clearly what we are now seeking, as far as in such a subject is possible, let us treat of the mind alone. The mind, then, when it loves itself, discloses two things — mind and love. But what is to love one's self, except to wish to help one's self to the enjoyment of self? And when any one wishes himself to be just as much as he is, then the will is on a par with the mind, and the love is equal to him who loves. And if love is a substance, it is certainly not body, but spirit; and the mind also is not body, but spirit. Yet love and mind are not two spirits, but one spirit; nor yet two essences, but one: and yet here are two things that are one, he that loves and love; or, if you like so to put it, that which is loved and love. And these two, indeed, are mutually said relatively. Since he who loves is referred to love, and love to him who loves. For he who loves, loves with some love, and love is the love of some one who loves. But mind and spirit are not said relatively, but express essence. For mind and spirit do not exist because the mind and spirit of some particular man exists. For if we subtract the body from that which is man, which is so called with the conjunction of body, the mind and spirit remain. But if we subtract him that loves, then there is no love; and if we subtract love, then there is no one that loves. And therefore, in so far as they are mutually referred to one another, they are two; but whereas they are spoken in respect to themselves, each are spirit, and both together also are one spirit; and each are mind, and both together one mind. Where, then, is the trinity? Let us attend as much as we can, and let us invoke the everlasting light, that He may illuminate our darkness, and that we may see in ourselves, as much as we are permitted, the image of God.

keep in mind here, that st Augustine's teachings were the biggest influence behind the formation of the trinitarian doctrine.
the problem is, that the church took what Augustine meant in mystical terminology, into literal terminology.
they didnt understand what he meant.
for all my faults...i understand it.
although, knowing something and it being effective is a diff thing.

Why do I need to understand your pov? Honestly, I feel like you are talking gobbly gook and trying to pass it off as something brilliant and mind blowing when all it really is is gobbly gook. Trying to come to God in your own way that you prefer. Not unlike Cain who brought God his offering but it wasn’t good enough, because its not what God wanted. That’s what you are doing. Offering up all these things that have nothing to do with anything that God says is right and good from His word. But, you won’t take His Word at its Word.

You keep trying to study all these things in hope they will bring you to the knowledge of God when all God really wants is you to believe..have faith. Faith doesn’t count on sight, it counts on faith. You can’t come to God without it..so all your studying isn’t getting you any closer to God..but further away. Believe on the Lord Jesus and be saved. That’s it, and then Biblical things will make more sense to you.

 

[Lisa]

Dear God. That was not the question. Are you mentally challenged? Are they still a part of the same egg they originally came from after being separated?

You're either not wanting to answer the question because you know it invalidates your stupid analogy or you really are mentally challenged and don't understand anything. Which one is it?

They are still called the egg shell and the egg yolk, right? From one egg, right? That’s the point of the analogy. That there are 3 parts to an egg but even thought those three parts have different names and different roles in the egg..they are still called an egg. Like God...who is three person, one God. That is all the analogy is supposed to be, nothing more.

 

[AspiringSoul]

Why do I need to understand your pov? Honestly, I feel like you are talking gobbly gook and trying to pass it off as something brilliant and mind blowing when all it really is is gobbly gook. Trying to come to God in your own way that you prefer. Not unlike Cain who brought God his offering but it wasn’t good enough, because its not what God wanted. That’s what you are doing. Offering up all these things that have nothing to do with anything that God says is right and good from His word. But, you won’t take His Word at its Word.

You keep trying to study all these things in hope they will bring you to the knowledge of God when all God really wants is you to believe..have faith. Faith doesn’t count on sight, it counts on faith. You can’t come to God without it..so all your studying isn’t getting you any closer to God..but further away. Believe on the Lord Jesus and be saved. That’s it, and then Biblical things will make more sense to you.

im sharing st augustine and you're saying 'gobbly gook'
LOL
see, you dont even know youre own religion, truthfully
if you're christian and dont know who augustine was..imo you're not even christian.

how can one be a trinitarian and not know about Augustine?
HE wrote the book 'on the trinity'
he was the biggest influence behind the doctrine.

and yet you all misinterpret him.

 

[AspiringSoul]

haha gobbly gook

 

[Lisa]

im sharing st augustine and you're saying 'gobbly gook'
LOL
see, you dont even know youre own religion, truthfully
if you're christian and dont know who augustine was..imo you're not even christian.

how can one be a trinitarian and not know about Augustine?
HE wrote the book 'on the trinity'
he was the biggest influence behind the doctrine.

and yet you all misinterpret him.

I don’t have to know Augustine to know God or Jesus...that’s the point..no one has to read anything but the Bible.

Romans 10:17
So faith comes from hearing and hearing by the word of Christ.
​

You my friend are reading the wrong things if you are looking for faith.

I don’t need to read Augustine to know about the trinity..like I said, the trinity is Biblical.

 

[AspiringSoul]

I don’t have to know Augustine to know God or Jesus...that’s the point..no one has to read anything but the Bible.

Romans 10:17
So faith comes from hearing and hearing by the word of Christ.
​

You my friend are reading the wrong things if you are looking for faith.

I don’t need to read Augustine to know about the trinity..like I said, the trinity is Biblical.

surely Lisa, you ough tto know your religion and the origins of the trinitarian doctrine?
even i, a muslim, am telling you, a christian, to go and read his book

it is an extensive early explanation of the trinity...before the nicene creed
He has 2 famous books
Confessions (where he talks about his early life and conversion to christianity...interesting guy actually)
On the Trinity (where he talks about the trinity).

now the thing he said about LOVE, that was his explanation of the trinity, or one of them.
yet that is also the sufi muslim belief, even rumi said what st augustine said.

the truth is..you dont understand us...that is all, you dont even attempt to understand me.
how can you converse with a person without understanding their views? if i talk to a hindu, i need to know their beliefs.

Lisa, ive dissed you enough recently, but ill just say this on a good note
you arent the best spokesperson for christianity as you lack that overall knowledge base...
ive known an indian christian who was smart as hell..and we'd talk for hours and hours on these themes, disagree but in the end, i respected him and viewed him as a positive example for christianity.

if i saw a simple muslim arguing over advanced topics with people, id ask him/her to quiet down...
likewise, with you, it hink you should leave these topics to people who have more knowledge ie someone who knows about the history of the trinity..knows who st augustine, plotinus and philo were.
without knowing the background behind the formation of christianity itself..how can anyone speak for it?
if you dont know who St augustine is, you cannot speak about the nicene creed, you are not qualified.

 

[Tidal]

Catholics...they were the first "Christians". You Protestants are not Christians, you're Satanists.

Catholics pray to Jesus's dead human mum and to dead human "saints" even though the bible says don't do occult stuff like talking to dead people, so their prayers are as useless as firing blanks and i bet satan's chuckling at them.
Also they ban women from being priests even though Paul said-
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:28 )

Below: Protestant Church of England women vicars..

Thery know Jesus loves 'em even if Popey don't..

 

[Infinityloop]

Catholics pray to Jesus's dead human mum

Christians pray to Jesus, makes no difference. Christians not only pray to Jesus but deify him as "God-incarnate", how much more blasphemous can you get?
Catholics don't worship Mary, but if they did (in an alternate universe) it would just be the logical conclusion of Jesus-worship. EXACTLY THE SAME THING.

 

[AspiringSoul]

Catholics pray to Jesus's dead human mum and to dead human "saints" even though the bible says don't do occult stuff like talking to dead people, so their prayers are as useless as firing blanks and i bet satan's chuckling at them.
Also they ban women from being priests even though Paul said-
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:28 )

Below: Protestant Church of England women vicars..

Thery know Jesus loves 'em even if Popey don't..

Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, people have never hated their own bodies, but they feed and care for them, just as Christ does the church—for we are members of his body.[Eph. 5:22–30]

there wasnt a single female apostle btw.
if women are to submit themselves to their husbands...how can a woman be a priest?
so basically, the catholics are closer to the original religion than you are.

you thought you were onto something with your selective, deceptive quoting...

 

[AspiringSoul]

the same people who came up with the trinitarian doctrine
were mary worshippers too


protestants are only 50% christian.

 

[Come2Islam]

What do you mean? Catholics aren’t Christians..they’ve taken the name of Jesus and some stories from the Bible..added to them and branded it a form of Christianity..but its not. They get it wrong especially when they add to it like the eucharist and Mary.

Same with islam, they take the name of Jesus, downgrade Him from God to prophet, take some of the Bible stories, gets them wrong and comes up with a new gospel that really has nothing to do with God or the Bible yet want to be considered part of the “Abrahamic” faith. When Ishmael was sent away not included in the covenant with God. They can be included..but they must believe in Jesus as God and forgiver of sins.

What a blasphemy, a god on earth crying to a god in heaven for help ?. "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matt. 27:46, KJV).
If you can't help yourself from ordinary drunken Roman Soldiers, how can you save some one else ?.

 

[AspiringSoul]

What a blasphemy, a god on earth crying to a god in heaven for help ?. "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matt. 27:46, KJV).
If you can't help yourself from ordinary drunken Roman Soldiers, how can you save some one else ?.

your point stills tands, but just have to add that Jesus was quoting Psalm 22 there, not literally saying those words himself.

 

[Kung Fu]

They are still called the egg shell and the egg yolk, right? From one egg, right? That’s the point of the analogy. That there are 3 parts to an egg but even thought those three parts have different names and different roles in the egg..they are still called an egg. Like God...who is three person, one God. That is all the analogy is supposed to be, nothing more.

It's honestly kind of sad that you don't understand how stupid your analogy is. I'm going to break it dow for you. You claim your god is One but that at the same time and at one point they were also 3 while also still being one. With the egg however, once they're separated they cease to be that one egg at the same time. They can either be a whole egg or 3 separated parts of an egg but not both at the same time. Unless you're stupid enough to believe that once the egg is separated it's still considered that one whole egg which it was originally.

 

[Lisa]

surely Lisa, you ough tto know your religion and the origins of the trinitarian doctrine?
even i, a muslim, am telling you, a christian, to go and read his book

it is an extensive early explanation of the trinity...before the nicene creed
He has 2 famous books
Confessions (where he talks about his early life and conversion to christianity...interesting guy actually)
On the Trinity (where he talks about the trinity).

now the thing he said about LOVE, that was his explanation of the trinity, or one of them.
yet that is also the sufi muslim belief, even rumi said what st augustine said.

the truth is..you dont understand us...that is all, you dont even attempt to understand me.
how can you converse with a person without understanding their views? if i talk to a hindu, i need to know their beliefs.

Lisa, ive dissed you enough recently, but ill just say this on a good note
you arent the best spokesperson for christianity as you lack that overall knowledge base...
ive known an indian christian who was smart as hell..and we'd talk for hours and hours on these themes, disagree but in the end, i respected him and viewed him as a positive example for christianity.

if i saw a simple muslim arguing over advanced topics with people, id ask him/her to quiet down...
likewise, with you, it hink you should leave these topics to people who have more knowledge ie someone who knows about the history of the trinity..knows who st augustine, plotinus and philo were.
without knowing the background behind the formation of christianity itself..how can anyone speak for it?
if you dont know who St augustine is, you cannot speak about the nicene creed, you are not qualified.

I know the Bible..that’s all I really need to know, those are the beliefs that I believe and the ones I’m comfortable with sharing. And that is what I do, I share my beliefs. I don’t need to read other peoples books about what I believe when I have the Bible..so Augustine doesn’t really matter to me.

Do I need to understand you to share my faith with you? Or do I need to just understand my faith and share that with you? My understanding where you come from doesn’t change the fact that you would have to believe something completely different from your understanding to be saved. If perhaps I had the same culture as you and converted, I would be able to have a better understanding of what I could say to you to help you perhaps understand better, as it is, I would still be having to say much of the same things I’m saying now.

I purposefully decided that I only need know that which I’m trying to share with others. I don’t see where debating other things really comes into play in the end. One must decided to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ to be saved...there is no other way to God..so to know all that other gobbly gook doesn’t matter in the end.

You may have more overall knowledge of different worldly views..but you don’t have the knowledge that counts..and that is what I have been trying to share with you..the knowledge that counts.

 

[Infinityloop]

Lisa's Egg analogy is really a denial of the Trinity because she believes that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all only partially God and not all equally fully-God.

What Lisa demonstrates is:

1. that she either believes a heretical Christology rejected by all mainstream Christians,
2. or that she doesn't even understand herself what the doctrine of the Trinity even is.

It's one or the other.

 

[illuminatimess]

Lisa's Egg analogy is really a denial of the Trinity because she believes that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all only partially God and not all equally fully-God.

What Lisa demonstrates is:

1. that she either believes a heretical Christology rejected by all mainstream Christians,
2. or that she doesn't even understand herself what the doctrine of the Trinity even is.

It's one or the other.

Both

 

[Lisa]

What a blasphemy, a god on earth crying to a god in heaven for help ?. "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matt. 27:46, KJV).
If you can't help yourself from ordinary drunken Roman Soldiers, how can you save some one else ?.

Matthew‬ ‭26:52-54‬ ‭
Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword. Or do you think that I cannot appeal to My Father, and He will at once put at My disposal more than twelve legions of angels? How then will the Scriptures be fulfilled, which say that it must happen this way?”​

‭‭