Skip to comments.The Arm of Jehovah (Isaiah 53) - Trinity series
Posted on 01/05/2012 5:10:45 AM PST by DaveMSmith
An exploration of Isaiah 53, John 1; 16:26, and 17:5, 24 from a Swedenborgian perspective. The key to it all is to see that Jesus is not a separate person; He IS "the arm of Jehovah." -- 90 minute study of Scripture
Prior to the live stream last night, I opened the Word randomly and read from Zechariah 13:
The Shepherd Struck, the Sheep Scattered 7 "Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, against the man who is close to me!" declares the LORD Almighty. "Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered, and I will turn my hand against the little ones. 8 In the whole land," declares the LORD, "two-thirds will be struck down and perish; yet one-third will be left in it. 9 This third I will bring into the fire; I will refine them like silver and test them like gold. They will call on my name and I will answer them; I will say, 'They are my people,' and they will say, 'The LORD is our God.' "
Swedenborg teaches the meaning of this chapter is:
The contents of chapter 13 are these: That the Word will be for the New Church, and will be opened to them (Zech. 13:1). That falsities of doctrine and worship will be altogether destroyed (Zech. 13:2-3). That the old prophetic or doctrinal teaching is to cease, and that there will no longer be falsities of doctrine (Zech. 13:4-5). That the Lord will be slain by those who are in the Old church, from their intention to disperse them that believe in Him (Zech. 13:6-7). That they who are of the vastated church will perish, and that those who are of the New Church are to be purified and taught by the Lord (Zech. 13:8-9). These are the contents of chapter 13 in the spiritual sense. AR 707 
I'll be happy to field questions.
Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is the ONE God and is Father, Son and Holy Spirit
Righteous Father, though the world does not know you, I know you, and they know that you have sent me. I have made you known to them, and will continue to make you known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them.expert ventriloquism:
While he was still speaking, a bright cloud covered them, and a voice from the cloud said, This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!self-conflict:
39 Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.double vision:
You have said so, Jesus replied. But I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.self denial:
45 From noon until three in the afternoon darkness came over all the land. 46 About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, Eli, Eli,[c] lema sabachthani? (which means My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?).
From the study: John 16:25 “These things I have spoken to you in figurative language; but the time is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figurative language, but I will tell you plainly about the Father.26 In that day you will ask in My name, and I do not say to you that I shall pray the Father for you; 27 for the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved Me, and have believed that I came forth from God. 28 I came forth from the Father and have come into the world. Again, I leave the world and go to the Father.”
A. John 16:25 These things I have spoken to you in figurative language; but the time is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figurative language, but I will tell you plainly about the Father. 26 In that day you will ask in My name, and I do not say to you that I shall pray the Father for you; 27 for the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved Me, and have believed that I came forth from God. 28 I came forth from the Father and have come into the world. Again, I leave the world and go to the Father.With this:
B. Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is the ONE God and is Father, Son and Holy SpiritA does not equal B.
Our freepers like Rn, metmom, jllh, fishtank, theo get me confused about who would be clubbed under that umbrella term Protestant?
Jesus would be considered a Protestant.
Against whom did He point most of his righteous anger? Toward the corruption of the church that the Godhead had established.
I join Jesus in defying such corruption, and in calling men and women to repentance and faith in Christ alone.
“Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is the ONE God and is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.”
Um. So, no Trinity? No Godhead? No Community within Himself?
Whew. Maybe I’m misunderstanding what you’re saying. Sounds like you’re saying that Jesus prayed to Himself, and submitted His will to Himself? Surely you’re not promoted heresy?
Help me understand.
You are mistaken. You think salvation is found in a “club.”
No, salvation and life are found within Christ.
How would you explain the Baptism of Jesus Christ then? When Mt 3:16-17
| 16And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
17And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
If you say Jesus IS God the Father, what exactly do you mean by this, please could you explain?
so, Theo — are Swedenborgians Protestants?
RM —> another case of poster making it personal and pretending to mind-read (incorrectly) saying “You think...”
wow, talk about historical revisionism. hello... Jesus was a Jew.
Jesus is the arm of God. He is also one of the separate persons of the Trinity.
Well, I just wikipedia’d Swedenborgians and it seems that they are a Protestant movement that arose in the 1600s in Sweden and the philosophy rejects the Trinity. I haven’t read enough about their philosophy, so it would be interesting to hear what Dave says
Why does it matter? Such a category is irrelevant.
Again, Jesus “protested” against the “church” that the Godhead had established through His covenant with Abraham, and further clarified through the Law given to Moses, decrying how it had become corrupted.
He called people to repentance and faith in Him, rather than adherence to a corrupted system of priests and “sacraments.”
In that sense, Jesus was clearly Protestant, generally a friend of sinners, and generally opposed to the mess that had become of the “official” church He had established millennia earlier.
Let me ask you: Did Jesus establish relationship directly with people, or was relationship with Christ only available through the age-old “church” and its priests and adherence to its customs?
Cronos: are Swedenborgians Protestants?
Theo: Such a category is irrelevant.
contradictory statements again.....
Johnny Appleseed was a Swedenborgian.
I regard non Catholic Christians who are not Eastern Orthodox as Protestants in general. How they farther divide into sects is a bit more complicated and depends both on their historic orgin and their current doctrine.
But for simplicity I use Protestant or if I know they are Calvinist “Reformed.”
Hm. There’s nothing “contra-dictory” about what I wrote.
You want to associate the heresy of the “Swedenborgians” with other non-Roman Catholic denominations. You do this by putting Baptists and Swedenborgians in the same category, “Protestant.” I’m not playing your game.
You place a GREAT DEAL of emphasis on denomination, as though we are saved through our denomination, or damned through our denomination. But that is incorrect. We are saved through Christ, or damned outside of Christ.
No, I don’t. Such a position is heresy, and clearly unbiblical.
So, do you hold to the view of many Roman Catholic priests that extramarital sexual intercourse with boys is acceptable?
Yes, that question is absurd. Just as yours is absurd. “Guilty by association” is not applicable in either case.
Again, it’s not about denomination, or category. It’s about Christ. If you are found in Him, then you have life. If you are not found in Him, you do not have life.
Swedenborgians would be a heretical sect based on their teachings of the Trinity so I would not regard them as Protestant since this heresy is rejected by Protestants and Catholics.
If Swedenborgians did not have this heresy (they may have more which I can’t address here) I would regard them as Protestants if they believed in Sola Scriptura and the other Solas of the Reformation and/or if they rejected the Sacraments and/or they identified themselves as such.
I would place Swedenborgians much as I do JW, a heretical sect which uses Christian image and language and misreading of Scripture.
If you don’t believe in the Trinity you are not Christian.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
Ah, man. How petty, pinging the RM because of that.
Straining out the gnat and swallowing the camel.
Balance with the whole of Scripture is key in studying doctrine.
And nothing comes close to substituting for a reading of the entire Bible year by year.
As you know maybe better than I, too many theological systems follow the study method of the 10 men of Hindustan. LOL.
The poster keeps making it personal — this is repeated in every thread where he goes on to say “You place...”, “you want to...” — utterly flouting forum rules over and over again.
Stop trying to derail the conversation by whining to the Religion Admin. Crying “foul!” because of semantics is no way to keep the focus on the topic at hand.
From now on, just assume that I’ve inserted “allegedly” or “seemingly” or “seem” or “appear” in all my sentences. Yeah?
For example, “You seem to want to associate the heresy of the ‘Swedenborgians’ with other non-Roman Catholic denominations.”
... or “You appear to place a GREAT DEAL of emphasis on denomination.”
Focus, Cronos. Focus.
Ping to my reply to Cronos’ whining about my semantic faux pas.
The effort will help keep the threads on the issues and avoid flame wars.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
I really dislike labels. 'Protestant' would be inaccurate because Swedenborg scribed a New Christianity -- Heavenly Doctrines. Many of the old or incorrect teachings were cast aside.
Prior to glorification, Jesus had the soul of the Divine with an imperfect exterior body so he could deal with us on our level.
The infinite cannot be understood as three persons anymore than we ourselves can -- we are in God's image.
Did you view the video? Rev Rose goes through great effort to show the three person Trinity is not supported in Scripture.
The problem is that in the Trinity we use the term "persons" as a bad translation from the Greek ὑποστάσεις
ok, thank you for your response.
The first verse of the very next chapter in Colossians says that Christ is “seated at the right hand of God.”
Surely you’re not saying that Christ is beside Himself.
Later in that chapter, another reference to two of the three persons included in the Godhead: “do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.”
Let’s go back to chapter 1 of Colossians, which includes, “We always thank God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Two persons identified there: a Father and a Son.
Yes, triune Creator is beyond comprehension, though Scripture does provide some direction toward understanding aspects of Him.
The Word is full beginning to end of these pairs. Power and Glory comes to mind. This is how to best understand the Lord and his kingdom.
Why did God create humans? Because He was lonely?
Or did He already enjoy community within Himself, and simply created humanity to express His glory?
(I’m not understanding your “pair” categories, or how that’s relevant here. Sounds intriguing, but kinda “forced.”)
A more concise question: Did the concept of “community” exist prior to creation?
If not, then why is it such a predominant aspect of humanity? And if so, how did it manifest itself pre-creation?
Here is a question from a previous Bible Study -- Did God create everything on the earth in Genesis 1 just to destroy it all 6 chapters later?
The Word has an internal sense -- a soul -- it's known and read in heaven on this level. This spiritual sense deals with the Lord and His life as well as ours and our spiritual development.
The point is, we are vessels for the Lord's love and to show our appreciation we are to love our neighbor.
In the early days of the old church, many things were imperfectly understood. Jesus said you cannot bear them now but He will send the spirit of truth. I understand that to mean Emmanuel Swedenborg.
The Lord wants us to approach Him out of love. We become more perfect and have freedom in our faith when we realize all goodness and truth flows from Him -- we are not the source of it. We all have uses in the spiritual world.
Swedenborg talks about visiting those of the Most Ancient Church of Adam -- it's fascinating.
But let me ask again: Did the concept of community exist prior to creation?
I don’t have an answer. Before creation was the un-created and infinite Lord — from eternity. You are asking a question about before the beginning which was without form and void.
" The natural man can hardly apprehend spiritual things, consequently those things which are of heaven. Who of this character can comprehend that spaces and times are not given in heaven, but instead thereof states? Would not the merely natural man believe that there must be mere emptiness and nothingness where there is not time and space? Hence it is evident, if the natural man concludes with himself that nothing is to be believed but what he apprehends, that in such case he casts himself into enormous errors. As it is with spaces and times, so also it is in many other things; as, for example, the natural man must needs fall into fantastic thought concerning the Divine, when he thinks from time, what the Divine had done before the creation of the world, that is, what He had done from eternity till then; nor can he be extricated from this labyrinth, until the ideas of time and space are removed; the angels, when they think of this eternity, never think of it from time, but from state. In the other life there appear two statues, partly of flesh and partly of stone, placed in the boundary of the created universe in front towards the left, and it is said of them, that they swallow up those who think of the Divine what He had done from eternity before He created the world; the swallowing up represents, that man, inasmuch as he cannot think but from space and time, cannot extricate himself thence of himself, but from the Divine, which is effected either by the dissipation of that thought, or by the removal of the ideas of time." (Secrets of Heaven 8325.)
But you have to have some sort of answer.
In comment #32, you wrote that “we are in God’s image.”
So my question is: In what sense? You must have some sense of what God “looked like” prior to creating us if you find some meaning in our having been created in His image.
I’d argue that among other ways that we reflect his image, we value community, just as He does (and always has).
Ancient Israel believed in an invisible God, which would be correct. When Moses was on mount Sinai, in Scripture it reads God addressed him then Jehovah. There are Bible commentators that believe that this is a result of two different authors!
I don't have an answer! As posted, Swedenborg warns of grave errors for all that go there. I mind his advice.
i don't follow you. God does become visible in some forms in the OT -- the burning bush, etc.
Why are labels important?
Where's the courtesy pint to theo?
Why are labels important?
Where's the courtesy PING to theo?