The Invisible Presence of Jesus

Originally posted by sonship
So Peter doesn't quite know how to handle this new stage of his relationship with the resurrected Jesus. This portion of the Gospel of John is so realistic to me.

Jesus appears. Jesus disappears.
Jesus is physically seen by them, to their great joy.
And Jesus hides Himself from their sight. It does not say that He went away. It says He vanished fro ...[text shortened]... causes them to catch a huge number of fish. And someone knew the count - about 153 fish (v.11).

Have you considered starting a club?

This portion of John has to be compared to the synoptic Gospels where Jesus called Peter to be a fisher of men. Jesus recapitulates the same miracle as He is teaching the disciples to live by His invisible presence.

" .. They went forth and got into the boast, and that night they caught nothing.

Now as soon as morning broke, Jesus stood on the shore; however the disciples did not know that it was Jesus.

Then Jesus said to them, Little children, you do not have any fish to eat, do you? They answered Him. No.

And He said to them, Cast the net on the right side of the boat, and you will find some. They cast therefore, and they were no longer able to haul it in because of the abundance of fish.

Then the disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, It is the Lord! Therefore when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he put his outer garment around himself, for he was naked; and he threw himself into the sea.

But the other disciples came in the little boat, for they were not far from the land, but about two hundred cubits away, dragging the net of fish.

Then when they got out onto to land, they saw a fire of coals laid there, and fish lying on it and bread.

Jesus said to them, Bring some of the fish that you have just now caught. Simon Peter therefore went up and hauled the net to the land full of large fish, a hundred and fifty-three; and though there were so many; the net was not torn." (vs. 3b-11)

When they got there, Jesus was already cooking some fish and preparing some breakfast. LOL. He was well able to take care of their practical need. Can you imagine? They haul in one hundred and fifty-three large fish, There is already a fire of coals cooking fish when they get there.

He was with them. He was unseen. He knew every single one of their practical needs. He was well able to bless their labor. He was well able to provide for their practical living even apart from their labor. They must learn to live by His invisible presence.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
What do you hope to achieve by posting these theological monologues on a chess forum sonship?

Unless you changed this sentence, I misread it and misunderstood it.
What I thought you said was that you hoped thus and such.
Therefore I said "Thankyou."

I apologize if I misread your question.

Originally posted by divegeester

The gospel is not a message of fear and the most viscous apocalyptic revenge, it is one of love and hope and charity.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Gospel message is many faceted. It does not just consist of what corresponds to any one person's disposition.

Yes, the Gospel message concerns great love.
But Paul also said that as a preacher he and his co-workers knew the fear of the Lord.

" Knowing therefore the fear of the Lord, we persuade men, but we are made manifest to God; " (2 Cor. 4:11a)

In this particular verse, Paul says he and his colleagues were motivated in their persuading also by "the fear of the Lord" .

So instead of being lopsided and saying the Gospel has one angle - that which fits personal preference and personal disposition, the apostles admit an element of "fear" is a legitimate component of their message as well.

This thread is about a sober fear of realizing the invisible presence of the Lord and Master, as well as a warm love for Him.

Originally posted by sonship
The Gospel message is many faceted. It does not just consist of what corresponds to any one person's disposition.

Whether the 'torturer God' ideology corresponds to your personal disposition or corresponds to someone else's personal disposition is just a red herring. The problem is that the ideology you propagate doesn't make any moral sense and sounds utterly man made and depraved, at least based on the way you explain it.

Originally posted by sonship
The Gospel message is many faceted. It does not just consist of what corresponds to any one person's disposition.

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. Yes I recognise this principle and I'm sure you mean well. However, I see absolutely no correlation whatsoever with that parental diciplinarian aspect to God and your utterly barbaric and morally preposterous 'eternal suffering' ideology which I see as a stumbling block to the lost and sleight on the very nature of Christ.

Originally posted by divegeester
The gospel is not a message of fear and the most viscous apocalyptic revenge, it is one of love and hope and charity.

But is it really 'viscous'?

Originally posted by FMF
Whether the 'torturer God' ideology corresponds to your personal disposition or corresponds to someone else's personal disposition is just a red herring. The problem is that the ideology you propagate doesn't make any moral sense and sounds utterly man made and depraved, at least based on the way you explain it.

To a man without God, it sure would.

It's okay if you don't "get it". Presumably, he's talking to those that do.

Originally posted by divegeester
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. Yes I recognise this principle and I'm sure you mean well. However, I see absolutely no correlation whatsoever with that parental diciplinarian aspect to God and your utterly barbaric and morally preposterous 'eternal suffering' ideology which I see as a stumbling block to the lost and sleight on the very nature of Christ.

And I'm sure he sounds as he does to you because your belief seems to be a monotone. You're so busy going on and on about someone's 'eternal suffering' ideology that you cannot focus on anything else they have to say.

For example, someone could be the finest law professor on the planet and could be highly in demand for what he could teach about law. But if someone was so single-minded that they couldn't get over his political ideology long enough to learn what he has to teach, then the education is completely lost on them. But this is not the fault of the law professor, is it?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
You of all people complaining about people complaining is bizarre in the extreme. You're the biggest saggy winge bag I've ever come across on my internet travels.

Fine. Can we continue now?

Originally posted by checkbaiter
Yes, I understand this belief of his, but I stand by what I said. I don't totally agree with any of the politicians but I will vote for one of them.
So what if he believes in eternal torment, so do many great bible teachers I follow. I disagree on this one point but there is too much to learn, to throw away the baby with the bath water.
I don't dwell ...[text shortened]... e themes. As I said I know God works with all kinds of people, and I see God working in Sonship.

Yes, precisely. Finally, someone gets it.

Originally posted by FMF
I am a participant in these discussions on spirituality and I give feedback to proselytizers about the ideologies they propagate and who the claims they make about the reality in which I live.

But sitting back like a curmudgeon saying "Balderdash!" (or perhaps like GKR's "Gibberish" ) all the time is boring and counter-productive. Preventing people from having their say is fun and all, until they get in your face and shut you up, right?

Originally posted by divegeester
Have you got the courage to say that to me directly?

Are you an unbeliever?

(Dang, some people's kids...)

Originally posted by divegeester
Then feel free to enjoy his posts and leave me to call him out over his gross error and fruitloopery

Are you also going to throw out your Bible, too, then, because there's too much there to learn? Or are you one of these who has supposedly learned it all, and now feels eminently qualified to sit back and judge?

Originally posted by divegeester
What a wonderfully receptive vessel of karmic peace you are.

What a terrible complimenter you are.

Right. We get what you're saying. Judging > learning.

Wait, what?