The Godhead of the Lord Jesus

Discussion in 'Doctrinal Discussions' started by PetriFB, Oct 4, 2014.

  1. I often heard people talk about dry spells with Jesus, but that has never happened with me.

    After Jesus told me not to read about him, and that he would teach me, he has never not been with me.

    The Holy Spirit/Jesus has guided me for almost the last forty years of my life.

    Many people say to me that they don’t hear the Holy Spirit/Jesus talk to them. Most of those people don’t even believe God does talk to his people.

    I tell those who want Jesus to talk to them, but he hasn’t that it most likely because God knows they are not willing to truly live all of God’s commandments.

    I believe people need to live God’s Word. And having possessions, trusting in the Government’s army, and its police force, having savings accounts, investing money in the stock market, and all the other ways to trust the world instead of God is not going to bring one to know God.
     
  2. You said...........
    "After Jesus told me not to read about him".

    But the Word of God says......

    Romans 10:17 ESV.......
    "Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God".........Just sayin it appears different than your thinking.
     
  3. I suppose that this is just something we disagree about. I would rather not keep repeating myself since we interpret the same passage of Scripture differently, so I won't attempt to keep debating the same points. I will say, though, that I don't think the Jews would have wanted to stone Jesus just because He said He had the same purpose as the Father.

    I am curious about how you would interpret passages that teach the preexistence of Christ, as when He says, "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." (John 17:5, KJV)

    It is my desire that you continue searching the Scriptures and learning from the word of God. I am trying to do this as well. There is always more that any of us can learn, and the more I learn, the more I realize that I still don't know.

    If my view on the deity of Christ ever changes, I will publicly acknowledge it on this forum...but at this point I still hold strongly to my belief in the deity and humanity of Christ.
     
    Major and C1oudwatch3r say Amen and like this.
  4. Very well. While I do disagree with you ABIC, I want you to know that I don't judge you for them and I hope I have not condescended you. Just because someone believes something different does not make them superior or inferior and we all share in the human experience. I know your threads get heated because they are not mainstream but under no circumstances is it OK to treat someone inhumanely.

    Having said that, I think this discussion is worthwhile for both sides, even if we reach stalemate.

    For Constantine's baptism, we got into kind of a useless debate, because the validity of baptism has nothing to do with the baptizer. I do want to know, though, if Jesus wasn't God, how could He supersede the Mosaic law? Dietary restrictions for instance? And why would He tell people they needed to eat His flesh?
     
  5. My brother....don't you ever back away from what you just posted!!! Jesus is the GOD-MAN!

    Believe it!....Love it!.....LIVE IT!
     
    Big Moose likes this.
  6. I do believe that Christ pre-existed before he came to earth. That still doesn't make him God.

    And as far as John 1:1 goes it is a highly debatable topic and it should be. I think there are 3 different ways that it's been interpreted 1. would be that this is saying Jesus is God 2. Would be saying that this verse is saying that Jesus is godly 3. Would be that the Word is referring to God the father and not Jesus at all.

    I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that God his Father manifested through him.
     
  7. IMO it means exactly what it says...........

    John 1:1-3..........
    "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. "

    Why would it mean something other than what it says?????
     
  8. Because what It says is that this is talking about God the Father only in someone elses interpretation. There is no change in scripture at all here for that interpretation. And once again there is the interpretation of of what "the Word was God" means God here could be interpreted as godly if some think it's talking about Jesus but they know that he's not God.. We need to always understand that there is other interpretations of scripture by what I could say would possibly be from our flesh or man teaching us these other interpretations so we have a bias or the Spirit would be teaching us. To understand some scriptures God wants us to seek and to understand them by comparing other scriptures and/or look at greek or hebrew definitions to get a better and clearer understanding.
     
  9. If you are saying that Jesus is merely human, yet agree that He pre-existed the world; how can you justify that? Have you ever heard of another mere human to pre-exist their natural born humanity? If Jesus is merely human, how do you account for His virgin birth?
     
    Major likes this.
  10. Not saying Jesus is merely just human. His Father is God.
     
  11. ABIC, how would you feel about a theology that the Godly essence generated a visible and humanly image, that was nonetheless of the same essence? That is effectively what Orthodoxy is saying.
     
    C1oudwatch3r likes this.
  12. God manifested through his Son. Just like he does with us. But I know the trinity is like the most popular theology but some Christians think they believe in the Trinity when they don;t even know what it really means
     
  13. If you do not understand plain English why would you want to try Greek and Hebrew? .......Just asking!

    The Greek and Hebrew were translated into English so that we who speak English would be able to understand the meaning. I do totally understand what you are trying to say and I do agree that at times the original means more than the translation. BUT it should not be a fall back option so as to form an excuse for not being willing to accept what is right in front of you.

    John could not have been any clearer and the fact it.....IF you will consider the original Greek of John 1:1-3 it confirms exactly what the English translation says.

    But to satify your need please consider the linguistics of the original Greek that you asked for. IT confirms that the Word (Christos) Christ and God are one.

    The word ‘God’ in the phrase ‘and the Word was God’ (‘theos’) and in other places, (even in the previous phrase, ‘and the Word was with God’ (‘theon’)) is the Greek language. Each Greek noun normally has 8 or 9 forms (cases & number) in which it can appear.

    In the first instance in John 1:1 it is the object of preposition and thus is in the accusative case. In the phrase in question, it is in the nominative case (indicating the subject or predicate nominative - equal to the subject). But it is the same word for ‘God’, and in both phrases here indicates the One and Only True God. So the apparent difference is spelling is not because ‘theos’ is a different word than ‘theon’, but is a different form of the identical word.
     
    C1oudwatch3r likes this.
  14. Matthew 26:40-41New King James Version (NKJV)
    40 Then He came to the disciples and found them sleeping, and said to Peter, “What! Could you not watch with Me one hour? 41 Watch and pray, lest you enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.”

    Understand? Comprehende? Verstehen? hiểu了解?

    The verse is an example of a human being, a Peter, with the same spirit and the same flesh, but it is the same Peter.

    Am not trying to convince you from U to T. Although what gets my attention is that you keep on mentioning “popular” , that is irrelevant, it is not based on objective thinking… in my opinion....

    That verse may not explain clearly the T. but, what am trying to say is that we may not know it clearly, but we (as human being) can relate to T.
     
    C1oudwatch3r and Major say Amen and like this.
  15. It's not Christos it's logos actually if you're trying to say what "Word" is. It's okay though you guys. I shared this with you all out of love to show you and if you're not willing to accept it that's fine with me. I'm glad that I see the truth and when Christ comes back we will all see what the truth really is.

    God Bless
     
  16. No problem Babe! Correct, it is Logos and I am glad you see that. I was typing faster than my fingers could think. I (we) just hate to see you get such an important thing as this wrong.

    The Trinity is one of those fundamentals of the faith.

    If I can ever be of any help to you please ask.
     
  17. Yes I understand. As I've said before, I truly don't believe that having a perfect dogmatic understanding is a prerequisite for God's grace. That being said, it is neither spiritually healthy to reject a dogma known to be true.

    I know that Unitarianism makes more theological sense to you, but I think you might be relying too much on your own capacity to process divinity, and that is a shady line to walk. Whatever the case, Trinitarian Christianity won out in early Christendom, and about 90% of Christians today believe in the Trinity today.
     
  18. I think interpretation #3 above would be eliminated because later in the same chapter (verse 14) it says, "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." In this case it would be saying that God the Father was made flesh and dwelt among us, which sort of takes us back to interpretation #1 (although there would still be a small, though not insignificant, difference between interpretations 1 and 3).

    This really only leaves interpretations #1 and 2 to be considered. I will acknowledge that the Greek word theos is sometimes translated "godly," as in 2 Cor. 7:10, "For godly sorrow worketh repentance..." However, it can be and usually is translated "God" as in John 1:1. In fact, I haven't seen John 1:1 translated "...and the Word was godly" in any English translation. As far as I know, it is always translated, "...and the Word was God." If you are aware of an English translation that uses "godly" instead of "God" in this verse, please let me know which one it is. I would like to see how the rest of John 1 is translated in that version.

    If, in fact, John 1 were the only basis for claiming that Jesus is God, I would concede that your argument is plausible. However, I base my interpretation of John 1:1 not only on the multitude of English translations that state, "...the Word was God," but also on several other important points. I have considered the Biblical evidence and believe that there are numerous connections between Old Testament references to God and similar New Testament references to Jesus. I will summarize some of these connections here, using the KJV which I believe you said was your preferred translation.

    First, Isa. 40:3 states, "The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God." Matt. 3:3 then references this prophecy when describing John the Baptist preaching the wilderness to prepare the way for Jesus.

    Second, Gen. 1:1 clearly states that God created the earth. Yet the first chapter of Colossians, in talking about Jesus ("his dear Son" in verse 13), says that "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him" (verse 16).

    Third, God says in Isa. 43:11, "I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour." Yet of course there are numerous references to Jesus being our savior, such as Phil. 3:20: "For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ."

    Fourth, Deut. 10:17 calls God, "God of gods and Lord of lords." The same names are given to Jesus in Rev. 19:16.

    Fifth, on countless occasions in the Old Testament, God told the nation of Israel to worship Him only (Exodus 34:14 gives one example of this). Yet Jesus is seen being worshipped in Rev. 5:6-10.

    I take all these among other examples to conclude that Jesus is God, and therefore accept the translation, "...and the Word was God" at the end of John 1:1.

    I fully admit that there is a significant amount of mystery in the doctrine of the Trinity. We have not even mentioned the Holy Spirit yet! However, I choose to embrace this mystery. It is another example of how God is so much higher than us.

    Of course, you are free to search the Scriptures and draw your own conclusions. I just wanted to explain some of the reasons why I accept the doctrine of Trinity.
     
    Major and C1oudwatch3r say Amen and like this.
  19. John 1:1 says that “the Word was God.”
    John 1:14 says that “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us”.

    This clearly indicates that Jesus is God in the flesh.

    Acts 20:28 tells us, "...Be shepherds of the church of God, which He bought with His own blood." Who bought the church with His own blood? Jesus Christ.

    Acts 20:28 declares that God purchased the church with His own blood. Therefore, Jesus is God!

    To try and grasp the Trinity, first understand that God the Father the Son and Holy Spirit are Spirit, light, awesomeness, power, justice and love -- and He in no way conforms to a human's understanding. Jesus told us God is Spirit. Shine two beams of light on the same spot, and you have the light of one, separate, yet also the same as the others.

    Next, try to grasp Jesus' nature as being both totally human and totally God. To help you with this consider these paradoxes by early church father Gregory of Nazianzus (329-390 A.D.). Gregory used these to argue against Arianism.

    "He was baptized as a man -- but He remitted sins as God...He was tempted as man, but he conquered as God...He hungered -- but He fed thousands...He was wearied, but He is the rest of them that are weary and heavy-laden. He was heavy with sleep, but He walked lightly over the sea...He pays tribute, but it is out of a fish; yea He is the king of those who demanded it...He prays, but he hears prayer. He weeps, but He causes tears to cease. He asks where Lazarus was laid, for He was man; but He raises Lazarus, for He was God. He is sold, and very cheap, for it is only for thirty pieces of silver; but He redeems the world, and that at a great price, for the price was His blood. As a sheep he is led to the slaughter, but He is the shepherd of Israel, and now of the whole world also...He is bruised and wounded, but He heals every disease and every infirmity. He is lifted up and nailed to the tree, but by the tree of life He restores us. He dies, but he gives life, and by His death He destroys death."

    Cyril of Alexandria (376 - 444 AD) says, ‘Indeed, the mystery of Christ runs the risk of being disbelieved precisely because it is so incredibly wonderful. For God was in humanity. He who was above all creation was in our human condition; the invisible one was made visible in the flesh; he who is from the heavens and from on high was in the likeness of earthly things; the immaterial one could be touched; he who is free in his own nature came in the form of a slave; he who blesses all creation became accursed; he who is all righteousness was numbered among the transgressors; life itself came in the appearance of death. All this followed because the body, which tasted death, belonged to no other but to him who is the Son by nature,’ [On the Unity of Christ]
     
    New Man 78 likes this.
  20.  

Share This Page