The Nature of Jesus Christ

[Matthias]

The problem for me has always been wrapping my head around what a single "being" means in this context, yet maintain that Father and Son and Holy Spirit are not identical. We can express the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity (three persons in one God) as a set of propositions in this way:

1. There is only one God.
2. The Father is God.
3. The Son is God.
4. The Father is not the Son.
5. The Holy Spirit is God.
6. The Holy Spirit is not the Father.
7. The Holy Spirit is not the Son.

For simplicity’s sake we need consider only 1 through 4 (for 5 through 7 will stand or fall on the same logical analysis we apply to 1 through 4):

1. There is only one God.
2. The Father is God.
3. The Son is God.
4. The Father is not the Son.

The difficulty in understanding the Trinity has always been that these four propositions are, as a group, logically inconsistent when analyzed from the standpoint of the three basic rules of logical equivalence: self-identity (everything is identical to itself, i.e., x = x); symmetry (if two things are equivalent, they are equivalent in any order, i.e., if x = y, then y = x); and transitivity (if one thing is the same as another and that other is the same as a third, then the first is the same as the third, i.e., if x = y and y = z then x = z). The orthodox doctrine of the Trinity fares ill in this analysis.

To make them logically consistent, we would need to sacrifice one of the four tenets. Thus, Arius sacrificed the third one:

1. There is only one God.
2. The Father is God.
4. The Father is not the Son.
3′. Therefore the Son is not God.

and Sabellius sacrificed the fourth one:

1. There is only one God.
2. The Father is God.
3. The Son is God.
4′. Therefore the Father is the Son.

Both Arius’ argument and Sabellius’ argument are logically consistent because, unlike the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity, they satisfy all three of the aforementioned principles of logical consistency. Arius and Sabellius, although approaching the inconsistency from different perspectives, each preferred rationality to irrationality―even if it meant preferring heresy to orthodoxy.

Now, we Trinitarians have two choices. We can simply throw up our hands and declare that God does not have to play by the rules of logical consistency, thereby forever assigning the Trinity to the status of unfathomable mystery. Or, we can allow for identity and equivalence to be relative to their contexts. Thus, “Robert is good” can be consistent with “Robert is not good” as long as a different sense of “good” holds for each proposition (e.g., he is a good theologian; he is not a good golfer.)

To say that “The Father is not the Son” is likewise context-dependent and predicate-specific. One can maintain without contradiction both that “The Father is not the same person as the Son” and “The Father is the same God as the Son” by separating out personhood from Godhood.

How to tease them apart is the ultimate challenge of orthodox Trinitarian theology.

Thanks.

Tell me about Jesus. What do you think his theology is?

I don’t think his theology is the theology of Arius. Do you?

I don’t think his theology is the theology of Sabellius. Do you?

I don’t think his theology is the theology of binitarianism. Do you?

I don’t think his theology is the theology of trinitarianism. Do you?

I think his theology should be the theology of his followers. Do you?

 

[Episkopos]

There is no 'Adamic' nor 'Human' nature in the Bible. These are religious and physiologic inventions of men, not truth of God. Scripture calls it science falsely so-called.

You have strayed far from the truth. You need to look at yourself closer. Paul said that sin was in him....beyond his strength to overcome. That is by nature. Just because the Bible doesn't say...sin nature... doesn't negate what Paul is saying. There are many such references..but you will need to unblock your mind to understand them.

Do you know the power of the cross? What does the power of the cross crucify on the disciple? Something good? Or something that leaches away the connection to God...the sin nature.

Now if you see yourself as pure in your own eyes....you are already way outside of reality

The only nature God speaks of is the nature of angels, which is spiritual. The nature of the creation, which is natural and physical and mortal. And the divine nature, which is God's nature of righteousness and true holiness.

The flesh of Jesus was made of the physical seed of Adam, which was in the flesh of Mary, which was used by the Holy Ghost to prepare a body for the Lord.

Jesus in the days of His flesh was all man: Spiritual being and living soul in mortal flesh.

Adam, as will as sinners, became a sinner by nature by sinning, not by birth of His soul not his body.

This makes no sense at all. You need to look for someone to teach you about spiritual things...and then how to communicate.

Many people who worship Jesus Christ as God, only idolize His life as a man, believing that He was made of immortal sinless flesh, unlike other mere mortals. Which is why they reject any possibility of obeying the commandment to live as He did by walking in His steps on earth.

The Word and Son of God did not come into the world and take upon Himself a Superman body. The cross was not built with Kryptonite.

Immortal sinless flesh? Your confusion is very great. There is no such thing as immortal flesh. The flesh is weak...not sinful in itself. What IS sinful is the nature that protects the inner man from harm in this world. It is the husk covering of the outer man that needs to be broken (crucified) to allow fellowship in the Spirit in the inner man. A seed needs a husk to protect it. Likewise the inner man needs an outer man nature to preserve the mortal life in this world. When we enter into Christ we must leave the outer husk behind since there is no sin in Christ. We experience death (outer man sin nature) AND life (in the inner man) to enter into Christ.

If you are unwilling to learn about spiritual matters, you will persist in a scheme that does not help you in understanding what the gospel is all about. Jesus came to set is free from the bondage of the carnal nature. All have sinned because we all have an outward husk to protect us that is infected with an independent nature that resists God.

To deny this is to deny the reason for the Lord's coming to us. We each need to be set free from the OLD MAN (the sin nature that each of us develop in as we grow into the age of responsibility.)

 

[Johann]

Off topic.

SO who is Jesus 'off topic?'

αγαπητοι μη παντι πνευματι πιστευετε αλλα δοκιμαζετε τα πνευματα ει εκ του θεου εστιν οτι πολλοι ψευδοπροφηται εξεληλυθασιν εις τον κοσμον
J.

 

[Johann]

Off topic.

I'm stupid that's why I go "off" topic.
J.

 

[Matthias]

I'm stupid that's why I go "off" topic.
J.

I don’t think so.

 

[Matthias]

SO who is Jesus 'off topic?'

αγαπητοι μη παντι πνευματι πιστευετε αλλα δοκιμαζετε τα πνευματα ει εκ του θεου εστιν οτι πολλοι ψευδοπροφηται εξεληλυθασιν εις τον κοσμον
J.

The topic is the nature of Jesus Christ.

 

[Taken]

The Nature of Jesus Christ
OP ^

Holy Not created Everlasting Spirit....period!

 

[RedFan]

Thanks.

Tell me about Jesus. What do you think his theology is?
I don’t think his theology is the theology of Arius. Do you?
I don’t think his theology is the theology of Sabellius. Do you?
I don’t think his theology is the theology of binitarianism. Do you?
I don’t think his theology is the theology of trinitarianism. Do you?
I think his theology should be the theology of his followers. Do you?

Interesting way to cast the issue, Matthias (if Jesus Christ is God, can an omniscient God even have a "theology," or are such "ologies" purely human attempts at understanding things in a systematic fashion?).

Assuming he has one (or had one while he walked the planet and had "emptied himself," as Paul curiously puts it, of his divinity), I'm just not qualified to opine on Jesus' "theology." He hasn't shared with me any trinitarian or antitrinitarian theories he may subscribe to, so I am left to piece his views together from what others (many of whom did not overhear his words directly) relate that he said, and from what others have said of him. In both cases I have concluded that the evidence is equivocal. What Jesus reportedly said about being one with the Father at one time and about ‘The Father is greater than I’ at another is not conducive to drawing firm conclusions. What others have said of him -- begotten of the Father yet coeternal with him; separate in personhood yet identical in essence -- likewise is fraught with ambiguity.

In the short time I've been participating in these Fora, I've seen that there are many who troll these posts with an agenda, convinced that their hypotheses are correct and bent on convincing others. Most of them take Scripture (by which I mean the series of books which were deemed inspired and selected for inclusion into the canon by the majority of Church Fathers in the Third Century) as the inerrant Word of God, as absolute truth, and so use selected passages (often in isolation rather than in context) to beat each other over the head. But never into submission, I've noticed. There is a reason for that. I won't play that game. I won't pontificate. I'm not competent to do so. My Trinitarian beliefs are mine, and while I'm happy to explain them to whoever might be curious, I can't honestly declare that they are Jesus's beliefs.

But to respond to your last question as best I can ("I think his theology should be the theology of his followers. Do you?"), I actually think the opposite. His followers' theology should match his (assuming, as questioned above, we can properly say he has or had one). The task of figuring his "theology" out is not one I have yet accomplished, nor expect ever to accomplish.

 

[Matthias]

Interesting way to cast the issue, Matthias (if Jesus Christ is God, can an omniscient God even have a "theology," or are such "ologies" purely human attempts at understanding things in a systematic fashion?).

Assuming he has one (or had one while he walked the planet and had "emptied himself," as Paul curiously puts it, of his divinity), I'm just not qualified to opine on Jesus' "theology." He hasn't shared with me any trinitarian or antitrinitarian theories he may subscribe to, so I am left to piece his views together from what others (many of whom did not overhear his words directly) relate that he said, and from what others have said of him. In both cases I have concluded that the evidence is equivocal. What Jesus reportedly said about being one with the Father at one time and about ‘The Father is greater than I’ at another is not conducive to drawing firm conclusions. What others have said of him -- begotten of the Father yet coeternal with him; separate in personhood yet identical in essence -- likewise is fraught with ambiguity.

In the short time I've been participating in these Fora, I've seen that there are many who troll these posts with an agenda, convinced that their hypotheses are correct and bent on convincing others. Most of them take Scripture (by which I mean the series of books which were deemed inspired and selected for inclusion into the canon by the majority of Church Fathers in the Third Century) as the inerrant Word of God, as absolute truth, and so use selected passages (often in isolation rather than in context) to beat each other over the head. But never into submission, I've noticed. There is a reason for that. I won't play that game. I won't pontificate. I'm not competent to do so. My Trinitarian beliefs are mine, and while I'm happy to explain them to whoever might be curious, I can't honestly declare that they are Jesus's beliefs.

But to respond to your last question as best I can ("I think his theology should be the theology of his followers. Do you?"), I actually think the opposite. His followers' theology should match his (assuming, as questioned above, we can properly say he has or had one). The task of figuring his "theology" out is not one I have yet accomplished, nor expect ever to accomplish.

If, for example, a person is a trinitarian then his or her theology is trinitarian and his or her God is the Trinity.

Do you think Jesus is a trinitarian? If so, his theology is trinitarian. Do you think his God is the Trinity?

 

[Taken]

Interesting way to cast the issue, Matthias (if Jesus Christ is God, can an omniscient God even have a "theology," or are such "ologies" purely human attempts at understanding things in a systematic fashion?).

Inanutshell....Gods “theology”... Knowledge, Belief, Teaching, Understanding IS expressly Applicable to HE Himself, Amongst the WHOLE of Himself...HIS OWN Counselor, Amongst:
His Idea, His Word, His Power....all IN Agreement.

 

[RedFan]

SO who is Jesus 'off topic?'

αγαπητοι μη παντι πνευματι πιστευετε αλλα δοκιμαζετε τα πνευματα ει εκ του θεου εστιν οτι πολλοι ψευδοπροφηται εξεληλυθασιν εις τον κοσμον
J.

And just how do you suggest we δοκιμαζετε τα πνευματα in the face of conflicting views?

 

[RedFan]

Do you think Jesus is a trinitarian? If so, his theology is trinitarian. Do you think his God is the Trinity?

I don't know how to conceptualize "his God" here, simply because my God is a Trinity, and Jesus is included in that Trinity. Before concluding that "his God" is himself in connection with the other two persons of the Trinity, I'd need to understand what you mean by "his God." I have difficulty understanding how God can have a God.

 

[Johann]

And just how do you suggest we δοκιμαζετε τα πνευματα in the face of conflicting views?

Conflicting views are rampant I agree, read the context


1Jn 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
1Jn 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
1Jn 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
1Jn 4:4 Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.
1Jn 4:5 They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them.
1Jn 4:6 We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.

J.

 

[RedFan]

Conflicting views are rampant I agree, read the context


1Jn 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
1Jn 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
1Jn 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
1Jn 4:4 Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.
1Jn 4:5 They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them.
1Jn 4:6 We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.

J.

So if I understand you correctly, your talisman for testing the Spirit is John's single litmus test: whether that Spirit proclaims that "Jesus Christ is come in the flesh." But pretty much EVERYONE agrees that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. Not everyone agrees that he is God come in the flesh.

 

[Johann]

The topic is the nature of Jesus Christ.

CHRIST'S DIVINITY-HUMANITY
(A) SCRIPTURAL TESTIMONY concerning his divinity
(1) His Own Words
Luk_22:69; Luk_22:70; Joh_10:30; Joh_10:37; Joh_10:38; Joh_12:45; Joh_14:7-10; Joh_16:15
--SEE 709
(2) Testimony of the Apostles
Mat_16:16; Joh_1:1; Joh_1:2; Rom_1:4; Rom_9:5; Col_1:15; Col_2:9
1Ti_3:16; 1Ti_6:15; Heb_1:3; Rev_19:16
--SEE 716
Christ Worshipped, WORSHIP, TRUE
(3) The Father Bears Witness
Mat_3:17; Mat_17:5; Joh_5:32; Joh_5:37; Joh_8:18; 1Jo_5:9
--SEE 706
(4) Seven Scriptural Witnesses to
John the Baptist
Joh_1:34
The Works of Christ
Joh_5:36
The Father
Joh_5:37
The Old Testament
Joh_5:39
Jesus Christ Himself
Joh_8:14
The Holy Spirit
Joh_15:26
Believers
Joh_15:27
(5) Evil Spirits Confess His Divinity
Mat_8:29; Mar_1:24; Mar_3:11; Luk_4:41; Act_19:15
(B) DIVINE NAMES ascribed to Christ
(1) Beloved Son
Mat_12:18; Mat_17:5; Mar_1:11; Eph_1:6; Col_1:13; Heb_5:5
(2) Son of God
Mat_2:15; Mat_3:17; Mat_8:29; Mat_14:33; Mat_17:5; Mar_1:1; Luk_1:35; Joh_1:34
Joh_3:18; Joh_9:35; Joh_10:36; Joh_11:27; Act_9:20; Heb_10:29; 1Jo_4:14
(3) King of Kings
1Ti_6:15; Rev_1:5; Rev_17:14; Rev_19:16
--SEE Glory of Christ, CHRIST JESUS
Christ Exalted, CHRIST'S DIVINITY
---For other titles relating to his Divinity SEE Titles, TITLES AND NAMES
(C) SPECIAL MARKS OF DIVINITY
(1) His Pre-existence
Mic_5:2; Joh_1:1; Joh_8:58; Joh_17:5; Joh_17:24; Col_1:17; Heb_7:3; Rev_22:13
--SEE Immutability, IMMUTABILITY
(2) His Authority
Mat_7:29; Mat_28:18; Mar_1:27; Joh_5:27
--SEE 717
Christ Judge, FUTURE, THE
(3) His foreknowledge
(a) General References to
Joh_6:64; Joh_13:1; Joh_13:11; Joh_18:4; Joh_19:28
(b) Predicts his own Sufferings
Mar_8:31; Luk_9:22; Luk_12:50; Luk_22:37; Luk_24:7; Luk_24:26; Luk_24:46; Joh_3:14
(c) Foretells his Departure
Joh_7:33; Joh_13:33; Joh_14:28; Joh_16:5; Joh_16:10; Joh_16:16; Joh_16:28; Joh_17:11
(4) His Lordship
Luk_6:5; Act_2:36; Act_5:31; Rom_10:9; 1Co_1:9; 1Co_8:6; 1Co_12:3; Eph_4:5
(5) His Pre-eminence
Mat_3:11; Joh_3:31; Joh_13:13; Act_2:36; Rom_14:9; Col_1:18
Heb_1:4; Heb_3:3; Heb_8:6; Rev_1:11
--SEE Divine Image, MAN
(6) His Dominion
Eternal
Isa_9:6; Isa_9:7; Dan_7:14
Universal
Zec_9:10
Over Nature
Mat_8:27; Mar_1:27; Joh_3:35
Over the Church
Eph_1:22
Over Heavenly Powers
1Pe_3:22
--SEE Christ's Power, POWER
(7) His Exaltation, to Heavenly Places
Mar_16:19; Luk_22:69; Act_2:36; Act_5:31; Eph_1:20; Phi_2:9
Heb_1:9; 1Pe_3:22; Rev_5:12
--SEE 708
Head of the Church, CHURCH, THE
Christ Honoured, HONOUR
(D) HUMANITY OF CHRIST
(1) General References to
Mat_1:1; Gal_4:4; Phi_2:8; 1Ti_2:5
(2) Manifested in the Incarnation
Isa_7:14; Isa_9:6; Isa_11:1; Luk_1:31; Luk_2:7; Joh_1:14; Act_2:30
Rom_1:3; Rom_8:3; Phi_2:7; 1Ti_3:16; Heb_2:14; 1Jo_4:2; 2Jo_1:7
--SEE Divine Condescension, CONDESCENSION, DIVINE
(3) He had the Common Experiences of Humanity
--Sorrow
Mat_26:37
--Natural growth
Luk_2:40
--Hunger
Luk_4:2
--Sleep
Luk_8:23
--Poverty
Luk_9:58
--A Physical body
Luk_24:39
--Weariness
Joh_4:6
(4) Called "The Son of Man"
Mat_8:20; Mat_9:6; Mat_11:19; Mat_16:13; Mat_18:11; Mat_20:28; Mat_24:27; Mar_8:38
Luk_18:8; Joh_1:51; Joh_5:27; Joh_6:53; Joh_12:23; Joh_13:31; Act_7:56; Rev_1:13
--SEE Incarnation, CHRIST'S
(5) Son of David
Mat_1:1; Mat_12:23; Mat_15:22; Mat_21:9; Mar_10:48; Mar_12:35; Joh_7:42
Rom_1:3; 2Ti_2:8; Rev_5:5

Simply amazing stem jy saam of loop ons hoeka
ezahlukeneyo,and therefore prueba los espíritus
J.

 

[Matthias]

I don't know how to conceptualize "his God" here, simply because my God is a Trinity, and Jesus is included in that Trinity. Before concluding that "his God" is himself in connection with the other two persons of the Trinity, I'd need to understand what you mean by "his God." I have difficulty understanding how God can have a God.

Let me begin by saying that God himself doesn’t have a God; he is God.

That should be something we can agree on.

Jesus spoke about his God.

That should also be something we can agree on.

“God” can be understood in a primary sense or in a secondary sense. In other words, a person may be called elohim or theos in scripture without being God himself. Such a person is “God” in a secondary sense, as a person who represents God and acts as his agent. The judges of Israel, for example, are called collectively elohim. They represent God himself but weren’t God himself.

Is that something we can agree on?

 

[Johann]

So if I understand you correctly, your talisman for testing the Spirit is John's single litmus test: whether that Spirit proclaims that "Jesus Christ is come in the flesh." But pretty much EVERYONE agrees that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. Not everyone agrees that he is God come in the flesh.

And correct you are, brings to mind the 5 stupid virgins who actually fooled the others that they were Christians.
Interesting forum we have here.
J.

 

[Matthias]

CHRIST'S DIVINITY-HUMANITY
(A) SCRIPTURAL TESTIMONY concerning his divinity
(1) His Own Words
Luk_22:69; Luk_22:70; Joh_10:30; Joh_10:37; Joh_10:38; Joh_12:45; Joh_14:7-10; Joh_16:15
--SEE 709
(2) Testimony of the Apostles
Mat_16:16; Joh_1:1; Joh_1:2; Rom_1:4; Rom_9:5; Col_1:15; Col_2:9
1Ti_3:16; 1Ti_6:15; Heb_1:3; Rev_19:16
--SEE 716
Christ Worshipped, WORSHIP, TRUE
(3) The Father Bears Witness
Mat_3:17; Mat_17:5; Joh_5:32; Joh_5:37; Joh_8:18; 1Jo_5:9
--SEE 706
(4) Seven Scriptural Witnesses to
John the Baptist
Joh_1:34
The Works of Christ
Joh_5:36
The Father
Joh_5:37
The Old Testament
Joh_5:39
Jesus Christ Himself
Joh_8:14
The Holy Spirit
Joh_15:26
Believers
Joh_15:27
(5) Evil Spirits Confess His Divinity
Mat_8:29; Mar_1:24; Mar_3:11; Luk_4:41; Act_19:15
(B) DIVINE NAMES ascribed to Christ
(1) Beloved Son
Mat_12:18; Mat_17:5; Mar_1:11; Eph_1:6; Col_1:13; Heb_5:5
(2) Son of God
Mat_2:15; Mat_3:17; Mat_8:29; Mat_14:33; Mat_17:5; Mar_1:1; Luk_1:35; Joh_1:34
Joh_3:18; Joh_9:35; Joh_10:36; Joh_11:27; Act_9:20; Heb_10:29; 1Jo_4:14
(3) King of Kings
1Ti_6:15; Rev_1:5; Rev_17:14; Rev_19:16
--SEE Glory of Christ, CHRIST JESUS
Christ Exalted, CHRIST'S DIVINITY
---For other titles relating to his Divinity SEE Titles, TITLES AND NAMES
(C) SPECIAL MARKS OF DIVINITY
(1) His Pre-existence
Mic_5:2; Joh_1:1; Joh_8:58; Joh_17:5; Joh_17:24; Col_1:17; Heb_7:3; Rev_22:13
--SEE Immutability, IMMUTABILITY
(2) His Authority
Mat_7:29; Mat_28:18; Mar_1:27; Joh_5:27
--SEE 717
Christ Judge, FUTURE, THE
(3) His foreknowledge
(a) General References to
Joh_6:64; Joh_13:1; Joh_13:11; Joh_18:4; Joh_19:28
(b) Predicts his own Sufferings
Mar_8:31; Luk_9:22; Luk_12:50; Luk_22:37; Luk_24:7; Luk_24:26; Luk_24:46; Joh_3:14
(c) Foretells his Departure
Joh_7:33; Joh_13:33; Joh_14:28; Joh_16:5; Joh_16:10; Joh_16:16; Joh_16:28; Joh_17:11
(4) His Lordship
Luk_6:5; Act_2:36; Act_5:31; Rom_10:9; 1Co_1:9; 1Co_8:6; 1Co_12:3; Eph_4:5
(5) His Pre-eminence
Mat_3:11; Joh_3:31; Joh_13:13; Act_2:36; Rom_14:9; Col_1:18
Heb_1:4; Heb_3:3; Heb_8:6; Rev_1:11
--SEE Divine Image, MAN
(6) His Dominion
Eternal
Isa_9:6; Isa_9:7; Dan_7:14
Universal
Zec_9:10
Over Nature
Mat_8:27; Mar_1:27; Joh_3:35
Over the Church
Eph_1:22
Over Heavenly Powers
1Pe_3:22
--SEE Christ's Power, POWER
(7) His Exaltation, to Heavenly Places
Mar_16:19; Luk_22:69; Act_2:36; Act_5:31; Eph_1:20; Phi_2:9
Heb_1:9; 1Pe_3:22; Rev_5:12
--SEE 708
Head of the Church, CHURCH, THE
Christ Honoured, HONOUR
(D) HUMANITY OF CHRIST
(1) General References to
Mat_1:1; Gal_4:4; Phi_2:8; 1Ti_2:5
(2) Manifested in the Incarnation
Isa_7:14; Isa_9:6; Isa_11:1; Luk_1:31; Luk_2:7; Joh_1:14; Act_2:30
Rom_1:3; Rom_8:3; Phi_2:7; 1Ti_3:16; Heb_2:14; 1Jo_4:2; 2Jo_1:7
--SEE Divine Condescension, CONDESCENSION, DIVINE
(3) He had the Common Experiences of Humanity
--Sorrow
Mat_26:37
--Natural growth
Luk_2:40
--Hunger
Luk_4:2
--Sleep
Luk_8:23
--Poverty
Luk_9:58
--A Physical body
Luk_24:39
--Weariness
Joh_4:6
(4) Called "The Son of Man"
Mat_8:20; Mat_9:6; Mat_11:19; Mat_16:13; Mat_18:11; Mat_20:28; Mat_24:27; Mar_8:38
Luk_18:8; Joh_1:51; Joh_5:27; Joh_6:53; Joh_12:23; Joh_13:31; Act_7:56; Rev_1:13
--SEE Incarnation, CHRIST'S
(5) Son of David
Mat_1:1; Mat_12:23; Mat_15:22; Mat_21:9; Mar_10:48; Mar_12:35; Joh_7:42
Rom_1:3; 2Ti_2:8; Rev_5:5

Simply amazing stem jy saam of loop ons hoeka
ezahlukeneyo,and therefore prueba los espíritus
J.

Jesus Christ himself has a God.

 

[RedFan]

Let me begin by saying that God himself doesn’t have a God; he is God.

That should be something we can agree on.

Jesus spoke about his God.

That should also be something we can agree on.

“God” can be understood in a primary sense or in a secondary sense. In other words, a person may be called elohim or theos in scripture without being God himself. Such a person is “God” in a secondary sense, as a person who represents God and acts as his agent. The judges of Israel, for example, are called collectively elohim. They represent God himself but weren’t God himself.

Is that something we can agree on?

God is God, I agree.

Jesus spoke about his God while walking the earth 2,000 years ago, I agree.

A person can be called "God" without it being intended as a reference to The Ruler of The Universe, I agree.

 

[Matthias]

God is God, I agree.

Jesus spoke about his God while walking the earth 2,000 years ago, I agree.

A person can be called "God" without it being intended as a reference to The Ruler of The Universe, I agree.

Let’s talk about your second statement. Who did Jesus identify as his God when he walked the earth 2,000 years ago?