I do hear it the way its actually meant.....
No, with all due respect, AJ, you don't. Kermos has stated it as clearly as possible. I encourage you to read his (her?) recent posts. The only thing I would add is... well, first:
Perhaps you can present a clear and direct statement from God or his Christ that they are part of a "godhead" with the holy spirit.....who are all equally "God"......I would like to see where John presents God or Christ ever saying that.
Christ Jesus Himself bears it out very clearly in John 14.
An "abstract concept"...is that what you call it?
Well, actually, I was referring to the concept that a person cannot be separated from his/her word or breath ~ in the sense that you cannot really be separated from what you say or from your breath. I take back that that concept is abstract.
You know… because I can see you, I can hear you, and I can feel your breath… or I could, anyway, if we were in close proximity to one another…
Since when is the Bible said to have 'abstract concepts' about the nature of God and his son?
Yeah, never, so, agreed.
The fact that they are called Father and son in the first place is proof that God wanted us to recognize their relationship as we humans would understand it...
Partially, yes, but really much more than just that. Read on.
...The Father as the "Begetter" and the Son as the "Begotten". The Son is the creation of his Father....his "firstborn". (Colossians 1:15)
"Firstborn," in Paul's context, is regarding preeminence, and not merely "born before anyone else" ~ the very same context in which David is made firstborn, though he was born after all his brothers. And as you know, Jesus is the
last Adam:
“'The first man Adam became a living being'; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit... The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven... As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the Man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven... Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the Man of heaven" (1 Corinthians 15:45-49).
Who said that the Redeemer had to be God incarnate?
No mere man is qualified to mediate between God and man except One Who is both God and man. The author of Hebrews is very clear about this fact.
An immortal God cannot die...nor can mere humans kill God...the idea is ridiculous.
Well, but Jesus has the ability, as God, to lay down His life on earth and then take it up again, which He said very clearly in John 10, when He says, "I lay down my life for the sheep... I lay down my life that I may take it up again... No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord... I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again... This charge I have received from my Father." And to head off at least one of your objections, yes, He received that charge from His Father, just as He said, but He would not have received this charge if He, by His own accord, could not execute this charge. God alone gives life and has command over it, and Jesus is there saying He is God also, because He, fully God as He is, has command over His own earthly life.
Okay so here's a good place to put in the addition to what Kermos has said:
We can take a look at YHVH's covenant with Abram (soon to become Abraham) in Genesis 15. Normally, the two parties to the covenant being made would have both passed through the halves (front quarters on one side, hind quarters on the other) of the animals to ratify the covenant, both parties essentially saying, "If I don't keep my end of the covenant, this is what will happen to me; I will be cut in half." But as you know, YHVH put Abram into a deep sleep and then walked through the animal halves alone, and in effect saying:
"If
I don't keep
My end of this covenant, this is what will happen to
Me,"
and,
on behalf of Abram (
and thus all his progeny), "If
you don't keep your end of this covenant, this is what will happen to
Me,"
YHVH, in the Person of Christ Jesus, did the latter.
He says there that The Son was "sent" by his Father, (whom Jesus identified as "the only true God") to give his life for them. (John 17:3) Did Jesus die? If he didn't, the ransom is not paid and we are still doomed.
See above. Of course He did. It might behoove you not to stop at John 17:3 and read on to John 17:5, where He prays with absolute confidence for the Father to
"glorify (Him; Jesus)
in (His; the Father's)
own presence with the glory that (He, Jesus)
had with (Him; the Father)
before the world existed."
And here also, Jesus's high priestly prayer, as we refer to it, is confirming to us that Jesus pre-existed
everything... He was not "born" ~ except only to the extent that He submitted Himself to being born of a woman, to take on the form of man for our sake, as Paul says in Philippians 2. As John has said previously, "
All things were made through Him, and without Him was not any thing made that was made... In Him was life, and the life was the light of men" (John 1:3-4)
Yes, I see that very clearly.....since Isaiah 35 is a prophesy about the future...
Yes and no. He's talking about salvation of men ~ being born again of the Spirit ~ which was occurring then, is now, and will continue to happen until Christ Jesus returns. This is the initial fulfillment. So, regarding your statement, no, it is not future only.
But after Christ's triumphant return and the ensuing Judgment, Christ consummates the kingdom and we have the new heaven and new earth. This is the ultimate fulfillment. So, here, yes, it is future only... right now.
So again, yes and no... or rather, in order, no and yes.
I'll rely on my God to undo the damage that satan has caused and give us back what Adam and his wife lost for us....it wasn't heaven.
LOL! Agreed.
Grace and peace to you, AJ.
