The spirit you speak of is the gift of the holy spirit that came on the day of Pentecost. See Acts chapter 2. It's the Christ in us and has nothing to do with a god person.
Is Jesus 100% man and 100% God
- Thread starter Peterlag
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
- Status
The spirit you speak of is the gift of the holy spirit that came on the day of Pentecost. See Acts chapter 2. It's the Christ in us and has nothing to do with a god person.
Would you mind showing me a place in the Bible where someone is identified as someone they are not?
So for instance, I know that God told Moses that we would be as God, and Aaron his prophet, but is there a place where it says, "and God spoke to Pharaoh, and said . . .", only, it was Moses actually talking? Something like that?
"And John the Baptist sent his disciples to Jesus to ask Him their question, and John asked, Are we . . .", like that?
Do you understand what I'm asking for? Something to demonstrate that the Bible was in fact written that way?
Much love!
So people say that someone who sends someone else, that to the Jewish mind, this is the same as the person themself going.
So then you've have something like, "John sent April to deliver the message to Leon. So April takes the bus to Leon's house, and arriving, John said to Leon, "my message is now delivered". Just a crude example.
We know it was April speaking, but John is credited, because he is he sender, and April is his agent.
This is a metynomy, naming one person, when another person is meant.
Can you show me an example of this in the Bible? Where one person is named as doing something that another person is actually doing, as an example of an agency based metynomy?
Much love!
Yes, like, Jesus sends Peter to someone's house to give a message, and the Bible describes the event as Peter going to give the message, so we can know it's Peter standing there, but then uses this language of "agency", saying, Jesus entered the house and Jesus spoke, giving the message, something like that.
Do you know what I mean?
A demonstrable example of the Bible speaking this way, using metynomy with people in an example of "agency".
Much love!
I don't think I understand what you are asking. There are places at my job where my boss Josh tells me to go tell Katie that I sent you to tell her the meeting is at ten. But Josh does not speak through my body unless I have a devil spirit in my body speaking through me.
Lord is the same thing. Here's some Scripture on Lord...
- Property owners are called the "Lord" (Matthew 20:8) kurios is “owner” in the NIV.
- Heads of households are called the "Lord" (Mark 13:35) kurios is "owner."
- Slave owners were called the "Lord" (Matthew 10:24) kurios is "master."
- Husbands were called the "Lord" (1 Peter 3:6) kurios is "master" in the NIV.
- A son called his father the "Lord" (Matthew 21:30) kurios is "sir."
- The Roman Emperor was called the "Lord" (Acts 25:26) kurios is "His Majesty."
- Roman authorities were called the "Lord" (Matthew 27:63) kurios is "sir."
You're not saying these are called God, though, right? God is our Master, and we also have human masters. So like, in Matthew 20:18, the full saying isn't simply, "The Lord", it's saying "the lord of the vineyard", right?
And of course this is a parable, and we need to keep that in mind.
Matthew 20:1 KJV
For the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which went out early in the morning to hire labourers into his vineyard.
Sarah called her husband lord, but not Lord, or LORD. Right?
I feel like I must be missing your point or something.
Much love!
I can help if you give me the verse that you are saying I quoted when your question came up.
Maybe I'm not understanding your point here.
Those who are familiar with the Semitic languages know that a man who is acting with God's authority can be called "god."
What was your meaning in this above part?
Much love!
A clear example that the word translated "God" in Isaiah 9:6 can be used of powerful earthly rulers is Ezekiel 31:11 referring to the Babylonian king. Mighty God in Isaiah 9:6 is the same Greek as mighty one or ruler in some translations of Ezekiel 31:11. If that wording made Jesus God. Then it also made the Babylonian king God.
The Old Testament refers to the Messiah as “one like a son of man” and the phrase “son of man” was a Semitic idiom for a human being and it's used that way throughout the Old Testament. The phrase “son of man” also became a title of the Messiah when Daniel referred to him as “one like a son of man” (Daniel 7:13) and that explains why Jesus called himself “the son of man” many times. The use of the “son of man” in reference to the Messiah is one more piece of evidence that Jesus was fully human and one more reason that people were expecting the Messiah to be human. The New Testament teaches Jesus was a man and Jesus himself said he was “a man who has told you the truth” John 8:40. Jesus was not being disingenuous and hiding his “divine nature” but rather was making a factual statement that reinforced what the Jews were expecting of the Messiah—that he would be a fully human man.
The apostles also taught Jesus was a man and we see this when the Apostle Peter spoke in his sermon to the crowds gathered on the Day of Pentecost making a very clear declaration that Jesus was a man approved of God: “Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you…” (Acts 2:22). Here Peter clearly taught that Jesus was a man and that God did miracles “by him.” Paul also taught Jesus was a man and we can see that when he was in Athens teaching a crowd of unsaved Gentiles about Jesus Christ and said that God would judge the world “by the man whom He has appointed” (Acts 17:31). Paul never said or implied that Jesus was anything but a “man.”
There are a number of other New Testament verses that state Jesus was a man and we can see them in places like Romans that says a man (Adam) caused sin to enter into the world, and also that a man would have to redeem it from sin. Romans 5:15 says “For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.” Some theologians teach that only God could pay for the sins of mankind, but the Bible specifically says that a man must do it. The book of Corinthians makes the same point Romans does when it says “For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead” (1 Corinthians 15:21).
The apostles also taught Jesus was a man and we see this when the Apostle Peter spoke in his sermon to the crowds gathered on the Day of Pentecost making a very clear declaration that Jesus was a man approved of God: “Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you…” (Acts 2:22). Here Peter clearly taught that Jesus was a man and that God did miracles “by him.” Paul also taught Jesus was a man and we can see that when he was in Athens teaching a crowd of unsaved Gentiles about Jesus Christ and said that God would judge the world “by the man whom He has appointed” (Acts 17:31). Paul never said or implied that Jesus was anything but a “man.”
There are a number of other New Testament verses that state Jesus was a man and we can see them in places like Romans that says a man (Adam) caused sin to enter into the world, and also that a man would have to redeem it from sin. Romans 5:15 says “For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.” Some theologians teach that only God could pay for the sins of mankind, but the Bible specifically says that a man must do it. The book of Corinthians makes the same point Romans does when it says “For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead” (1 Corinthians 15:21).
GEN2REV
Well-Known Member
Since when are science and any ways of mankind the measuring stick for what is possible for God Almighty?
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
I've come to realize part of trinitarian indoctrination is the false idea that there is only one lord and only one god in reality. Capitalizing does not change that fact.
The word "lord" is a title, which means what Peterlag indicated. There are dozens of lords in Scripture.
The word "god" is also a title, synonymous with lord. Again, there are REAL lowercase gods in the Bible. For instance, it is said Satan is the god of this world. So, in incorrectly using capitalization, trinitarians seek to escape calling their Creator by name, which is not Jesus but YHWH. Consider why Paul felt it necessary to write:
5 We have only one Lord, one faith, and one baptism. 6 There is one God who is the Father of all people. Not only is God above all others, but he works by using all of us, and he lives in all of us.
Ephesians 4:5-6 CEVThe CEV translation uses the word "we" and a similar sentiment is expressed by Paul in his letter to the Corinthians, 1 Corinthians 8:6
We have only one God, and he is the Father. He created everything, and we live for him. Jesus Christ is our only Lord. Everything was made by him, and by him life was given to us.
Why the use of the word "we?" And why did he have to say "we" have only one of these things? Because there are other lords and gods that exist! For those that believe in the god of Israel and his chosen redeemer, this reduces the applicable set to one. I hope you understand the truth of what I am writing.
Much love
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
You know that the Sovereign God is bounded, right? @Rich R recently listed about 5 things that he cannot do with Scriptural references for each. And Jesus said that God is good. This is blasphemy even though it properly limits the bounds of God. In Islam, Allah is unbounded, and therefore, untrustworthy.
To say 'anything is possible for God' has to be looked at in the context of where that sentiment was expressed. It cannot be used as a rationalization for the inherently contradictory concept of the man-is-god thesis.
GEN2REV
Well-Known Member
I've known you to rail against the deity of Christ, but never to diminish God Almighty.
This is a new low for you.
If your god is allah, that would answer a lotta questions.
It seems logical to say that if God works with His own logic and science that He created, then there is stuff He simply cannot do. It seems clear He cannot lie. He probably cannot make a square circle. And if He is unlimited in goodness and wisdom, then He probably cannot be bad or unwise.
- Status
Similar threads
