Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Derail: Two Natures of Christ

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post

    None of those abilities differ from abilities demonstrated by Spirit-empowered humans both before and after Jesus.
    Your assessment is as succinct as it is accurate.
    1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
    .
    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
    Scripture before Tradition:
    but that won't prevent others from
    taking it upon themselves to deprive you
    of the right to call yourself Christian.

    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

      I'm an atheist, but personally, I feel no point in getting into what I call the "Bible Trivia Game." It serves no purpose.

      First, I don't really care, because I don't believe the bible anyways. So, I have no stake in being right or wrong.
      Second, even if I were to "win", what's the point? First, see #1, Second, I doubt that by "winning" I would convince anyone to give up their religion (not a goal of mine anyways).
      Third, I know the bible, nor care to read it, so why do this?
      Fourth, "beating" christians at knowing their own book would be just about stroking my own ego, and I don't need to do that.
      Among devout Christians these discussions go well beyond "Bible Trivia Game" and into conversations that might very well offer us better insights into and knowledge about our faith.

      I'm always still in trouble again

      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        Among devout Christians these discussions go well beyond "Bible Trivia Game" and into conversations that might very well offer us better insights into and knowledge about our faith.
        I'm not talking about what Christians discuss, I'm talking about the game that many atheists (especially H_A) play, where the purpose seems to be showing christians don't know their holy book as well as the outsider does.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

          I'm not talking about what Christians discuss, I'm talking about the game that many atheists (especially H_A) play, where the purpose seems to be showing christians don't know their holy book as well as the outsider does.
          As annoying as those exchanges can get, the investigation that is involved can often prove useful for either demolishing or underpinning concepts that have simply been accepted without any real consideration.
          1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
          .
          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
          Scripture before Tradition:
          but that won't prevent others from
          taking it upon themselves to deprive you
          of the right to call yourself Christian.

          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by tabibito View Post

            1/ Jesus did not just use his God powers. Jesus denied that he did anything by his own authority (John 5:30) and asserted that people of faith would come to be able to do even more (John 14:12). Note particularly the people whom Jesus says will be doing the greater things.
            He claimed to be equal to the Father (God). Doing something under the authority of the Father does not mean he wasn't God the Son. And he took credit for his own miracles, not saying it was God doing it through him.

            2/ He performed miracles. So too did the disciples. Peter walked on water (briefly). Compellingly, Jesus did not attribute Peter's failure and going glug to Peter's humanity, but to his lack of faith. Luke 17:6 attributes authority to the person who has faith
            ,
            Peter only walked on water because Jesus was there giving him the power to do so.

            3/ He raised the dead. So too did Peter (Acts 9:39-40) and even Elisha (2Kings 4:32-34)
            Again Jesus didn't attribute his miracles to someone else, but himself. He also accepted worship from people.

            Matthew 2:11 On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him.

            Matthew 14:33 Then those who were in the boat worshiped him, saying, "Truly you are the Son of God."

            John 9:37 Jesus said, "You have now seen him; in fact, he is the one speaking with you." 38 Then the man said, "Lord, I believe," and he worshiped him



            4/ He knew things that no-one could know. Jesus is not the only one to whom the question was addressed, "We have never met before, how do you know me?," and in analogous circumstances. Prophets generally know things that cannot be known; it comes with the office. (Not that prophesying is restricted to Prophets).
            Prophets only know what God has shown them. Jesus didn't have any visions before meeting the woman. He just knew.

            He also forgave sins. Not just sins against him personally, but all sins a person committed, such as the woman about to be stoned, the woman at the well, the thief on the cross, etc.

            Jesus referred to himself as the "I AM"

            John 8:58 "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

            John 13:19 "I am telling you now before it happens, so that when it does happen you will believe that I am He."

            some additional verses showing he was God on earth.

            Matthew 1:21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins." 22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23 "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" --which means, "God with us."

            John says that God the Son (the Word) became flesh:

            John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

            John 1:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.

            So he was God when he lived among us.
            Last edited by Sparko; 08-25-2022, 09:22 AM.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by tabibito View Post
              That is what he did do. After his response they were still acting against him, but no longer trying to stone him.


              If that is to be interpreted along the lines that you suggest, Jesus wasn't claiming just that he was God, but that he was the Father.


              Either they misunderstood, or Jesus did not bestow the authority to forgive sins on his disciples (John 20:22). If he bestowed that authority to forgive sins on men, that authority quite clearly is not restricted to God. John 20:22 indicates that the authority to forgive sins is bestowed on men by the Holy Spirit.
              You claim John 10 shows Jesus' telling his opponents that they misunderstood him and them relenting after his explanation, but that's not what it says in the text. Rather, Jesus doubles down on his claim to divinity, and the Jewish leaders again tried to seize him, no doubt with the intent of finishing what they had started when they picked up stones to execute him.

              Scripture Verse: John 10

              Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be broken—do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?

              © Copyright Original Source


              Notice that Jesus clearly identifies himself as someone who was uniquely consecrated by the Father and sent into the world. This follows on his earlier declaration that "I and the Father are one." There is nothing in this passage to suggest that the Pharisees who accused him of claiming to be God misunderstood what he was saying. Certainly no Christian could make such a claim without it being blasphemy.

              Concerning John 14, Jesus and the Father are two aspects of the same being, so Jesus was correct to say, "If you have seen me, then you have seen the Father." Jesus was not claiming to be the Father, but he was claiming to be God (the Trinity can be a difficult concept to understand because there is no parallel for it in the natural world). Again, a Christian who said the same would be guilty of blasphemy.

              Finally, in John 20, the disciples were being given a unique commission that Jesus could only have granted if he was God. If you ever encounter a Christian who takes it upon himself to bestow on others the authority to forgive sins, then stay far away from him because he is blaspheming.
              Last edited by Mountain Man; 08-25-2022, 09:39 AM.
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                Summary of my position:

                1. Did Jesus ever say "I am God"?


                Those exact words? No. Indirectly? Yes.

                He made comments equating himself to his Father (God), did miracles that only God could do and claimed HE did them, not God through him, showed that he possessed qualities only God had such as omniscience, and accepted worship from others. The writers, especially John also did their best to show that Jesus was God, and even gave him many of the same titles as God. In Revelation Jesus even called himself the Alpha and Omega.

                I think all Christians here will agree with this summary. The only one who seemed to have a problem with it was Hypatia.
                I will quibble slightly.

                -- IMO, John's Gospel is the one that most readily lends itself to being interpreted as having Jesus identify Himself with deity. But it is also the one that most readily lends itself to be interpreted as conferring some measure of deity on believers.

                -- The Alpha and Omega, First and Last stuff from Revelation clearly identifies Jesus as I Am, but those are post-Resurrection claims.

                OTOH, I agree that the fact that He accepted worship is strong evidence.


                2. Was Jesus God before the resurrection?

                The orthodox position on the Hypostatic Union (the dual nature of Christ as God and Man) is that it occurred at conception and continues forever onward. This is what John 1 says pretty clearly. That the Son became flesh and was born to Mary.

                No, I don't find John 1 to be "clear" on that. Taken on its own, it "clearly" says that Jesus was one thing from "the beginning" or even earlier, and at a point in time "became" something else.

                But taking that at face value would mean we would *not* take Heb. 10:5 and 13:8 at face value.

                Really, it's not reasonably possible to reconcile the "clear" teaching of John 1:14 and Heb. 13:8. That, IMO, is why theologians invent words like "hypostatic union": To "resolve" the conflict by basically painting over it.
                Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                Beige Federalist.

                Nationalist Christian.

                "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                Proud member of the this space left blank community.

                Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

                Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

                Justice for Matthew Perna!

                Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

                Comment


                • #38
                  The "I and the Father are one" statements are dicey for proving the deity of Christ, because in the portion of the Last Supper Discourse in John 17, Jesus freely moves back and forth using virtually identical language about the disciples as about Him and the Father.
                  Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                  Beige Federalist.

                  Nationalist Christian.

                  "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                  Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                  Proud member of the this space left blank community.

                  Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

                  Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

                  Justice for Matthew Perna!

                  Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    He claimed to be equal to the Father (God).
                    People did claim that is what he was doing. He scotched the claim. In fact, given that he no longer had the glory of God (John 17:5), it is evident that he was not equal to God or the Father.

                    Doing something under the authority of the Father does not mean he wasn't God the Son. And he took credit for his own miracles, not saying it was God doing it through him.
                    And again, Jesus stated that people would be doing the same works that he did and even greater works. He did not say that the Father would be doing greater works through them.

                    Peter only walked on water because Jesus was there giving him the power to do so.
                    Yet Jesus attributed Peter's ultimate failure to a lack of faith only. Peter walked on water, went glug, Jesus rescued him.

                    Again Jesus didn't attribute his miracles to someone else, but himself. He also accepted worship from people.
                    There was worship of him as the son of God, not as God. Given that Koine Greek doesn't distinguish between worship and honour, the ambiguity can cause problems.

                    Matthew 2:11 On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him.
                    Yet the Magi were worshipping the one they considered to be "born the king of the Jews." Nothing suggests that they were worshipping him as God - and the ambiguity of "worship" remains.

                    Matthew 14:33 Then those who were in the boat worshiped him, saying, "Truly you are the Son of God."
                    Likewise, in the first century, "son of God" was not understood to be anything other than a human

                    John 9:37 Jesus said, "You have now seen him; in fact, he is the one speaking with you." 38 Then the man said, "Lord, I believe," and he worshiped him
                    You have seen "the son of Man," an appellation that applies only to humans, and not even necessarily prophets.

                    Prophets only know what God has shown them. Jesus didn't have any visions before meeting the woman. He just knew.
                    As did the person I referred to. Prophets (and others who might from time to time prophesy) don't always get their information from visions, sometimes it is almost as though they are dredging up their own forgotten memories.

                    He also forgave sins. Not just sins against him personally, but all sins a person committed, such as the woman about to be stoned, the woman at the well, the thief on the cross, etc.
                    And conferred that same authority upon his disciples.

                    Jesus referred to himself as the "I AM"
                    As would anyone else in similar circumstances. The man who had been blind from birth, whom Jesus healed, also said "I am" when people were questioning whether he might in fact be the same man who had been blind from birth. It is reasonable to assume that the healed man was not claiming to be God.

                    John 8:58 "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"
                    As noted earlier, it is clear that Jesus was God prior to his conception. However, that particular citation doesn't show Jesus claiming to be God, just that he had existed since before Abraham.

                    John 13:19 "I am telling you now before it happens, so that when it does happen you will believe that I am He."
                    "You rightly call me teacher and lord, and I am exactly that" (John 13:13) ... and I tell you these things so that "you will believe that I am." ("he" is not present in the Koine text).

                    Would you think that Jesus was claiming to be God if you did not already believe that Jesus was God? Another sensei could readily make the same claims - he might be considered somewhat arrogant, but would anyone think such a person was claiming to be God?




                    Matthew 1:21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins." 22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23 "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" --which means, "God with us."
                    The meaning of Joshua doesn't change. One of the early church Fathers made a very strong comparison between Jesus/Joshua and Joshua son of Nun,

                    John says that God the Son (the Word) became flesh:
                    And claims that Jesus retained godhood come close to being demolished on that one "became" alone, even without the other texts being brought into play. (I won't make any further comment about "Logos" being rendered as "God the Son")

                    John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

                    John 1:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.

                    And another verse is indeed brought into play. Athanasius was not the only early Church theologian who made the claim that, during his incarnation as a man, Christ remained God. To the best of my knowledge, every one of the early theologians who made the claim explicitly denied that Logos (the Word) actually became flesh. (In ordinary English, the speaker would say "flesh and blood."
                    Last edited by tabibito; 08-25-2022, 10:28 AM.
                    1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                    .
                    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                    Scripture before Tradition:
                    but that won't prevent others from
                    taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                    of the right to call yourself Christian.

                    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
                      The "I and the Father are one" statements are dicey for proving the deity of Christ, because in the portion of the Last Supper Discourse in John 17, Jesus freely moves back and forth using virtually identical language about the disciples as about Him and the Father.
                      Not to mention that prayer in the garden. Jesus prays that the disciples might be one, just as he and the Father are, and later in that same prayer that the disciples might be one with the Father and with himself, in the same way that he and the Father are one. Nothing in there even begins to indicate that "I and the Father are one" might be a call to a common ontology.
                      1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                      .
                      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                      Scripture before Tradition:
                      but that won't prevent others from
                      taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                      of the right to call yourself Christian.

                      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        [QUOTE=NorrinRadd;n1408057]

                        OTOH, I agree that the fact that He accepted worship is strong evidence.
                        With the ambiguity of worship, that would depend on what he accepted worship as. A person could accept worship as an honourable person, or as a magistrate, etc so forth and so on, without any violation of anti worship provisions. In fact, it would be a breach of etiquette to refuse to show due obeisance.


                        No, I don't find John 1 to be "clear" on that. Taken on its own, it "clearly" says that Jesus was one thing from "the beginning" or even earlier, and at a point in time "became" something else.
                        An expanded interpretation "In the beginning Logos already was" is entirely appropriate.

                        But taking that at face value would mean we would *not* take Heb. 10:5 and 13:8 at face value.
                        10:5 would take some unravelling, 13:8 is interesting: interpretation would depend on when Jesus Christ (vis a vis Logos) actually came to be.

                        Really, it's not reasonably possible to reconcile the "clear" teaching of John 1:14 and Heb. 13:8. That, IMO, is why theologians invent words like "hypostatic union": To "resolve" the conflict by basically painting over it.
                        Or even ignoring comments such as those in Hebrews 2:9, which states that Jesus was for a time made lesser** than the angels.

                        ** ἐλαττόω - lower (in rank or status)
                        1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                        .
                        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                        Scripture before Tradition:
                        but that won't prevent others from
                        taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                        of the right to call yourself Christian.

                        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                          Summary of my position:

                          1. Did Jesus ever say "I am God"?


                          Those exact words? No. Indirectly? Yes.

                          He made comments equating himself to his Father (God), did miracles that only God could do and claimed HE did them, not God through him, showed that he possessed qualities only God had such as omniscience, and accepted worship from others. The writers, especially John also did their best to show that Jesus was God, and even gave him many of the same titles as God. In Revelation Jesus even called himself the Alpha and Omega.

                          I think all Christians here will agree with this summary. The only one who seemed to have a problem with it was Hypatia.

                          2. Was Jesus God before the resurrection?

                          The orthodox position on the Hypostatic Union (the dual nature of Christ as God and Man) is that it occurred at conception and continues forever onward. This is what John 1 says pretty clearly. That the Son became flesh and was born to Mary.

                          After some consideration, I have more quibbles.

                          Specifically, "did miracles that only God could do and claimed HE did them, not God through him."

                          -- In places like Acts 5:16 and 8:7, healing is attributed to believers (or their shadows!), with no explicit mention of God doing it through them.

                          -- In Acts 10:38, Luke quotes Peter as saying that Jesus did His miracles "because God was with Him" (my emphasis), specifically by the power of the Holy Spirit.

                          -- Luke 5:17 makes a point of noting that on that particular occasion, "the power of the Lord was with Him to heal," suggesting at least the possibility that sometimes that power was NOT present.

                          -- Mark 5:30 suggests that the "power" was not totally under His direct conscious control. It also suggests His supposed "omniscience" did not function at all times.

                          Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                          Beige Federalist.

                          Nationalist Christian.

                          "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                          Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                          Proud member of the this space left blank community.

                          Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

                          Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

                          Justice for Matthew Perna!

                          Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by tabibito View Post



                            With the ambiguity of worship, that would depend on what he accepted worship as. A person could accept worship as an honourable person, or as a magistrate, etc so forth and so on, without any violation of anti worship provisions. In fact, it would be a breach of etiquette to refuse to show due obeisance.




                            An expanded interpretation "In the beginning Logos already was" is entirely appropriate.



                            10:5 would take some unravelling, 13:8 is interesting: interpretation would depend on when Jesus Christ (vis a vis Logos) actually came to be.
                            10:5 goes to the idea that He "took on" flesh, rather than "became" flesh.

                            13:8 would also depend on whether "yesterday" was intended to extend as far into the past as "forever" extends into the future.


                            Or even ignoring comments such as those in Hebrews 2:9, which states that Jesus was for a time made lesser** than the angels.
                            ** ἐλαττόω - lower (in rank or status)
                            Placement w.r.t. angels is also problematic for harmonization. Matthew and Mark note that angles arrived to serve Him during or immediately after His testing in the wilderness. Matt. 26:53 has Jesus saying He could have "twelve legions" of angels at His disposal immediately merely by asking, but apparently He *would* need to *ask*. And Heb. 1:14 says the angels are sent to serve "those who will inherit salvation," which would seem to mean "believers."

                            So it's unclear when and how He was "lower" than angels, and the extent to which His status differed from ours w.r.t. angels.
                            Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                            Beige Federalist.

                            Nationalist Christian.

                            "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                            Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                            Proud member of the this space left blank community.

                            Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

                            Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

                            Justice for Matthew Perna!

                            Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post

                              After some consideration, I have more quibbles.

                              Specifically, "[He] did miracles that only God could do and claimed HE did them, not God through him."

                              -- In places like Acts 5:16 and 8:7, healing is attributed to believers (or their shadows!), with no explicit mention of God doing it through them.
                              Add in John 11:41, Hebrews 5:7. Neither is particularly strong, but they do point in the direction. Add in Acts 14:9-11. No record of "In the name of Christ," and the witnesses' response indicates that it wasn't merely an omission in the text.

                              -- In Acts 10:38, Luke quotes Peter as saying that Jesus did His miracles "because God was with Him" (my emphasis), specifically by the power of the Holy Spirit.
                              Also stating that God anointed him with the Spirit and with power. Which brings us to the point about what the very title, "Christ," declares. The messiah, the anointed of God ... there is more than one legitimate messiah recorded in the Old Testament.

                              -- Luke 5:17 makes a point of noting that on that particular occasion, "the power of the Lord was with Him to heal," suggesting at least the possibility that sometimes that power was NOT present.
                              I suspect that goes beyond what the author intended, but must admit it is within range for a fair interpretation.

                              -- Mark 5:30 suggests that the "power" was not totally under His direct conscious control. It also suggests His supposed "omniscience" did not function at all times.
                              Certainly the latter. but he admitted as much when he stated that certain things were known only to the Father. The former doesn't signify much either way: power can go out from a person without the person knowing what is going on in advance (or even during) though perceiving that it is happening, certainly, but I suspect that it still relies on the person's acquiescence. Beyond that, it's not a subject that I am overly familiar with, so the conjecture might be somewhat or even totally awry.
                              Last edited by tabibito; 08-25-2022, 03:43 PM.
                              1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                              .
                              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                              Scripture before Tradition:
                              but that won't prevent others from
                              taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                              of the right to call yourself Christian.

                              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                                You claim John 10 shows Jesus' telling his opponents that they misunderstood him and them relenting after his explanation, but that's not what it says in the text. Rather, Jesus doubles down on his claim to divinity, and the Jewish leaders again tried to seize him, no doubt with the intent of finishing what they had started when they picked up stones to execute him.

                                Scripture Verse: John 10

                                Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be broken—do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?

                                © Copyright Original Source


                                Notice that Jesus clearly identifies himself as someone who was uniquely consecrated by the Father and sent into the world. This follows on his earlier declaration that "I and the Father are one." There is nothing in this passage to suggest that the Pharisees who accused him of claiming to be God misunderstood what he was saying. Certainly no Christian could make such a claim without it being blasphemy.
                                Why so? Is a Christian not a son of God? How could claim to be a "son of God" be blasphemy? Is a Christian not consecrated and sent into the world? Jesus does not portray himself as "uniquely" consecrated - uniquely does not appear in the text. " What need would Jesus have to be consecrated/sanctified if he was God? The people who said he was making himself God were of the same kind that said he was a sinner, demon possessed, {a glutton, drunkard, and friend of sinners}, mad: hardly credible witnesses. He didn't admit the allegation, he didn't say "I am God:" he said "I am the son of God." Also he states in verse 25, the the works he does are done in the Father's name.

                                Concerning John 14, Jesus and the Father are two aspects of the same being, so Jesus was correct to say, "If you have seen me, then you have seen the Father." Jesus was not claiming to be the Father, but he was claiming to be God (the Trinity can be a difficult concept to understand because there is no parallel for it in the natural world). Again, a Christian who said the same would be guilty of blasphemy.
                                He was asked to show them the Father, and he said "If you have seen me, you have seen the Father." While "God" is sometimes used when referring to the Father, there is no occasion when Father is used to mean God. Again - Jesus was not claiming to be the Father when he spoke those words, and there is no justification whatever for reinterpreting "Father" to mean "God."

                                Finally, in John 20, the disciples were being given a unique commission that Jesus could only have granted if he was God. If you ever encounter a Christian who takes it upon himself to bestow on others the authority to forgive sins, then stay far away from him because he is blaspheming.
                                I do believe that Jesus bestowed that authority after the resurrection. There is no viable argument that I can see in favour of claiming that Jesus was not God after the resurrection: post resurrection he is assuredly God.

                                1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                                .
                                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                                Scripture before Tradition:
                                but that won't prevent others from
                                taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                                of the right to call yourself Christian.

                                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                39 responses
                                155 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                129 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                426 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X