An honest inquiry into the nature of Christology by a Trinitarian

[Brakelite]

The only reason Peter could walk on the water was because Jesus called him out of the boat. Jesus had that kind of power. He could heal the sick, restore sight to the blind, Even raise the dead.

Did He though? Sure He had that power at His disposal. But did He use it?

 

[synergy]

You need to start thinking with more depth and snap out of the simplistic
if you are going to learn to better understand the nature of God.

I'm not interested in your version of a Preincarnate Word whose soul is separate from his body which means he was physically death - dead since eternity past!

We are talking about God pre-Incarnate. Not some soul that was awaiting a body.

So now you're promoting the virtues of a disembodied soul. That's physical death! The more you try to salvage your position the more you're embarrassing yourself.

Jesus as the Lord God of Israel did not have to have "physical Life" to be alive.
For as being Soul and Deity in union? God was His "spiritual body."

Now God has a spiritual body. You're sounding just like a Mormon. Congratulations on that

He was omnipresent in the mind of his soul.

You're now all over the map - bringing Jesus' mind to salvage your position. What rabbit hole is next? His heart, his will, etc..?

Hew limited all that for His Soul when he made "himself become as a man."

There's never been a case where a man was a soul before he acquired a body. That fact disqualifies your Word from being a true man.

Then His Soul needed a body for physical life..

First you said that it's "not some soul that was awaiting a body" and now you say "His Soul needed a body". You're contradicting yourself and you're all over the map. Get a grip on yourself and come over to the Christian side. You will not regret it.

 

[GeneZ]

I told you that any attempt to redefine physical death will be immediately denied. Resistance to that universal definition is futile and you ascribing physical death to the Preincarnate Word is undeniable. You can deal with it or not. The choice is yours.

There is definitely something futile going on with you.

OK... back on Ignore. I tried.....

 

[synergy]

There is definitely something futile going on with you.

OK... back on Ignore. I tried.....

You prefer to stick your head in the sand instead of dealing with reality. That's your choice and that's on you.

 

[GeneZ]

The pre-Incarnate soul of the Lord God of Israel (which was the soul of Jesus when He made Himself to become as a man)
is revealed to us as follows, as recorded in the Torah...

'You will eat the old supply and clear out the old because of the new. Moreover, I will ​

make My dwelling among you, and my soul will not reject you.'I will also walk among ​

you and be your God, and you shall be My people." Lev 26:10-12​

And they began to remove the foreign gods from their midst and to serve Jehovah, ​

so that his soul became impatient because of the trouble of Israel. Judges 10:16​

Jehovah himself examines the righteous one as well as the wicked one, and anyone ​

loving violence his soul certainly hates." Psalm 11:5​

Those verses reveal there were two natures to be found in union with the Lord God of Israel..
God would never refer to his nature of Deity as "soul."
For Jesus clearly stated that God is "spirit" not soul in John 4:23-24!

But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit ​

and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. God is spirit, and those who worship ​

Him must worship in spirit and truth.” John 4:23-24​

God gives us clues.....
God must also give us the insight to see it..

And this is my prayer: that your love may abound more and more in knowledge and depth of insight."​

​

Philippians 1:9​

​

​

............... grace and peace!

 

[Brakelite]

The USE of them was "emptied."

Not the POSSESSION of them.

In other words, he still had 'em in the closet, he just didn't take 'em out.

Like Clark Kent and Superman.

Now and again His power and authority some through, but never ever for His own benefit. The miracles of healing and providence were acts of faith. This however...
KJV John 18:4-6
4 Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye?
5 They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them.
6 As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground.

Truth at times... Revelation... Has that effect on people.

 

[Brakelite]

and was made in the likeness of men:

Hi Johann. You ask what it was that Christ emptied Himself of. I suggest you have the answer in your own quote above. He emptied Himself of everything that impeded whatever it took to become a man.

 

[Brakelite]

What do we get when it says He has two natures (not just one nature)? God + Perfect man.

Would Clark Kent stop being Superman when he appeared before others having to limit his actions as being as man?
No, he would not. He would still be Superman, but choosing to deny himself of using his super human powers.

In Clark's case?
It was an act.
But, it shows even he could limit how much power he exerted by choice.

As for the Lord?
He is truly two different natures in a unique union ...

Its a union that seems very few people are able to think about objectively in the needed terms to grasp the concept.

First, they must let go of their own hazy concept they developed as a means to stabilize and cope with knowing He is two natures in union.
Once they can do that? Then they can allow the Spirit to show them ways it does actually work...

It takes the Holy Spirit, not logic alone.

.........

And yet that union is available to us, and the manner in which He lived have is an example of how it could be done.
KJV 2 Peter 1:2-4
2 Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord,
3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Manmade IDOLATRY. Obviously, your definitional understanding of ‘fully’ is elastic.

What you say is anti-Scriptural. There is one God, the Father. There is only God the father.

Jesus died. That proves he is not God.

Christ is alive. His body died. You have no life without Jesus Christ.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Hi Johann. You ask what it was that Christ emptied Himself of. I suggest you have the answer in your own quote above. He emptied Himself of everything that impeded whatever it took to become a man.

I thought men sin. Isn't that what you do.
I thought men lied. That is what men do.
I thought men wither and fade away.... Is that what Christ did?

 

[Dizerner]

I thought men sin. Isn't that what you do.
I thought men lied. That is what men do.
I thought men wither and fade away.... Is that what Christ did?

I thought men sin. Isn't that what Christ was nailed on the Cross for.

I thought men lied. Isn't that what Christ was nailed on the Cross for.

I thought men wither and fade away.... isn't that what Christ was nailed on the Cross for.

 

[Johann]

Perhaps we can take this beyond just a school of thought?

How God anointed (that means empowered folks) How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; (now watch the next statement) ---> for God ....was with him. Acts 10:38

So why was it possible for Jesus to heal all which were oppressed on the devil? For.....for...(this is the reason why and this is what the Apostles knew to be true) FOR. Somebody was with him. And who was that? God the Father and the Spirit.

Jesus also said in another place the Father in me he does the works. He didn't say it was possible for he functioned as the Son of God with his own power. He functioned as something different The Son of Man. Read over and over and over in the gospels what he stressed he is the Son of Man, the Son of Man, the Son of Man.

He was the Son of God though HE WAS! Not denying he wasn't. But notice something as the usual most of the time thing he never publicly much highlighted that fact and we see the following.....Jesus asked the disciples who men say that he was.....and Peter said to him after the disciples gave thought to it.....he told Jesus he was the Son of the living God.....now the shocking thing......He said to his disciples, that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. Matt 16:20 After the resurrection that very much was their mandate but not then.

Agree 100%

"Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power" Notice the things Peter affirms about Jesus.

God anointed Him (anoint is the Hebrew root word of Messiah)
with the Holy Spirit (the new age is the age of the Spirit)
with power (effective ministry)
doing good
healing all oppressed by the devil (power of evil and Satan)
God was with Him (He spoke and acted on behalf of YHWH, cf. John 3:2; 9:33; 10:38; 14:10-11)
Apparently this refers to Jesus' baptism (cf. F. F. Bruce, Answers to Questions, pp. 171-172).

Robert B. Girdlestone, Synonyms of the Old Testament, makes the interesting statement:

"The verb χρίειν is used five times in the N.T. In four of these passages it refers to the anointing of Christ by His father, namely: Luke 4. 18, which is quoted from Isa. 61. 1; Heb. 1. 9, quoted from Ps. 45. 7; Acts 4. 27, where it is used with special reference to the quotation from the second Psalm, which immediately precedes it; and Acts 10. 38, where we are told God anointed Jesus with the Spirit" (p. 183).

 

[Brakelite]

The Son is eternal just as the Holy Spirit are eternal. The Son( 2nd Person of the Trinity) became flesh , human, man. And He forever remains God Incarnate, in the flesh.

God can mean all 3, just One like the Father. God can mean the Son or Holy Spirit. The context lf the passage will determine the meaning.

hope this helps !!!

So not begotten?

 

[Johann]

But does this have to mean because Jesus suspended the use of attributes that he divested himself of the Godhead? If my name is John Doe. and I tied down my feet so as I couldn't use certain abilities. Am I not still John Doe. Don't I have certain abilities still. Do they have to be where I can use them?

Now in my country we have people who have rather large substantial amounts of wealth in what's called tax free savings accounts. You can't touch them for a year or for whatever amount of time you want them in such. The person HAS this wealth. They're still worth such and such.

If one were to say to me I'm no longer wealthy or I'm diminished because I can't by agreement tap into such accounts.....well I still am just as wealthy. So consider Jesus is just as much God regardless as to whether he's set on the shelf certain things.

Now it seems to me if were going to take a position that God HAS TO use them or he's no longer God.....then I'm sorry but that has a familiar ring. Sounds very much like the Calvinistic argument because God is sovereign HE HAS TO force everything to his will. If he doesn't do that....he's no longer God. Please gentlemen. I think we need to be careful of saying when God can no longer be God.


And here's other statements which I feel needs a fair hearing. I believe Jesus is God, that he came to the earth. I believe when he came to the earth becoming a man there's more to the reasoning of the why to this then what people might think. Adam sinned. A man a human had to be instrumental in bringing about the reconciliation between God and man.

There was no man. God had to become a man. If an entity was there with powers beyond just what men are in and of themselves....it would not be legal. (now that raises another question when I suggest something might not be legal) (Maybe another time I can touch on what I mean)

So emptying himself many dear brothers hold that it can't mean the suspending of his attributes. Then why do we see Jesus tell the world, that is when he walked his earthly ministry .not now but then.....it's the Father in me! He....he....he doeth the works. John 14:10 We might ask too why did he say to the Pharisees, "Many good works (speaking of the miracles) have I shewed you from my Father...John 10:31

Now connect that back to the Father in me he doeth the works. There's other passages I think should be in the mix when studying this subject as well. God Bless.

Correct-

14:10 Jesus' question in Greek expects a "yes" answer.



"you. . .you" The first "you" is SINGULAR, referring to Philip. The second "you" is PLURAL, referring to the Apostolic group (cf. John 14:7, 10).

"The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative" Jesus was acting on the Father's behalf in all things (cf. John 14:24; 5:19,30; 7:16-18; 8:28; 10:38; 12:49). Jesus' teachings are the very words of the Father (cf. John 14:24).

"but the Father abiding in Me does His works" This fellowship between the Father and the Son (i.e., John 7:14; 8:28; 10:38), which is emphasized in Jesus' High Priestly prayer of John 17, becomes the basis for the "abiding" of believers in Christ in John 15. John's Gospel reveals salvation as

doctrine
fellowship
obedience
perseverance

14:11 "Believe Me" This is a PRESENT ACTIVE IMPERATIVE or a PRESENT ACTIVE IMDICATIVE (cf. John 14:1).

There is a manuscript variant of some significance in the opening phrase of this verse. Some early Greek texts (P66, P75, א, D, L, and W) have just the VERB "believe" followed by (hoti) "that," which implies that they were to accept the truth about Jesus and the Father's unity. Other ancient texts (MSS A and B) add the DATIVE "in Me," showing the personal object of the belief. The United Bible Societies' Greek scholars believe that the first option was original (cf. Bruce M. Metzger's A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, which gives this option a "B" rating [almost certain], p. 244). Most modern translations keep the "in me" but add "that" (which shows the content to be believed).

"otherwise believe because of the works themselves" Jesus tells them to believe in His works (cf. John 5:36; 10:25,38). His works fulfilled OT prophecy. His works reveal who He is! The Apostles, like all of us, had to grow in faith.

5:34 "I say these things so that you may be saved" This is an AORIST PASSIVE SUBJUNCTIVE. The PASSIVE VOICE implies the agency of God or the Spirit (cf. John 6:44,65). Remember the Gospels are evangelistic proclamations (i.e., tracts), not historical biographies. There is an evangelistic purpose in all that was recorded (cf. John 20:30-31).

5:35 "he was the lamp" This is another emphasis on light, here John's preparatory message(cf. John 1:6-8).

5:36 "the very works that I do-testify about Me" Jesus' actions were fulfillments of OT prophecies about the Messiah. The Jews of His day should have recognized these miraculous signs--healing the blind, feeding the poor, restoring the lame (cf. Isa. 29:18; 32:3-4; 35:5-6; 42:7). The power of Jesus' teachings, lifestyle righteousness, compassion, and mighty miracles (cf. John 2:23; 10:25,38; 14:11; 15:24) bore a clear witness to who He was, where He came from, and Who sent Him.

"the Father has sent Me" See Special Topic: The Fatherhood of God and Special Topic: Send.

THE FATHERHOOD OF GOD

I. Old Testament

A. There is a sense that God is father by means of creation.

1. Gen. 1:26-27

2. Mal. 2:10

3. Acts 17:28

B. Father is an analogy used in several senses.

1. father of Israel (by election)

a. "Son" – Exod. 4:22; Deut. 14:1; Isa. 1:2; 63:16; 64:8; Jer. 3:19; 31:9,20; Hosea 1:10; 11:1; Mal. 1:6

b. "firstborn" – Jer. 31:9

2. father of the king of Israel (Messianic)

a. 2 Sam. 7:11-16

b. Ps. 2:7; Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:5; 5:5

c. Hosea 11:1; Matt. 2:15

3. analogy of loving parent

a. father (metaphor)

(1) carries his son – Deut. 1:31

(2) disciplines – Deut. 8:5; Pro. 3:12

(3) provides (i.e., Exodus) – Deut. 32:6

(4) will never forsake – Ps. 27:10

(5) loves – Ps. 103:13

(6) friend/guide – Jer. 3:4

(7) healer/forgiver – Jer. 3:22

(8) mercy giver – Jer. 31:20

(9) trainer – Hosea 11:1-4

(10) special son – Mal. 3:17

b. mother (metaphor)

(1) will never forsake – Ps. 27:10

(2) love of a nursing mother – Isa. 49:15; 66:9-13 and Hosea 11:4 (with the proposed textual emendation of "yoke" to "infant")

II. New Testament

A. The Trinity (texts where all three are mentioned)

1. Gospels

a. Matt. 3:16-17; 28:19

b. John 14:26

2. Paul

a. Rom. 1:4-5; 5:1,5; 8:1-4,8-10

b. 1 Cor. 2:8-10; 12:4-6

c. 2 Cor. 1:21-22; 13:14

d. Gal. 4:4-6

e. Eph. 1:3-14,17; 2:18; 3:14-17; 4:4

f. 1 Thess. 1:2-5

g. 2 Thess. 2:13

h. Titus 3:4-6

3. Peter – 1 Pet. 1:2

4. Jude – vv. 20-21

B. Jesus

1. Jesus as "only begotten" – John 1:18; 3:16,18; 1 John 4:9

2. Jesus as "Son of God" – Matt. 4:3; 14:33; 16:16; Luke 1:32,35; John 1:34,49; 6:69; 11:27

3. Jesus as Beloved Son – Matt. 3:17; 17:5

4. Jesus' use of abba for God – Mark 14:36

5. Jesus' use of pronouns to show both His and our relationship to God

a. "My Father," e.g., John 5:18; 10:30,33; 19:7; 20:17

b. "your Father," e.g., Matt. 5:16,45,48; 6:1,4,6,8,9,14,15,18,26,32; 7:11; 10:20,29; 18:14

c. "our Father," e.g., Matt. 6:9,14,26

C. One of many family metaphors to describe the intimate relationship between God and humankind:

1. God as Father

2. Believers as

a. sons of God

b. children

c. born of God

d. born again

e. adopted

f. brought forth

g. family of God

May Christ be magnified.
J.

 

[Dizerner]

So not begotten?

true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father

In an attempt to express the timelessness of the begetting some early fathers described it as an eternal present tense begetting.

Timelessness kinda breaks our minds.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I thought men sin. Isn't that what Christ was nailed on the Cross for.

I thought men lied. Isn't that what Christ was nailed on the Cross for.

I thought men wither and fade away.... isn't that what Christ was nailed on the Cross for.

Sure is. Do you agree with what I said or not? You're deflecting.

No mere man could have died for mere man.

 

[Johann]

Sure is. Do you agree with what I said or not? You're deflecting.

No mere man could have died for mere man.

And yet-

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
1Ti 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
1Ti 2:7 Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.

 

[praise_yeshua]

And yet-

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
1Ti 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
1Ti 2:7 Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.

I suppose Peter or John could have died for man?

 

[civic]

So not begotten?

Not in the sense of eternity that there was a time there was no Son. Begotten in the sense of the Incarnation. If by monogenes you mean unique/ one of a kind then I agree.

MONOGENÊS

BAGD: "In the Johannine lit[erature] m[onogenês] is used only of Jesus. The mngs. only, unique may be quite adequate for all its occurrences here...But some (e.g., WBauer, Hdb.) prefer to regard m[onogenês] as somewhat heightened in mng. in J and 1J to only-begotten or begotten of the Only One." (Bauer, it will be remembered, believed the Gospel of John was a gnostic text, and hence saw a theology behind John's writing compatible with the creation of the Logos as a semi-divine intermediary between the Monas and the creation with which He could not directly interact).

Louw & Nida: "Pertaining to what is unique in the sense of being the only one of the same kind or class - 'unique, only.'"

Moulton & Milligan: "Literally 'one of a kind,' 'only,' 'unique' (unicus), not 'only-begotten....'"

Grimm/Thayer: "Single of its kind, only, [A.V. only-begotten]." (Note that Thayer's insertion merely cites the KJV translation, which owes considerable debt to the Vulgate of Jerome, who translated monogenês "unigenitus").

NIDNTT: "The only begotten, or only....RSV and NEB render monogenês as 'only.' This meaning is supported by R. E. Brown, The Gospel According to John, Anchor Bible, I, 1966, 13 f., and D. Moody, “God’s Only Son: The Translation of John 3:16 in the Revised Standard Version,” JBL 72, 1953, 213-19. Lit. it means “of a single kind,” and could even be used in this sense of the Phoenix (1 Clem. 25:2). It is only distantly related to gennao, beget. The idea of “only begotten” goes back to Jerome who used unigenitus in the Vulg. to counter the Arian claim that Jesus was not begotten but made."

Newman: "Unique, only."

LSJ: "Only, single" (references John 1:14, the only NT verse cited).

TDNT: defines monogenês as "only begotten," but distinguishes between nouns ending in -genes and adverbs ending in -genês. The former denote the source of the derivation, the latter the nature of the derivation. Thus, the author (Buchsel) concludes that monogenês means "of sole descent." But Pendrick argues strongly against this view:

 

[Dizerner]

Not in the sense of eternity that there was a time there was no Son. Begotten in the sense of the Incarnation.

Did Jesus become the Son.

Or was he always the Son.