Who is Jesus?

Then you deny the most important doctrine of the Christian faith - the bodily Resurrection of Christ.
The question required only one word for an answer. I could not have pick Yes because the Lord was not resurrected with a glorified human body. He was resurrected with a resurrected spiritual body.

Is Jesus in heaven right now with a glorified human body that still retains the crucifixion marks in His side, hands and feet ? yes or no
 
The question required only one word for an answer. I could not have pick Yes because the Lord was not resurrected with a glorified human body. He was resurrected with a resurrected spiritual body.

Is Jesus in heaven right now with a glorified human body that still retains the crucifixion marks in His side, hands and feet ? yes or no
100% yes . Spiritual does not mean immaterial
 
“Now the Lord Yahweh has sent me.” The subject abruptly shifts here, which is not uncommon, and Cyrus answers God’s call. Isaiah himself had answered God’s call earlier (Isa. 6:8), and now Cyrus does. God sent Cyrus and Cyrus both obeyed the call and acknowledged the God of Israel (Ezra 1:2).

“and also sent His spirit.” It was well known that for prophets and kings to be successful they had to be empowered by God’s spirit, His gift of holy spirit. That was why God put his spirit upon the elders that were to rule Israel (Num. 11:17-29), why after David sinned he prayed that God would not take His holy spirit away (Ps. 51:11), and why Elisha asked for a double portion of God’s spirit to be upon him (2 Kings 2:9), and indeed, the Bible records that Elisha did almost twice as many miracles as Elijah. Cyrus, in typical fashion of one who does not take credit not due him, acknowledges here in Isaiah 48:16 that God sent him, but will not take full credit for his success but says that God also gave His spirit to Cyrus, which was the source of much of his success.
Error, neither Cyrus nor Isaiah were at the beginning. listen carefully, Isaiah 48:16 "Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me."

so try again.

101G.
 
Not all translations have that error of Phil 2:6 in your version.
LOL, always an excuse...... #1. it's not MY version. so we can take this as you do not know, nor understand, nor answer. no worries... good day.

101G.
 
Error, neither Cyrus nor Isaiah were at the beginning. listen carefully, Isaiah 48:16 "Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me."

so try again.

101G.
I do not need to try again because I'm starting to think that when the Bible speaks about the spirit that is referring to the spirit God places on certain people in the Old Testament or the spirit that all Christians have is what you think is God. So I can't help you.
 
I do not need to try again because I'm starting to think that when the Bible speaks about the spirit that is referring to the spirit God places on certain people in the Old Testament or the spirit that all Christians have is what you think is God. So I can't help you.
ERROR, not in this verse, the Holy Spirit is the Lord Jesus in flesh, the ordinal Last. please know and understand the ECHAD in Spirit. the ordinal designations of God.

101G.
 
ERROR, not in this verse, the Holy Spirit is the Lord Jesus in flesh, the ordinal Last. please know and understand the ECHAD in Spirit. the ordinal designations of God.

101G.
We disagree on the trinity. I do not believe there's any such thing in the Bible. Only what the Catholics started hundreds of years later and they have never been right about anything.
 
We disagree on the trinity. I do not believe there's any such thing in the Bible. Only what the Catholics started hundreds of years later and they have never been right about anything.
Catholics did not exist at the time of the Bible nor during the time of the Nicene Council. Your statements clash with history. Learn some history and then we can talk.
 
We disagree on the trinity. I do not believe there's any such thing in the Bible. Only what the Catholics started hundreds of years later and they have never been right about anything.
first, 101G do not believe in any trinity, have you not been reading my posts? two, nor do 101G believe in anything where the Lord Jesus was the “Sheliah” of God, or the agent of God as many unitarian believe. none of that do 101G believes.

101G is a "diversified oneness" and that's biblical. and can and is found in scripture, both OT and NT.

we suggest you look back over 101G's replies and try to understand what and why101G believes and stands for.

1`01G.
 
Defective Christology. Most Christian-based religions distort Christ by compromising His deity . . . . Jehovahs Witnesses teach that Jesus was a created being the archangel Michael prior to His human birth . . . . Mormons deny the virgin birth; Jehovahs Witnesses and Armstrongs Worldwide Church of God, the bodily resurrection


Defective Christology. Those who believe in an unbiblical Jesus will usually deny the true Deity of Christ, or the true humanity of Jesus. Some, such as Mormons, deny the virgin birth. They say that God the Father had sexual relations with Mary. I John 4:1-3 gives a scriptural litmus test for false teachers.

Among the most common feature of these religions is a defective view of Christ. Defective views of Christ are not new, they go back to the early days of the church. One of the apostle Paul's principal reasons for writing his letter to the Colossian Church was to combat an heretical view of Christ that was being taught there. During the second century the church had to battle against the heresy of Gnosticism, which denied the true humanity of Christ. In the fourth century the church battled against the Arian heresy which denied the true deity of Christ.

Most modern day non Christian religious systems follow in the footsteps of their predecessors. For example, the Jehovah's Witnesses are simply a modern version of the Arian heresy in the early church. Like the Arians of the fourth century, the Jehovah's Witnesses deny that the Son is co-eternal with the Father. Like the Arians, the Jehovah's Witnesses regard the Son as being created by the Father. Christian Science is another religion which has a defective view of Jesus Christ. They do not believe in the existence of matter - to them the material world is an illusion. So according to their teaching Jesus Christ did not have a real body. In this they repeat the same heresy of the Gnostics, who denied the real humanity of Christ. The Mormons also have a very defective view of Christ in that, they regard Jesus Christ the first-born among the spirit children of God. They do not believe that Jesus is the eternal Son of God. Rather they regard Him as the offspring of a mortal mother and an immortal father.


A Defective Christology

"Who is Jesus Christ?" This is the most important question a person can ever ask. Our deepest joys on earth and hope of eternal life rest upon our answer to that question. Because this is so, the primary activity of Satan must surely be to obscure as much as possible the true nature and work of the Lord Jesus Christ. Satan knows that an improper or incomplete understanding of the person and work of Christ makes salvation impossible.

Early heresies such as Cerinthianism denied the humanity of Christ (John 1:14; 1 John 1:1-3; 4:1-3). Arianism denied the deity of Christ (John 1:1, 8:58). Others denied the union of his two natures in one person. Gnosticism taught that there were many spiritual levels and mediators between earth and heaven of which Jesus was merely one (Colossians 1:16, 2:3-23). Most non Christian religious systems today follow in one of these errors. The most insidious types which insist on extra-biblical revelations and esoteric and mystical experiences of God are simply the children of the Gnostics.

The central doctrine of Christianity is Christology, the doctrine of the nature of the person of Jesus Christ as revealed in space-time history. Any teaching that compromises the humanity or deity of Christ and His uniqueness as the only God-man, destroys the efficacy of the atonement, the work of Christ on the cross, and thereby the basis of the gospel.

Jesus said "I am the way, the truth and the life. No once comes to the Father but by me." (John 14:6). If Jesus was not fully God and fully human, he had no authority to say so. John 1:14 tells us that Jesus was "full of truth." In John 1:18 we are told that no one has ever seen God, but the unique Son "has made Him known." Anything after the words of Jesus Christ would be anticlimactical, a descent from the mountain top of revelation. Jesus was the only one qualified to reveal to humanity the truth about God. Jesus perfectly fulfilled that mission (John 17:6-8,14).

In the closing days of the earthly ministry of Christ, he took the Apostles aside to prepare them for His departure. The narrative in John 14:7-10 is very instructive in helping us to discern the error many cults make with regard to the sufficiency of Christ's revelation of God. To comfort His disciples Jesus reminds them that through Him, they now knew the Father and had seen Him. But Philip was not satisfied. He begs for one glimpse of the Father (John 14:8) believing this would suffice. He may have felt that they had not quite got as close as Moses who got to see the back of Almighty God. If only he could have a similar experience. But notice that Jesus was clearly distressed by Philip's request.

"Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?" (John 14:9)

Philip's search for something more, a deeper revelation of God than Jesus had given was an insult to Jesus, and received a rebuke. How could a vision of God be more thrilling than to talk with God's Son? In the words of Jesus Christ we have the full revelation of the Father's will. Everything Jesus had learned from the Father, He had made known to them, and through them to us (John 15:15, 16:12-15). To believe that the revelation of Christ in Scripture is insufficient is to hold a defective Christology.

It cannot be overstated that biblical doctrine, that is, what we understand about the way God has revealed Himself in history and supremely in Jesus Christ is of vital importance in perpetuating orthodox Christianity and withstanding heresy

hope this helps !!!
Hello @civic,

Reading your entry, I think of the words of John:-

'That which was from the beginning,
.. which we have heard,
.... which we have seen with our eyes,
...... which we have looked upon,
........ and our hands have handled,
.......... of the Word of life;
............ (For the life was manifested,
.............. and we have seen it,
................ and bear witness,
.................. and shew unto you that eternal life,
.................... which was with the Father,
...................... and was manifested unto us )

That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you,
that ye also may have fellowship with us:
and truly our fellowship is with the Father,
and with His Son Jesus Christ.
And these things write we unto you,
that your joy may be full.'

(1Jn 1:1-4)

What a testimony!
 
'For we have not followed cunningly devised fables,
when we made known unto you
the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,
but were eyewitnesses of His majesty.
For He received from God the Father honour and glory,
when there came such a voice to Him from the excellent glory,
This is My beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased.

And this voice which came from heaven we heard,
when we were with Him in the holy mount.'

(2 Pet. 1:16-18)

Another living witness!
 
If Jesus is fully God, then we have a triune God...it's that simple
'Beware lest any man spoil you
through philosophy
and vain deceit,
after the tradition of men,
after the rudiments of the world,
and not after Christ.
For in Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
And ye are complete in Him,
Which is the head of all principality and power:'

(Col 2:8-10)

Hello @360watt,

Praise God!,That though our minds are not able to fully comprehend the Godhead, God knows and understands. It does not interfere with our worshipping Him, and being thankful for all that God, as Father, Son and Holy Spirit have done, and continue to do.

Praise His Holy Name!

In Christ Jesus
Chris
 
Last edited:
If Jesus is fully God, then we have a triune God...it's that simple
To have a man born of a woman that is clear to everyone and then after the child is out of diapers to begin calling him God is totally insane. It blows my mind that more than two people believe there would be a reason for God almighty to become a man. Would there be some reason for me to become a fly? Could it even be possible that I can become a fly? God can do a lot of stuff, but He cannot lie, die, or be something else.
 
To have a man born of a woman that is clear to everyone and then after the child is out of diapers to begin calling him God is totally insane. It blows my mind that more than two people believe there would be a reason for God almighty to become a man. Would there be some reason for me to become a fly? Could it even be possible that I can become a fly? God can do a lot of stuff, but He cannot lie, die, or be something else.
He had to deal with our sin. To do that He took on the form of a man. Taking the sin on our behalf.

The atonement.

It's what separates Christianity from every other religion. Sin is dealt with not by our good doings..but His payment..His atonement.
 
He had to deal with our sin. To do that He took on the form of a man. Taking the sin on our behalf.

The atonement.

It's what separates Christianity from every other religion. Sin is dealt with not by our good doings..but His payment..His atonement.
Where do you get this information from because it's not in the Bible...

Romans 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).
 
Where do you get this information from because it's not in the Bible...

Romans 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).
For Peterlag, God cannot be anything but isolated from the universe. God would not have the ability or comprehension of a way of interacting with humanity through humanity. Although Rom 5:15 speaks of a man, Peterlag cannot realize that a common man never did bring grace to many. Then the quoting of 1 Cor 15:21 is ludicrous for Peterlag to use for calling Jesus simply a man. No man has the ability to resurrect people from the dead. I think Peterlag misses many elements that makes that resurrection possible through Christ. What does Peterlag even think is the ultimate nature of Christ? maybe just another nice man who gained notoriety? We never seem to get the full picture, just the denial of the divine nature of Christ.
 
For Peterlag, God cannot be anything but isolated from the universe. God would not have the ability or comprehension of a way of interacting with humanity through humanity. Although Rom 5:15 speaks of a man, Peterlag cannot realize that a common man never did bring grace to many. Then the quoting of 1 Cor 15:21 is ludicrous for Peterlag to use for calling Jesus simply a man. No man has the ability to resurrect people from the dead. I think Peterlag misses many elements that makes that resurrection possible through Christ. What does Peterlag even think is the ultimate nature of Christ? maybe just another nice man who gained notoriety? We never seem to get the full picture, just the denial of the divine nature of Christ.

Hey I'm Mike A W if you just took the first letters :)

But yea I'm also struggling to understand where Peterlag is coming from. He quotes NT scripture but then doesn't see the very verses he is using support Jesus' diety
 
.
From the information given by Ezek 1:1-28, I tend to think that maybe the
supreme being is a composite unity consisting of four dimensions instead of three;
and yet according to John 4:24 the supreme being is invisible, and according to
John 5:37 the supreme being is silent, and according to 1Tim 6:16 the supreme
being abides in seclusion; so I have to assume that everyone and everything we
know of as the supreme being, including the voice heard in Adam's garden, the
voice heard by Moses from within the burning bush, and the voice heard by Jesus
during his baptism, were theophanies and/or apparitions instead of the supreme
being's actual self in person.

You know: arguing over the supreme being's characteristics is sort of like a group
of blind men arguing over characteristics of an elephant judging by the part of its
body each man happens to be touching. I rather suspect that when all is said and
done, both sides of the aisle are going to be astonished to discover that the supreme
being has been active in our world in more forms than many among us thought possible.
For example:

Acts 7:52-53 . .Which of the prophets have not your ancestors persecuted? And
they have slain them which showed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom
you have been now the betrayers and murderers: who have received the law by the
disposition of angels, and have not kept it.

Well; I've read, and I've re-read, the giving of the law to Moses in the Old
Testament and have thus far myself not been able to detect the participation of
celestial creatures anywhere in that event.

Gen 48:15-16 . . And Jacob blessed Joseph, and said: God, before whom my
fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this
day, the angel which redeemed me from all evil; bless the lads

Jacob experienced some contact with celestial creatures (Gen 32:2-3) but none of
them can be referred to as "the" angel because that particular distinction belongs to
the divine being whom Jacob first encountered in dreams (Gen 28:10-15, Gen
31:10-13) in visitations (Gen 35:9-13) and with whom Jacob later had a close
encounter of a third kind. (Gen 32:24-30) and also who Jacob identifies as "God,
before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my
life long unto this day"

I'm not trying to shoehorn Jesus into the Old Testament; my intent is to show that
the supreme being has a history of interacting with the human world by means of a
variety of forms and apparitions including but not limited to: smoke, fire, thunder,
trumpets, brilliant lights, clouds, voices, wind, earthquakes, and men. So when we
run across the "angel of the Lord" in our reading of the Old Testament, it would be
a good idea to stifle the impulse to assume the Bible is always talking about a
celestial creature.
_
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom