Is Jesus Christ a created being (Begotten Son) or has He always existed alongside God the Father (Eternal Son)?

[TrevorL]

Greetings again RandyK,

Wisdom itself is not personified unless it is expressed as though a person. That happened when it was represented as a woman.

Yes.

The Word of God is not personified unless it is given human-like attributes. That is not happening. The Word became flesh because it actually was a transition from God's thoughts to a realized physical reality. It was not, as such, a "personification."

I am interested in your definition and agree with some aspects. But you are possibly the first Trinitarian that I have met that does not define "The Word" as the pre-existent Jesus, or God the Son, one third of the Trinity.

You say that "Jesus has become The Word," and that he did not become God's "physical glory." What does this even mean?
How could Jesus "become the Word?" He was a human being, and not he sort of conforms, morally, to what he thinks God is like, and so becomes "the Word?"
I find nothing in the Scriptures suggesting this. I read that he *was* in fact the Word.

Let us go back to what I stated:

in John 1:14 Jesus has become The Word, or rather The Word has become Jesus, "his glory", moral glory, not physical glory, he was "full of grace and truth".

I will still resort to the definition that The Logos represents the One God, Yahweh, God the Father's Plan, Purpose, Wisdom and Character. Please note that I have stated both "Jesus has become The Word", and with a major adjustment of perspective "The Word has become Jesus".

Looking at the first of these, John states that at the time of his ministry, the disciples and others beheld "his glory". Now this was not physical glory as revealed on the Mount of Transfiguration, but moral glory, reflecting the character of God. Jesus was at the time of his ministry "full of grace and truth". This was a development, growing in wisdom as a child, and being instructed by His Father throughout his whole life. So this was in many respects was all a matter of growth. So going back to the definition, Jesus' willing submission to the Plan and Purpose of God, and his development of Wisdom and God's Character "full of grace and truth", then Jesus has become The Word.

Looking at the second, "The Word has become Jesus" places the emphasis on the work of Salvation, by means of the development of Jesus. God's Plan, Purpose, Wisdom and Character came to fruition in the birth, growth, ministry, trials, crucifixion, death and resurrection of Jesus.

I find nothing in the Scriptures suggesting this. I read that he *was* in fact the Word. He did not *become the Word.* Jesus existed before Abraham.

I consider that Jesus was in the plan, purpose and wisdom of Yahweh before the existence of Abraham. I briefly considered John 8:58 in my previous post.

He did not just summon the moral courage to be more moral than other people to represent God's Word! Why wouldn't anybody else be able to do the same, unless he is viewed as either Divine or sinless, or both? And if he was sinless, how is he not something beyond human, which would have to be Divine?

Jesus is a special human, the Son of God by birth, character and resurrection raised by God to achieve his work of salvation. I will not respond to the rest of your post as it is outside my understanding.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[RandyK]

I am interested in your definition and agree with some aspects. But you are possibly the first Trinitarian that I have met that does not define "The Word" as the pre-existent Jesus, or God the Son, one third of the Trinity.

True, my Trinitarian explanation is unusual, which is due to my experience in a modalist cult. I'm aware of the problem and difference of opinion, as I had a "go around" way back in the mid-70s with Walter Martin's group, Christian Research Institute. Martin disagreed but never proved that what I said was heterodox or wrong--it was simply "irrational" from his perspective.

To this day, nobody has proven my position heterodox or even truly "irrational." I've developed it after a personal study of Western philosophy. I give you credit for recognizing it, as did Free. The goal has never been to challenge orthodox definitions of the Trinity, but rather, to explain it better for myself or for anybody else who had problems with it as I did.

I will still resort to the definition that The Logos represents the One God, Yahweh, God the Father's Plan, Purpose, Wisdom and Character. Please note that I have stated both "Jesus has become The Word", and with a major adjustment of perspective "The Word has become Jesus".

What you said was this: "in John 1:14 Jesus has become The Word, "his glory", moral glory, not physical glory, he was "full of grace and truth"."

So your "major adjustment of perspective" appears to be your editting of your statement to add "the Word has become Jesus," which is what John 1.14 is actually saying--not "Jesus has become the Word."

And this is an important "adjustment" because you can defend what the passage is actually saying--not what it is not saying. It did not say that "Jesus has become the Word." It said that "the Word became flesh."

Looking at the first of these, John states that at the time of his ministry, the disciples and others beheld "his glory". Now this was not physical glory as revealed on the Mount of Transfiguration, but moral glory, reflecting the character of God.

And I'm just to take your word for this, that on the Mt. of Transfiguration there was only "moral glory," and not "physical glory?" It's pretty presumptuous of you to think that all should agree with you on this, since there is zero evidence that this is so apart from your claim that it is so. At least, I don't see any evidence for your claims?

Jesus was at the time of his ministry "full of grace and truth". This was a development, growing in wisdom as a child, and being instructed by His Father throughout his whole life. So this was in many respects was all a matter of growth. So going back to the definition, Jesus' willing submission to the Plan and Purpose of God, and his development of Wisdom and God's Character "full of grace and truth", then Jesus has become The Word.

"Growing in wisdom" is not "becoming the Word!" We can all "grow in wisdom." Are you then saying that we can all "become the Word?" What a strange way to say things. And I'm virtually certain that is not what the Apostle John meant to say when he wrote this!

Beyond this, the Scriptures do not define "becoming the Word" in this way. You simply assume it is true because the Scriptures say, "the Word became flesh." But for God's "moral Word" to become flesh we are not being told that Jesus grew in wisdom to attain to such a reality.

You apparently just refuse to believe that Divine revelation can crystalize into the appearance of a human being. But if that is how God created the entire universe, how is it so incredible that God revealed His own Person in the appearance of a single man?

And if He had already done that in the past through theophanies, why suddenly think that the only way it could be done with Jesus is through "growing in wisdom?" It doesn't sound realistic to me.

Looking at the second, "The Word has become Jesus" places the emphasis on the work of Salvation, by means of the development of Jesus. God's Plan, Purpose, Wisdom and Character came to fruition in the birth, growth, ministry, trials, crucifixion, death and resurrection of Jesus.

Yes, that is your obvious intent, but that is not the obvious meaning of "the Word became flesh." But thanks for answering. Have a nice day...

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again RandyK,

To this day, nobody has proven my position heterodox or even truly "irrational." I've developed it after a personal study of Western philosophy.

Interesting, but I consider any Trinitarian perspective as having many problems, and I will let you discuss your differences with other Trinitarians. I endorse the Biblical Unitarian perspective, and possibly only the narrow view of this espoused in my particular fellowship.

It did not say that "Jesus has become the Word." It said that "the Word became flesh."

But I consider the subject can be viewed from the two perspectives.

And I'm just to take your word for this, that on the Mt. of Transfiguration there was only "moral glory," and not "physical glory?" It's pretty presumptuous of you to think that all should agree with you on this, since there is zero evidence that this is so apart from your claim that it is so. At least, I don't see any evidence for your claims?

You have misrepresented me here. The glory that Jesus and Moses and Elijah revealed on the Mount of Transfiguration was physical glory, not moral glory.

"Growing in wisdom" is not "becoming the Word!" We can all "grow in wisdom." Are you then saying that we can all "become the Word?" What a strange way to say things. And I'm virtually certain that is not what the Apostle John meant to say when he wrote this!

In what sense was Jesus as a babe in arms "The Word"? I am looking at the moral glory of The Word, that Jesus was full of grace and truth. John witnessed this fullness of grace and truth revealed by Jesus during the ministry of Jesus. As far as quantity and quality of his character, no one else has or can attain to the same level.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[RandyK]

Greetings again RandyK,

Interesting, but I consider any Trinitarian perspective as having many problems, and I will let you discuss your differences with other Trinitarians. I endorse the Biblical Unitarian perspective, and possibly only the narrow view of this espoused in my particular fellowship.

But I consider the subject can be viewed from the two perspectives.

You have misrepresented me here. The glory that Jesus and Moses and Elijah revealed on the Mount of Transfiguration was physical glory, not moral glory.

Sorry, I didn't misrepresent you intentionally. I don't think I had enough information to know precisely what you were saying. You do seem to indicate that Jesus was not God--only conformed to God morally. Or am I wrong?

"Glory" has to do with God's presence and immortality. At the time of the Transfiguration, human immortality did not exist yet. And so, "glory" had to do with God's presence. It was a recognition of Jesus' Deity and status as "Son of God," in my opinion.

In what sense was Jesus as a babe in arms "The Word"? I am looking at the moral glory of The Word, that Jesus was full of grace and truth. John witnessed this fullness of grace and truth revealed by Jesus during the ministry of Jesus. As far as quantity and quality of his character, no one else has or can attain to the same level.

I'm a little confused as to why you think Jesus is "just a man," and yet "above other men?" Sounds very much like Arianism, which perhaps you have no problem with?

The "Word of God" is God's ability to reveal Himself in time and space. And so, God revealed His Person in time and space through Christ's physical birth, childhood, and adulthood.

It was all a "revelation" from God--not just a coalescence of Divine thoughts into physical reality, but even more, a complete portrait of God's Person in a human being throughout his life.

Jesus' identity as "the Word made flesh" indicates that his human personality was a representation of God's own Person--not just a story about God. Incidentally, here is the problem Christian Research Institute presented to me back in ithe 70s when I outlined my own formula of the Trinity....

They wrote, "1 Person does not equal 3 Persons." They indicated that this would be irrational.

My argument today is that the "1 Person" is transcendent and before Creation, whereas the "3 Persons" are that 1 transcendent Person appearing within time and space, ie within Creation.

And so, what appears on the surface to be "irrational" is actually quite rational. A transcendent Being cannot be limited to His appearance as a transcendent Being, but being transcendent He is fully able to reveal His Person within the world, and as such, present Himself in multiple Persons.

It may be confusing to some to think that these multiple Persons can interrelate with one another and yet comprise a single transcendent Being. But it is what it is...

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again RandyK,

Sorry, I didn't misrepresent you intentionally. I don't think I had enough information to know precisely what you were saying. You do seem to indicate that Jesus was not God--only conformed to God morally. Or am I wrong?

Jesus is the Son of God by birth Matthew 1:20-21, Luke 1:34-35, John 1:14, the Son of God in character - he was full of grace and truth John 1:14, and he is the Son of God by resurrection Romans 1:1-4. His character is not because he is the continuation of a pre-existent person or being, God the Son, or The Word, one third of the Trinity. Jesus attained to the status of "full of grace and truth" as a result of his growth during his youth and up to and including his ministry.

"Glory" has to do with God's presence and immortality. At the time of the Transfiguration, human immortality did not exist yet. And so, "glory" had to do with God's presence. It was a recognition of Jesus' Deity and status as "Son of God," in my opinion.

There must be many aspects to God's glory. I am conscious of what Moses asked:
Exodus 33:18–23 (KJV): 18 And he said, I beseech thee, shew me thy glory. 19 And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy. 20 And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live. 21 And the LORD said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock: 22 And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by: 23 And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen.
Here is mainly the physical glory.

Exodus 34:5–7 (KJV): 5 And the LORD descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the LORD. 6 And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, 7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.
Here is mainly the moral glory. The difference between this incident and the our Lord Jesus Christ is that in the record of Exodus the Name or Character Of Yahweh, while John beheld the Name or Character revealed in the very being of Jesus, the Son of God, he was full of grace and truth.

At the time of the Transfiguration, human immortality did not exist yet. And so, "glory" had to do with God's presence. It was a recognition of Jesus' Deity and status as "Son of God," in my opinion.

Jesus was NOT immortal on the Mount of Transfiguration, neither were Moses and Elijah. This was a vision of what Jesus will be like in the future Kingdom of God.

I'm a little confused as to why you think Jesus is "just a man," and yet "above other men?" Sounds very much like Arianism, which perhaps you have no problem with?

Jesus is a human, the Son of God by birth, character and resurrection.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[RandyK]

Greetings again RandyK,

Jesus is the Son of God by birth Matthew 1:20-21, Luke 1:34-35, John 1:14, the Son of God in character - he was full of grace and truth John 1:14, and he is the Son of God by resurrection Romans 1:1-4. His character is not because he is the continuation of a pre-existent person or being, God the Son, or The Word, one third of the Trinity. Jesus attained to the status of "full of grace and truth" as a result of his growth during his youth and up to and including his ministry.

That's what I thought you were saying, that Jesus conformed to Divine Morality--not to Divine Personhood.

There must be many aspects to God's glory. I am conscious of what Moses asked:
Exodus 33:18–23 ...
Here is mainly the physical glory....

Exodus 34:5–7
Here is mainly the moral glory. The difference between this incident and the our Lord Jesus Christ is that in the record of Exodus the Name or Character Of Yahweh, while John beheld the Name or Character revealed in the very being of Jesus, the Son of God, he was full of grace and truth.

Yes, that's what I indicated I thought you were saying, that Jesus conformed to God *morally.* You distinguish between God's physical glory and His moral glory not because that is explicitly said, but because that's how *you* wish to distinguish them, not even entertaining the idea that they could be the same.

In my opinion, there is no distinction here in God's glory and in His moral glory--they are one and the same. Nothing causes them to be distinguished but you, who wish to distinguish them to forward your own Unitarian agenda.

I wish to read the Bible as it is, understanding normally that God's glory is His radiance, and that God's Person, whose radiance it is, is a moral Being, consistent with Himself, and requiring certain behavior from free agents in His universe. There is no need to distinguish between God's Person and His moral consistency.

Jesus was NOT immortal on the Mount of Transfiguration, neither were Moses and Elijah. This was a vision of what Jesus will be like in the future Kingdom of God.

Why are you telling me that? I already stated that I believed that myself! Human immortality began with Jesus' ascension into heaven following his resurrection. That's when he put on an immortal body. Prior to that he lived in a mortal body, just like ours.

So prior to our immortalization and glorification, which is the same thing, the only glory that existed was God's glory, as far as I know. The radiance of God's presence we call His "glory."

And so, when that glory was associated with Jesus, he indicated that he was the Son of God, a Divine man. My opinion. You can believe as you will.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again RandyK,

And so, when that glory was associated with Jesus, he indicated that he was the Son of God, a Divine man. My opinion. You can believe as you will.

Jesus was not immortal on the Mount of Transfiguration. The vision was prophetic of future things.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[RandyK]

Greetings again RandyK,

Jesus was not immortal on the Mount of Transfiguration. The vision was prophetic of future things.

Kind regards
Trevor

In my opinion, *no man, including Jesus, was immortal* prior to Jesus' ascension! That means Jesus was *not* immortal on the Mt. of Transfiguration.

That being said, I think the glory of God, ie His radiance, was identified with Jesus, even before he was rendered immortal. He obtained glory and majesty on the Mt. of Transfiguration.

Christians will be glorified when they become immortal at Jesus' Coming. But they will not receive the majesty that Jesus received both before and after he became immortal.

It is important to say that Jesus was king even before he will receive his Kingdom. It is like King David was annointed king even before he obtained his Kingdom after Saul's death.

Jesus received a different kind of glory than what Christians will receive when they are made immortal. He received the "majestic glory," ie glory and majesty.

Jesus is unique, being identified with the glory of God's Person, just as the glory of God was identified as God's radiance in the OT Scriptures.

2 Peter 1.17 He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” 18 We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain.

I distinguish between Jesus "receiving glory and honor," which is simply being honored for who he is, and his "glorification event," which refers to his immortalization. Jesus was honored, or received glory, for who he was even during his earthly ministry, before he was rendered immortal.

But when Jesus was rendered immortal, he was "glorified" as such, or made fit for his eternal Kingdom. That was a matter of receiving glory above simply being honored for who he was.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again RandyK,

In my opinion, *no man, including Jesus, was immortal* prior to Jesus' ascension! That means Jesus was *not* immortal on the Mt. of Transfiguration.

I am still confused as to the full range of your perspective. You seem to have many ideas that are very different to the Trinitarian view, and in some respects they are closer to my view.

I consider that Jesus is Yahweh revealed. He is a distinct being, but he is so united in thought and word with the One God, Yahweh, God the Father that he is "One" with the Father. When Jesus says:
Matthew 5:21–22 (KJV): 21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: 22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Jesus speaks with authority as if the One God, Yahweh, God the Father is speaking Himself. Is Jesus a Person, God the Son speaking, or a Person "The Word" either of whom pre-existed as a Person? No.

Jesus does not reveal a pre-existing Person. Jesus is a human and reveals the One God, Yahweh, God the Father:
John 14:4–11 (KJV): 4 And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know. 5 Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way? 6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. 7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him. 8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. 9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? 10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake.

Jesus is a human and his response was voluntary:
Psalm 40:6–10 (KJV): 6 Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required. 7 Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, 8 I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart. 9 I have preached righteousness in the great congregation: lo, I have not refrained my lips, O LORD, thou knowest. 10 I have not hid thy righteousness within my heart; I have declared thy faithfulness and thy salvation: I have not concealed thy lovingkindness and thy truth from the great congregation.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[RandyK]

Greetings again RandyK,

I am still confused as to the full range of your perspective. You seem to have many ideas that are very different to the Trinitarian view, and in some respects they are closer to my view.

I've long learned from various theological schools without signing on to them. I believe that there may be truth even in wayward schools of thought, and don't consider other views in a prejudiced way.

I am inclined, however, towards mainstream orthodoxy, and don't wander much from there. Generally, Christians who hold to doctrinally-orthodox views have the same experience, and are likely to agree on the fundamentals.

I consider that Jesus is Yahweh revealed. He is a distinct being, but he is so united in thought and word with the One God, Yahweh, God the Father that he is "One" with the Father. When Jesus says:
Matthew 5:21–22 (KJV): 21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: 22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Jesus speaks with authority as if the One God, Yahweh, God the Father is speaking Himself. Is Jesus a Person, God the Son speaking, or a Person "The Word" either of whom pre-existed as a Person? No.

I have to be careful here not to annoy my fellow Trinitarian brethren. The "Word of God" is purely a verbalization originating from God. But the Scriptures also describe Him as having been a Person from before Creation and also becoming a human person in Christ.

Like you I don't define the "Word" like a "2-headed God" in Eternity. I see God as perennially able to verbalize who He is in eternity and into time.

But I cannot say that God's Word is not a distinct Person because God, in order to verbalize Himself, must always be able to distinguish His manifestation in time, thus forming a plurality of Persons.

So I wouldn't define the "Word of God" as strictly the "2nd Person of the Trinity." On the contrary, it is the expresssion of God's Person in as many representations of His Person as is possible, including the Father, the Son, the Spirit, and various kinds of theophanies.

When the Scriptures say that the Word became flesh, it is not limiting the Word of God only to Jesus. It is only saying that Jesus is equal to God's Word and is God's Person. It is not saying that the Word of God cannot be communicated to the consciences of men or cannot reveal God's Person in many other ways.

Jesus does not reveal a pre-existing Person. Jesus is a human and reveals the One God, Yahweh, God the Father...

Yes, I agree that Jesus did not preexist his humanity as a man. That is a truism. But He emerged in time from a preexistent source, the Word of God, to reveal God's Person in time as a human being.

Jesus is a human and his response was voluntary:

Jesus could not choose to do anything contrary to God's Person, since he was in fact a revelation of God's Person. But as a man, he had a created human spirit.

This created human spirit, by definition capable of independent choices, was by necessity consistent with God's will. What was created in him emerged as a revelation from something that preexisted.

Creation normally sounds like something strictly limited to time, and separate from eternity. But Jesus was a revelation in time that emerged from eternity.

As such, the part of Jesus that was created, both body and human spirit, comprised a revelation from eternity. He was God's Person manifested in time, but originating from before Creation.

These things are hard to understand, and even worse to express without sounding "off the rails." I do my best to conform to truth as I understand it, and also truth as the Bible expresses it. It is an experience we should all have in common, if we truly know God and see Him in Jesus.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again RandyK,

Jesus could not choose to do anything contrary to God's Person, since he was in fact a revelation of God's Person. But as a man, he had a created human spirit.

Perhaps this is where we differ. Jesus could sin but did not sin.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[RandyK]

Greetings again RandyK,

Perhaps this is where we differ. Jesus could sin but did not sin.

Kind regards
Trevor

Yes, I understand you're saying that as a man he could make human choices. But in my view, he is instrinsically linked to God's Person, and as such, could not possibly act inconsonant with his own Divine Being.

We also will one day operate on a single Divine Spirit and never make any choices outside of God's love. But what Jesus was driven to do by God's Spirit was to act in concert with God's identity. That is not something we can ever do, not being Divine ourselves.

Everything Jesus did caused him, by impetus of the Spirit of God, to identify with God's Person, which is illustrated by his perfect conformity with God as His only Divine Son.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again RandyK,

Yes, I understand you're saying that as a man he could make human choices.

He was a man, the Son of God and his obedience was voluntary.

Psalm 40:6–8 (KJV): 6 Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required. 7 Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, 8 I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.

There is a beautiful balance between the Divine education and active guidance of Jesus and his obedience and sinlessness.

Hebrews 5:7–9 (KJV): 7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; 8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; 9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

If he was God, the above struggle would not have been difficult or necessary.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[RandyK]

Greetings again RandyK,

He was a man, the Son of God and his obedience was voluntary.

There is a beautiful balance between the Divine education and active guidance of Jesus and his obedience and sinlessness.

Trevor, it takes more than education to live a sinless life. We were born with a Sin Nature--not just a desire to learn truth. We have a fight to engage in and must overcome our Sin Nature. But 1st, we need the blueprint of righteousnesss that comes when we learn about Christ, and then receive his spiritual enablement within.

If he was God, the above struggle would not have been difficult or necessary.

What made Christ's struggle against Sin difficult was not his lack of decisiveness, or weakness to temptation. Rather, it was the abuse that the temptor puts upon us, the effort he makes to force us to do his bidding mentally and physically.

But there was never any doubt that Christ would choose to do what characterizes who God is because quite frankly--he was God in human flesh!

There are thing God enables us to do as His People, who have been given instruction about Christ and who have been given his Spirit to live like him. But only Christ could utilize God's knowledge and power to *be God.* Everything Jesus did was to show that he was God, that his identity was Divine.

 

[JLB]

I do not mind terminating our discussion as I will not submit to your shallow syllogism. I am VERY satisfied with my understanding of Genesis 1:1 and 1:26.

Ok.


Thanks for your time.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again RandyK,

Everything Jesus did was to show that he was God, that his identity was Divine.

We seem to have reached the end of our discussion with a major disagreement. As with JLB it is time to move on. I appreciate your participation.

Kind regards
Trevor