Is Jesus considered to be God?

[follower of Christ]

Just exactly what parts of Christ actions can we follow and what parts can we not?

In and of ourselves we can only do what humans can do.
The Spirit of God inside us is, however, unlimited.

How do you know? Is it reduced to supposition and guesswork? In 40 years of study I have discovered no key that tells me that Christ did this as God and that as man.

uh....yeah...

Jesus Christ is ONE person.
His person consists of being both man AND God.

If I follow your doctrine then following Christ as our example is full of guesswork and suppositions.

Please
There are a number of areas of doctrine that we DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH AVAILABLE DATA for that we simply cannot know the FULL, COMPLETE picture.
We HAVE to just ACCEPT truths AS truths regardless of whether we, in our finite ability, understand these truths.

 

[follower of Christ]

Did Christ dual nature have any effect on his resurrection?

Playing your game, if I say 'who knows' then I guess that means that Christ wasnt resurrected, right ?

Whether WE understand the 'hows' and 'whys' is irrelevant.
The FACTS are the FACTS whether we comprehend how and why they are facts.

Adam DIDNT need to know WHY he wasnt allowed to touch that tree.
ADAMS job was to BELIEVE GOD and OBEY !

If christ dual nature had any effect on his right to be raised from the dead, how is that a hope for me that I will be raised?

Are you not in error because you do not KNOW the scriptures?
CHRIST is the one who raises us on the last day. WE dont do that of ourselves.

(John 6:39 EMTV) And this is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me, I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.

(John 6:40 EMTV) And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day."

(John 6:44 EMTV) No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me should draw him; and I will raise him up at the last day.

(John 6:54 EMTV) Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up in the last day.

 

[Free]

Here is a key passage:

Php 2:5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,
Php 2:6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
Php 2:7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
Php 2:8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
Php 2:9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name,
Php 2:10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
Php 2:11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

This passage supports the concept I mentioned earlier called the Economic Trinity--that is, how the Trinity relates to each other in bringing out the salvation and redemption of creation. The Economic Trinity shows the difference in function between the Persons of the Trinity in the plan of redemption. However, a difference in function does not mean a difference in equality.

Some important points to make about this passage:

1. Jesus was in "the form of God." This is supported by John 1:1-3.
2. He "did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped"; that is, being in the form of God, being equal with the Father, did not consider that equality something to be "forcefully retained [or held onto]."
3. He, being Jesus, emptied himself--not only was it he who did the emptying, he emptied himself of something. Jesus willingly chose to take the form of a human for the salvation of mankind.
4. In emptying himself, he took on the "form of a servant," "being born in the likeness of men"--this contrasts with his being in the "form of God." This is what John 1:14 is speaking of.
5. Being found in "human form"--again, as opposed to his having been in "the form of God"--he "humbled himself by becoming obedient."

1. OR JESUS WAS IN THE OUTWARD APPEARANCE OF GOD CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD LIKE ADAM

No. It is clear that this is prior to his "taking the form of a servant." The two terms are contrasted--"being in the form of God" and "taking the form of a servant"/"being found in human form." If his "being found in human form" meant that he was human, it logically follows that his being "in the form of God" means that he is "identified with the being, nature and personality of God" (Word Studies, M.R. Vincent).

Prior existence is clearly in view here.

2. OR AS A HUMAN HE DID NOT SEEK EQUALITY WITH GOD AS ADAM DID. AS THE SECOND ADAM HE DID NOT FALL BECAUSE OF SATANS "YOU SHALL BE LIKE GOD".

You have missed the point. Being that it was already stated Jesus was "in the form of God," showing his existence prior to creation, the idea here is that equality with God was not something to be held onto, that is, forcibly retained. This is also supported by the verses following.

3.OR AS THE CONTEXT CLEARLY SHOWS IT IS ABOUT ATTITUDE.JESUS DID NOT CONSIDER HIS OWN NEEDS OR DESIRES. JESUS GAVE UP HIS DESIRES EVEN UNTO DEATH. HE DID NOT WANT TO DIE "LET THIS CUP PASS FROM ME" HE GAVE UP THE ATTITUDES THAT WOULD SAY HE DID NOT DESERVE TO DIE.

No. That clearly ignores the context of the passage. He emptied himself "taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men." Not only does this very clearly shows his pre-existence, it shows that he did it willingly, himself. He emptied himself, made himslef nothing, and then took on the form of a servant.

Although, you are right about one thing and that is that this is about attitude. Paul's point is that since Jesus was God and was willing to humble himself and become a man, we ought to also show that same humility; that since he was willing to be obedient unto death on a cross, we ought to "Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves" (vs 3), "look not only to [our] own interests, but also to the interests of others" (vs 4), and "Do all things without grumbling or questioning" (vs 14).

4. OR AGAIN A DIRECT TIE IN WITH GENESIS.

No.

There is a very clear progression in this passage which you choose to ignore:

i. Jesus was "in the form of God."
ii. He did not think his equality with God was to be forcibly held onto.
iii. He made himself nothing; he emptied himself.
iv. He took "the form of a servant," that is, he was then "born in the likeness of men."
v. He humbled himself to God unto death for the redemption of creation.

This is inescapable.

I have posted several times about Phil. The problem us that many Trinitarians and it appears you too have a wrong understanding of this portion of scripture based on a preconceived idea of doctrine.

Yes, of course, we are the only ones who could possibly be approaching this passage with preconceived ideas. I think it is abundantly clear that you are the one not letting this passage speak for itself. The language is very clear.

This verse has nothing to do with the Godhead or about the pre-existent Christ. These verses are direct comparison between the first and the second Adam. Between Jesus and Adam. Between the motives and actions of Adam as compared to the motives and actions of Christ.

And you have just proved my point. There is no mention of Adam in this passage or in the entire book of Philippians for that matter. You are forcing an interpretation onto this passage which is not there. His equality with the Father and his pre-existence could not be more clearly written.

Now to Phil 4. Notice the context is set from the very beginning. It is not about proof of divinity or pre-existance for Jesus but rather about the attitude Christ had. Here the context is set of comparing the first and second Adam. I am deleting the verse separations since they were not in the originals.

Delete all you want, it does nothing to help your case. Again, the context has nothing to do with Adam.

I am also replacing the term “form†with the literal meaning of the word “outward appearanceâ€.

You can do that if you like but it is completely unjustified.

Jesus was a son of God.

He was the Son of God.

Created in the image (outward appearance) of God.

You have failed to show that Jesus was created and the context of Phil 2 shows that he existed prior to his "being born in the likeness of men."

 

[follower of Christ]

As you admitted -- You do not understand it fully.

And that was qualified with the fact that there is MORE to things than the very limited data in scripture provides.
Im just dying to hear you claim that you know it all here friend.
Please say something to that extent so the readers here can see it too.

Yet you insist it is true. how do you know?

John 1.

There is a current ad on TV about some new drug. In the ad the announcer says "it is believed that this drug works by....." they do not know how it works but want us to take it. there reasoning is that they see the results, but they most likely will not see the side effects.
Your stand is much like this.

Sorry but its not the same at all.
I have an absolute truth in John 1 that PROVES conclusively that Jesus Christ IS the Word and the Word IS God.

You do not know how it works but you want me to believe it.

So by this joke of a thought here if you do not comprehend 'God' 100% in ALL ways then we cannot expect you to believe in Him.
Huh. Imagine that.

Believe what? You do not even know.

I know that Jesus Christ is the Word and that the Word is God

I ask to at least see the results (fruits) and I am accused of playing a game.
I point out the side effects and you downgrade or ignore them.
And then you claim your arguments are conclusive?

My arguement are nothing.
Gods word PROVES who Jesus Christ is.

IMO you are ticked at me because I post to reality.

First off stop playing analyst here. You dont know me from Adam. Dont try to analyze my emotional state.
Secondly you have posted nothing so far but....well, nothing at all that proves your views.

not intellectual head knowledge but real honest working gospel that actually changes lives.
I post looking for fruit and you reply - "truth is truth is truth."
In the case of scripture truth is tested by fruit.

No friend.
GODS truth is tested by nothing.
GODS truth simply IS.

Either the man accepts that truth or man does not.


.

 

[Yahoshea]

FREE AND FOLLOWER ---
this statement carries no weight since it brings into the conversation terms that are not in scripture and that carriy a doctrinal bias.

Sorry friend but the WORD 'trinity' doesnt have to be in the texts for the CONCEPT WE call trinity to be therein.

You attempt to use one of the supposed proofs of the trinity to prove the trinity.

And youve done the same.

[quote:1x2d28q9]this is circular reasoning.

Ah...the last ditch plea for help from one who has become desperate.
When all else fails, call the whole thing 'circular' ;)[/quote:1x2d28q9]

I said
You attempt to use one of the supposed proofs of the trinity to prove the trinity.

You reply -
And youve done the same.

My reply –
I am not aware of doing such a thing. Would you please illustrate instead of simply making accusations.
Furthermore – If I werte guilty of doing such a thing, does that make it OK for you to do the same? It would make us both wrong and our proofs just as questionable.

I said –
this is circular reasoning.

You replied -
Ah...the last ditch plea for help from one who has become desperate.
When all else fails, call the whole thing 'circular'

My response –
It is not a last ditch plea if it is correct.
Perhaps you do not understand circular reasoning. Let me give an example
I was on an archeological dig in the desert and we were excavating a cliff of strata. Layers of sand and dirt deposited over a period of time.
A bone was found in one layer. The team leader said it was ten million years old. I ask how she knew and she said “because the layer is ten million years old.†I ask how she knows the layer is ten million years old and she replied, “because the bone is ten million years old.â€
This is circular reasoning. It proves nothing. There was no proof of the age of the bone or the strata.

You claim one of the reasons that the Trinity is true is because of the incarnation.
Then you elude to the incarnation being true because Christ is both fully God and fully man and part of the Trinity.

You cannot prove the incarnation based on Christ being fully God and fully man (that IS the incarnation). and you cannot use as proof of the trinity the incarnation when the incarnation is central to the doctrine of the trinity.



OK --- now I am going to bed.
Good night all ><((((((((((o>

 

[follower of Christ]

You have missed the point. Being that it was already stated Jesus was "in the form of God," showing his existence prior to creation, the idea here is that equality with God was not something to be held onto, that is, forcibly retained. This is also supported by the verses following.

Very good point, free.

 

[follower of Christ]

I said
You attempt to use one of the supposed proofs of the trinity to prove the trinity.

You reply -
And youve done the same.

My reply –
I am not aware of doing such a thing. Would you please illustrate instead of simply making accusations.
Furthermore – If I werte guilty of doing such a thing, does that make it OK for you to do the same? It would make us both wrong and our proofs just as questionable.

I think we both know you have run to your prooftexts....as we all have here.

I said –
this is circular reasoning.

You replied -
Ah...the last ditch plea for help from one who has become desperate.
When all else fails, call the whole thing 'circular'

My response –
It is not a last ditch plea if it is correct.
Perhaps you do not understand circular reasoning.

What i understand is that in EVERY case where I see this 'circular reasoning' nonsense rear its head the person using it has been completely thrashed in the discussion up to that point.
I see no difference here at all.

Let me give an example

Not in the least bit interested in more dodging, friend.

-irrelevance snipped-

You claim one of the reasons that the Trinity is true is because of the incarnation.

Uh...*I* claim that the trinity is true, in part, because John PROVES that Jesus Christ IS God.

Then you elude to the incarnation being true because Christ is both fully God and fully man and part of the Trinity.

You cannot prove the incarnation based on Christ being fully God and fully man (that IS the incarnation). and you cannot use as proof of the trinity the incarnation when the incarnation is central to the doctrine of the trinity.

....and you do the hokey pokey and you turn yourself about.....
I see nothing here but making the issue complex to keep from accepting the FACTS as presented in John 1.
I think youll find, dear friend, that Im a pretty narrow minded person. I wont allow you to drag me far from the FACTS.
While you sit there behind your computer coming up with new and ingenious ways to deflect the truth, *I* and others here will simply accept that simple truth for what it is



.

 

[Yahoshea]

You do not understand fully how Christ overcame temptation?
You do not understand how Christ was resurected from the Dead?
How did Christ do miracles? Was it the deity in him or the humanity in him that performed the miracles? If you say the deity, then we can never preform a miracle because we do not have the same deity (dual-nature) in us.

Firstly gent WE humans are incapable of performing miracles (ie breaking the natural laws God set into place).
With technology we can simulate things a bit, but in and of ourselves it is impossible.
The SPIRIT within us....ie GOD...CAN perform miracles thru us.

so jesus could be human and perform miracles by God flowing through him.
I agree. he is not required to be God to perform miracles.

 

[follower of Christ]

You do not understand fully how Christ overcame temptation?
You do not understand how Christ was resurected from the Dead?
How did Christ do miracles? Was it the deity in him or the humanity in him that performed the miracles? If you say the deity, then we can never preform a miracle because we do not have the same deity (dual-nature) in us.

Firstly gent WE humans are incapable of performing miracles (ie breaking the natural laws God set into place).
With technology we can simulate things a bit, but in and of ourselves it is impossible.
The SPIRIT within us....ie GOD...CAN perform miracles thru us.

so jesus could be human and perform miracles by God flowing through him.
I agree. he is not required to be God to perform miracles.

Uh....yeah.
And the FACTS are that Jesus IS the Word and the Word IS God.
That Peter, by the power of the Spirit of God, healed the lame it does not follow that Peter was required to be God in order to do so.
That has NO bearing on what scripture SAYS about the Man named Jesus who IS the Word and IS God.


.

 

[Yahoshea]

I have posted several scriptures showing that good teaching produces good fruit like the building up of the saints and instruction in righteousness.
Your doctrine does not do either.
Christ talks all through the gospels about judging things and people by their fruits. And yet you dismiss this as not important.

You are right I do think you are narrow minded. You cannot back away from your philosophy enough to see if it actually has any purpose other then a mental philosophy to debate.

Truth is truth is truth is only truth if it is true. We can argue whose truth is true till the rapture (assuming you believe in it) and never come to an answer. Perhaps you are looking for the accolades of the board members as your reward for sticking to your doctrine. A doctrine which a vast number agree with. If so eat it up buddy. I am not interested in such things.
What I am interested in is learning doctrine that will produce good fruit in my life.
Philosophical, scriptural, doctrinal debates on a forum are no more then entertainment UNLESS a person can glean a teaching or truth that actually produces something in them. something that God desires in them. something like the character of God or understanding of christ as our example. Perhaps hope or edification or instructions toward righteousness.
I am stuck for the moment in the house because of injury. I am using the forum as a form of entertainment. When I get on the other side and God asks me what I did in my life to become like him in character. I am surely not going to say I debated on a forum or that I defended a doctrine that could not produce that character change.
I am not going to say that I defended a doctrine that did not edify or teach me the path of righteousness or any other good fruit.
I am not going to tell God that it is not important what fruit my teaching produced. I am not going to demand that God check out my scriptures I use to defend my doctrine. (no matter how much my often deceived intellect tells me I am right)
I am not going to tell God that I defended the traditional doctrines of the church no matter how little fruit they produced.
I am not going to tell God that I planted seeds of doctrine that dried up and died producing no fruit.

I pray I will be able to show that what I taught made Christ a very clear example for me and others on how a human should walk with God That example being made perfectly clear with the understanding that he did it as a human just like me.
I pray that others will see Christ as their brother that understand them perfectly because he has suffered and endured as a man just like us. (not hybrid God/man but just like us)
I pray that others will see how precious they are to God by seeing what stock God put on one just like us that completed his plan even unto death.
I pray others will be able to say from what I teach that they can overcome and have hope because they now know that a man made just like them with no special augmentation/dual-nature has completed the race and overcome.
I pray that others will understand that they can know Christ their brother without having to rely on some mystery and that they can have the same breath of God in them that was in their brother, Christ.
I pray that they will be able to see that they can become one with their heavenly Father even as Christ, their brother, was one with him.
I pray that they will be able to see the relationship between their human brother Christ and YHWH without resorting to some mystical excuse.

could not sleep. I do need to get to bed.
Blessings to all

 

[follower of Christ]

All those words and nothing there nullifies the plain truth in John...

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.

All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overtake it.

There was a man sent from God; his name was John. This one came as a witness, to bear witness concerning the Light, so that all might believe through him. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. He was the true Light; He enlightens every man coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world came into being through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and His own received Him not. But as many as received Him, He gave to them authority to become the children of God, to those who believe on His name, who were born, not of bloods, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but were born of God.

And the Word became flesh, and tabernacled among us.
And we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and of truth. John bore witness of Him and cried out, saying, This was He of whom I spoke: He who comes after me has been before me, for He was preceding me. And out of His fullness we all have received, and grace for grace. For the Law came through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.
(John 1:1-17 MKJV)

I see ALL of you here as brothers.
That doesnt mean that we arent to correct error.

 

[Apostolic Soldier]

I am very tired and I have skimmed several posts. I am not going to post a long post but I have one question. God is the same, yesterday, today, and forever. Will someone who believes in the Trinity go back and find ANYWHERE in the Old Testament where there is talk of a "Godhead" with different "personas"? You won't find any talk of this in the Old Testament. So, if God is ALWAYS the same, he was either always a Trinity or always One. The Trinity believers are basically saying that God didn't reveal himself to be a "Triune Godhead" until several thousands of years after already establishing himself as the God of the Jews. Why did he leave this crucial part of who he is a mystery for so long?

 

[follower of Christ]

I am very tired and I have skimmed several posts. I am not going to post a long post but I have one question. God is the same, yesterday, today, and forever. Will someone who believes in the Trinity go back and find ANYWHERE in the Old Testament where there is talk of a "Godhead" with different "personas"? You won't find any talk of this in the Old Testament. So, if God is ALWAYS the same, he was either always a Trinity or always One. The Trinity believers are basically saying that God didn't reveal himself to be a "Triune Godhead" until several thousands of years after already establishing himself as the God of the Jews. Why did he leave this crucial part of who he is a mystery for so long?

There was no need for the teaching at that point friend.
The Spirit had not yet been given and Jesus had not yet been born.

 

[Apostolic Soldier]

[quote="Apostolic Soldier":3cu6px17]I am very tired and I have skimmed several posts. I am not going to post a long post but I have one question. God is the same, yesterday, today, and forever. Will someone who believes in the Trinity go back and find ANYWHERE in the Old Testament where there is talk of a "Godhead" with different "personas"? You won't find any talk of this in the Old Testament. So, if God is ALWAYS the same, he was either always a Trinity or always One. The Trinity believers are basically saying that God didn't reveal himself to be a "Triune Godhead" until several thousands of years after already establishing himself as the God of the Jews. Why did he leave this crucial part of who he is a mystery for so long?

There was no need for the teaching at that point friend.
The Spirit had not yet been given and Jesus had not yet been born.[/quote:3cu6px17]

No need for teaching? Oh, but it is so important. The truth is that actually the God of the Old Testament is always taught to be one God. Over and over, you can read that God is one God in the Old Testament. You can also read over and over that Christ would be sent as the Messiah. Yet, never once even though the prophets are teaching this, do they feel the need to mention that this coming Messiah was the second persona in a "Triune Godhead". Seems that should have come up along the way.

 

[follower of Christ]

No need for teaching? Oh, but it is so important.

Really ?
So teaching an obstinate people about a Spirit they dont have and havent yet seen and the Son of God whom they havent yet seen is somehow important ?

 

[follower of Christ]

[quote="Apostolic Soldier":2vtaim3c]
No need for teaching? Oh, but it is so important.

Really ?
So teaching an obstinate people about a Spirit they dont have and havent yet seen and the Son of God whom they havent yet seen is somehow important ?
[/quote:2vtaim3c]
That said, books like Isaiah DO teach about the Son and the fact that He IS GOD !

Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

 

[follower of Christ]

I edited a previous post because I really worded something poorly enough that I know it will be distorted into something it wasnt.

 

[Apostolic Soldier]

I know it is difficult for many people to get past this body of Christ. The flesh of Christ leads many to believe in this supposed "distinction" of persons in a Triune Godhead. This is because we see the flesh praying, crying out, etc. We must realize that Christ was God in the flesh. God was IN the mortal man Jesus Christ, it was Christ (the man) and God (the spirit) coexisting within this flesh. There are many scriptural references to a man and his soul (spirit), Luke 12:19 is one of these examples. So, was Christ praying to himself all of those times? No, not at all. He was praying to this spirit that dwelled within his flesh, just as he speaks to his soul in Luke 12:19. Furthermore, we know that the Flesh of Christ did cry out on the cross. So, Christ was indeed God in the flesh. Peter told the Jews on the day of Pentecost "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36)." Lord meaning God, and Christ meaning man. Christ was BOTH God and Man. There is no other scripture to support anything else.

 

[follower of Christ]

I know it is difficult for many people to get past this body of Christ. The flesh of Christ leads many to believe in this supposed "distinction" of persons in a Triune Godhead.

WRONG, chap.
the SCRIPTURES lead man to believe in the trinity...

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.

All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overtake it.

There was a man sent from God; his name was John. This one came as a witness, to bear witness concerning the Light, so that all might believe through him. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. He was the true Light; He enlightens every man coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world came into being through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and His own received Him not. But as many as received Him, He gave to them authority to become the children of God, to those who believe on His name, who were born, not of bloods, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but were born of God.

And the Word became flesh, and tabernacled among us.
And we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and of truth. John bore witness of Him and cried out, saying, This was He of whom I spoke: He who comes after me has been before me, for He was preceding me. And out of His fullness we all have received, and grace for grace. For the Law came through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.
(John 1:1-17 MKJV)

 

[follower of Christ]

There is no other scripture to support anything else.

Only in your own mind.
There IS support that Jesus is His own person in the Godhead.

But concerning that day and the hour, no one knows, not the angels, those in Heaven, nor the Son, except the Father.
(Mark 13:32 LITV)

ONLY the Father knows, NOT the Son.


.