Scriptural proof that Jesus was NOT "fully God"

[Bonairos]

God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh

Just pondering your posts. Does the changed emphasis matter?



Be blessed, Stay blessed, and be Bold!

 

[Drew]

Drew,

No, sorry, not following what you're saying here.

Remember the story in the OT book of Lev where there were two goats, one was a scapegoat and the other goat was made a sin offering.. and Aaron confessed all the sins of the people of Israel and it says that they were placed upon the Head of the goat... (Lev 16)

What's that mean to you ? Does it sound like some cleaning was going on or that an innocent animal sacrifice was substituted and bore the sin of the people ? ?

You appear "stuck" in the standard "legal substitution" model, although I concede I may not have explained myself as well as I might have.

Note that there is a real difference between the following two ways to see what happens to the goat:

1. The goat is "punished" for the sins of the people as though the goat is seen as morally culpable of the sins of the people, and then killed as "punishment";

2. The sins of the people, understood not as some kind of moral violation but rather as a stain or a contamination, are transferred to the goat, and then, in order to permanently wipe away that contamination, the goat needs to be killed.

I suggest intepretation number 2 is how we need to see the atonement.

I have to stop now - I know this explanation needs more work.

 

[Drew]

How this for a grisly detail?
80+ verses reveal, teach, etc. that Jesus ...
is God, is equal to Father God, is the Creator, is the Sustainer, is the Giver of eternal life.

I can list the references, if anyone would like them.

The problem is that you seem "stuck" in the mode of analyzing the Bible at the "level" of verses, as if the Bible does not communicate truths through the broad sweep of the overall narrative.

 

[Eventide]

You appear "stuck" in the standard "legal substitution" model, although I concede I may not have explained myself as well as I might have.

Well maybe when you get it a little more fine tuned you can give it another try.

 

[John Zain]

The problem is that you seem "stuck" in the mode of analyzing the Bible at the "level" of verses,
as if the Bible does not communicate truths through the broad sweep of the overall narrative.

I plead guilty of occasionally taking verses out of context with the rest of Scripture.

Of course, born-again Christianity requires believing the verses,
understanding the broad sweep, and being led by the Holy Spirit.

 

[childeye]

You appear "stuck" in the standard "legal substitution" model, although I concede I may not have explained myself as well as I might have.

Note that there is a real difference between the following two ways to see what happens to the goat:

1. The goat is "punished" for the sins of the people as though the goat is seen as morally culpable of the sins of the people, and then killed as "punishment";

2. The sins of the people, understood not as some kind of moral violation but rather as a stain or a contamination, are transferred to the goat, and then, in order to permanently wipe away that contamination, the goat needs to be killed.

I suggest intepretation number 2 is how we need to see the atonement.

I have to stop now - I know this explanation needs more work.

Reading your posts drew has me really thinking. I hope you will elaborate more on these two goats and the implications if you are able. How do they apply to the Christ or rather are they two differing perspectives of the Christ meant to divide people on one side or the other depending on how they believe?

 

[warhorse]

Scripture says that ...
Jesus was NOT going around being "fully God" and able to do everything himself.

Even though Jesus, the man, had God * within him,
He still was a man and needed a lot of help from the Father and the Holy Spirit.
* It's my understanding that he had the Second Person of the Triune God within Him.

Luke 4:18
The Spirit of the LORD is upon Me, because He has anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor;
He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives
and recovery of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed (by demons)

Luke 5:17
Now it happened on a certain day, as He (Jesus) was teaching,
that there were Pharisees and teachers of the law sitting by,
who had come out of every town of Galilee, Judea, and Jerusalem.
And the power of the Lord was present to heal them.

Hebrews 10:38
... how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power,
who went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil,
for God was with Him.

It is also my understanding that Jesus was NOT "fully man"
because since he was "without sin", he did not have man's sin nature.

Not!!! read below...

 

[Asyncritus]

How this for a grisly detail?
80+ verses reveal, teach, etc. that Jesus ...
is God, is equal to Father God, is the Creator, is the Sustainer, is the Giver of eternal life.

I can list the references, if anyone would like them.

Yeah, let's see them - because I can produce at least 75 from John's gospel alone which say the exact opposite. In fact, now I think about it, the list is already published somewhere on the forum.

 

[Asyncritus]

This answer doesn't answer the question to which it was posed. Do you think Jesus was fully and/or fully God?

I don't know what you mean by 'fully' God.

If you mean that He could not sin, as God cannot sin, then the answer is a definite 'No'.

If you mean that He possessed underived immortality, as God does, then again the answer is a definite 'No'.

If you mean that He is Almighty, then the answer is again a definite 'No'.

If you mean that He existed from all eternity as God does and did, then again the answer is a definite 'No'. (He is the 'beginning of the creation of God' ie He had a starting point.)

If you mean that He is not subject to the Father, then again that's a definite 'No'. (1 Cor. 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued to him, then shall the Son also himself be subject to him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.)

He is the 'image' of the invisible God, and cannot therefore be the invisible God.

There are, of course, other things, so please carefully define or describe what you mean by 'fully' God.

 

[jasoncran]

how can jesus say i am the first and last in the book of revalation and also this for those that dont know the origin of el-shaddai(the good sheppard)
i am the good sheppard

the being called malach yhwh in ancient hebrew also by numerology in jewish traditions points to the name el-shaddai which means the good sheppard. that being said. its still held today by the jews of today.

the angel of the lord also demanded worship and yet that is clearly condemned.

Judges 13


1And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD delivered them into the hand of the Philistines forty years.
2And there was a certain man of Zorah, of the family of the Danites, whose name was Manoah; and his wife was barren, and bare not.
3And the angel of the LORD appeared unto the woman, and said unto her, Behold now, thou art barren, and bearest not: but thou shalt conceive, and bear a son.
4Now therefore beware, I pray thee, and drink not wine nor strong drink, and eat not any unclean thing:
5For, lo, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and no razor shall come on his head: for the child shall be a Nazarite unto God from the womb: and he shall begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines.
6Then the woman came and told her husband, saying, A man of God came unto me, and his countenance was like the countenance of an angel of God, very terrible: but I asked him not whence he was, neither told he me his name:
7But he said unto me, Behold, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and now drink no wine nor strong drink, neither eat any unclean thing: for the child shall be a Nazarite to God from the womb to the day of his death.
8Then Manoah intreated the LORD, and said, O my Lord, let the man of God which thou didst send come again unto us, and teach us what we shall do unto the child that shall be born.
9And God hearkened to the voice of Manoah; and the angel of God came again unto the woman as she sat in the field: but Manoah her husband was not with her.
10And the woman made haste, and ran, and shewed her husband, and said unto him, Behold, the man hath appeared unto me, that came unto me the other day.
11And Manoah arose, and went after his wife, and came to the man, and said unto him, Art thou the man that spakest unto the woman? And he said, I am.
12And Manoah said, Now let thy words come to pass. How shall we order the child, and how shall we do unto him?
13And the angel of the LORD said unto Manoah, Of all that I said unto the woman let her beware.
14She may not eat of any thing that cometh of the vine, neither let her drink wine or strong drink, nor eat any unclean thing: all that I commanded her let her observe.
15And Manoah said unto the angel of the LORD, I pray thee, let us detain thee, until we shall have made ready a kid for thee.
16And the angel of the LORD said unto Manoah, Though thou detain me, I will not eat of thy bread: and if thou wilt offer a burnt offering, thou must offer it unto the LORD. For Manoah knew not that he was an angel of the LORD.
17And Manoah said unto the angel of the LORD, What is thy name, that when thy sayings come to pass we may do thee honour?
18And the angel of the LORD said unto him, Why askest thou thus after my name, seeing it is secret?
19So Manoah took a kid with a meat offering, and offered it upon a rock unto the LORD: and the angel did wonderously; and Manoah and his wife looked on.
20For it came to pass, when the flame went up toward heaven from off the altar, that the angel of the LORD ascended in the flame of the altar. And Manoah and his wife looked on it, and fell on their faces to the ground.
21But the angel of the LORD did no more appear to Manoah and to his wife. Then Manoah knew that he was an angel of the LORD.
22And Manoah said unto his wife, We shall surely die, because we have seen God.
23But his wife said unto him, If the LORD were pleased to kill us, he would not have received a burnt offering and a meat offering at our hands, neither would he have shewed us all these things, nor would as at this time have told us such things as these.
24And the woman bare a son, and called his name Samson: and the child grew, and the LORD blessed him. 25And the Spirit of the LORD began to move him at times in the camp of Dan between Zorah and Eshtaol.

 

[Sparkey]

God is not a man. Jesus came in the flesh. This is a non-issue.
Somebody invented a couple terms in English to stimulate debate but facts are facts. "God-man" and "Fully-God" are invented terms. Jesus is the Son of God, the Messiah. He was not created but was indeed born of a virgin and clothed in flesh. His Father was never "born". Of course, when we speak of the man -- the Christ whose name is Jesus, we are not saying that he was a Spirit that inhabits all heaven and all earth. Jesus is a man. This is not to say that He and His Father are not perfect or that they are not one. Why debate a non-issue? Did God dwell fully in Jesus the Christ? Yes. Is this a matter of semantics or semitics? Both

Learn the lesson that Thomas understood and be blessed: (Jhn 20:28-29 KJV) - "And Thomas answered and said unto him, "My Lord and my God."
Jesus saith unto him, "Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed." Why try to prove what is clearly stated and now obvious (to believers)?

 

[smaller]

Any believer who has sincere interests in this matter and has studied the foundations of the general Church orthodox positions should come to the conclusion that God in Christ was both fully God and fully Man, with one very large exception, without sin. Satan had 'nothing in Him.'

None of the balance of us 'men' can make that statement, therefore our visions remain cloudy because the appearance of God in His Creation is rightfully termed 'a mystery.' We do not see this mystery clearly because Satan blinds us all in part and many get sucked into various divisions and heresies trying to 'segment' God when God was never divided in the first place.

s

 

[Brother Lawrence]

Athanasian Creed

Before anybody gets excited, "Catholic" means universal. The links go to Catholic sites because I got this copy from a Catholic web page, but there are many denominations who subscribe to this Creed. This was the understanding of the church fathers. Take notice in the part that talks about Christ's divinity and humanity.

Whosoever will be saved, before all
things it is necessary
that he hold the Catholic Faith.
Which Faith except everyone do keep whole
and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish
everlastingly. And the Catholic Faith
is this, that we worship one God
in Trinity and
Trinity in Unity.
Neither confounding the Persons, nor
dividing the Substance. For there is one Person
of the Father, another of the Son, and
another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead
of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy
Ghost is all One, the Glory Equal,
the Majesty Co-Eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son,
and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father Uncreate,
the Son Uncreate,
and the Holy Ghost Uncreate.
The Father Incomprehensible, the Son
Incomprehensible, and the Holy
Ghost Incomprehensible. The Father
Eternal, the Son Eternal, and the Holy
Ghost Eternal and yet they are not Three Eternals but One Eternal.
As also there are not Three Uncreated, nor
Three Incomprehensibles, but One Uncreated,
and One Uncomprehensible. So likewise the Father is
Almighty, the Son
Almighty, and the
Holy Ghost
Almighty. And yet they are not Three
Almighties but One Almighty.



So the Father is God, the Son
is God, and the Holy
Ghost is God.
And yet they are not Three Gods, but One God.
So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son
Lord, and the Holy
Ghost Lord. And yet not Three Lords
but One Lord. For, like as we are compelled
by the Christian verity
to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be
God and Lord,
so are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion
to say, there be Three Gods or Three Lords.
The Father is made of none, neither created,
nor begotten. The Son is of the Father
alone; not made, nor created, but begotten.
The Holy Ghost is of the Father, and of the Son
neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but
proceeding.

So there is One Father, not Three
Fathers; one Son,
not Three Sons; One Holy
Ghost, not Three Holy Ghosts.
And in this Trinity none is afore
or after Other, None is greater or less than
Another, but the whole Three Persons are
Co-eternal together, and Co-equal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity
in Trinity, and the Trinity
in Unity, is to be worshipped.
He therefore that will be saved, must thus
think of the Trinity.

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting Salvation,
that he also believe rightly the Incarnation
of our Lord Jesus
Christ

. For the right Faith
is, that we believe and confess,
that our Lord Jesus
Christ

, the Son of
God

, is God and Man.
God, of the substance
of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and Man,
of the substance of His mother, born into
the world. Perfect God
and Perfect Man,
of a reasonable Soul and human
Flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father as
touching His Godhead,
and inferior to the Father as touching His Manhood.
Who, although He be God
and Man, yet He is not two, but One Christ.
One, not by conversion of the Godhead
into Flesh, but by taking of the Manhood
into God. One
altogether, not by confusion of substance,
but by Unity of
Person. For as the reasonable soul
and flesh is one Man, so God
and Man is one
Christ. Who suffered for our salvation,
descended into Hell,
rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended
into Heaven

, He sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God
Almighty

, from whence he shall come to judge
the quick and the dead. At whose coming all men
shall rise again with their bodies, and
shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good
shall go into life everlasting, and they
that have done evil
into everlasting fire. This is the Catholic
Faith, which except a
man believe
faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.

 

[Drew]

Any believer who has sincere interests in this matter and has studied the foundations of the general Church orthodox positions should come to the conclusion that God in Christ was both fully God and fully Man, with one very large exception, without sin. Satan had 'nothing in Him.'

Not sure exactly what you are saying, but I will repeat a text that is central:

For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,...

A rather clear statement that "sin" was in "Jesus;s flesh".

Please note that I am not suggesting that Jesus sinned - I am simply taking Paul at his word: on the cross something called "sin" was, in some sense at least, in Jesus' flesh, and it was sin, not Jesus, that is the "target" of the condemnation.

This is part of the problem with the normal "judicial" interpretation which sees Jesus "punished" in our place. Well, Paul is clear, it is sin, not Jesus that is condemned on the cross.

 

[smaller]

Not sure exactly what you are saying, but I will repeat a text that is central:

For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,...

A rather clear statement that "sin" was in "Jesus;s flesh".

Please note that I am not suggesting that Jesus sinned - I am simply taking Paul at his word: on the cross something called "sin" was, in some sense at least, in Jesus' flesh, and it was sin, not Jesus, that is the "target" of the condemnation.

This is part of the problem with the normal "judicial" interpretation which sees Jesus "punished" in our place. Well, Paul is clear, it is sin, not Jesus that is condemned on the cross.

Your statement above puts you clearly in the heresy camp and your view does not contain one vital piece of scriptural fact about the difference between God in the flesh and everyone else:

1 John 3:5
And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.

To make this easier, God can, did, in the form of Jesus Christ, swallow every sin and remained Perfect regardless....

s

 

[Free]

Your statement above puts you clearly in the heresy camp and your view does not contain one vital piece of scriptural fact about the difference between God in the flesh and everyone else:

1 John 3:5
And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.

To make this easier, God can, did, in the form of Jesus Christ, swallow every sin and remained Perfect regardless....

s

Before stating that someone is "in the heresy camp," be sure you understand what Scripture says. Clearly, 1 John 3:5 can be simply saying that Christ never sinned.

 

[smaller]

Before stating that someone is "in the heresy camp," be sure you understand what Scripture says. Clearly, 1 John 3:5 can be simply saying that Christ never sinned.

Are you really willing to say that sin was in Christ?

I can not read John's statement of 'in Him is no sin' and come to the conclusion that Drew presented.

No orthodox determination of the Godhead arrived at that conclusion, and those who made such claims have been termed heretics by every form of orthodoxy that I am aware of.

s

 

[Free]

Are you really willing to say that sin was in Christ?

I can not read John's statement of 'in Him is no sin' and come to the conclusion that Drew presented.

No orthodox determination of the Godhead arrived at that conclusion, and those who made such claims have been termed heretics by every form of orthodoxy that I am aware of.

s

All I am saying is that you are leaning on a specific interpretation of the verse you gave when it may not be saying that at all.

 

[smaller]

All I am saying is that you are leaning on a specific interpretation of the verse you gave when it may not be saying that at all.

All I'm saying is that no determination of orthodoxy has placed sin in Jesus Christ.

The statement from John needs no 'interpretation.'

 

[ivdavid]

I think a better model is that of a "cleansing" operation. We humans are "contaminated" by our sins and that contamination needs to be "cleaned" if we are to be "saved". Jesus then serves as the "place" where all our contaminations gets "dumped".

This has something to do with the "New Perspective on Paul" interpretation, right? Correct me if I'm wrong. I ask this not to be biased but to save some of your time by my reading up on the net instead of asking you every single thing. But what it has raised so far, I shall ask -

What according to your interpretation are we going to give account for on judgment day? What does God judge on that day? Why are we to confess an illness and why should God forgive that? Why must there be a law against a contamination and why must there be moral condemnation for being ill? What is meant by God's mercy and wrath in the absence of a legal system.

Surface-level answers to the above will do for now - you can elaborate when we dwell deeper. I expect you got the intent of my questions - my concern is that when you make sin an illness or contamination, you remove man's accountability for all that he does on account of sin. And accountability does play a role in the legal system whereas not in the corrective surgery room. In short, according to you, is acting out the consequences of an illness morally wrong or not?

I think you have reversed the functions. I think that the illness was used as an analogy to express our state in sin while actually the legal system is in force. You are attempting to make the analogy the reality and vice versa and your supportive argument is that these are similar - which is quite obvious, since they are analogies. I see not what theological ground you gain by this interpretation while I see a grave harm that could be done by this. So please clarify. Thank you in advance.