To begin, what you said above was in reference to (and quoting my citation of) Hebrews 5:5. Given the context of that passage, the phrase "first born from the dead" isn't specifically mentioned, so I'm not sure why you were bringing it up right then.
The reason I bring it up is because in Hebrews 5:5 it quotes Psalm 2:7 saying, "today I have begotten you", and you in an attempt to disprove Jesus' preexistance quoted this - while I was showing you that God meant that in the sense of Jesus' ressurection, of being the firstborn from the dead.
The interpretation of that passage is undeniable, because it is clearly stated that that is the proper application for it:
"
that God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm, 'YOU ARE MY SON; TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU.' "
(Acts 13:33)
Thus you misapplied Hebrews 5:5. Plain and simple.
However, your idea that the logos is therefore 100% ontologically God Himself, as is similar with Potluck's view, I disagree with that conclusion.
I'm sorry if the words "and the
Word was God" are too strong for you to stomach, so perhaps I should feed you with the milk of the word. The book of John is consistant on its supposition of the pre-existance of Christ, him having former glory with the Father, and having come into the world, and Thomas rightly spoke when he called Jesus God. Jesus was handed all things over by his Father, and was given the authority to make men the sons of God, for God relegated all his authority even the judgement over to his son (which even the OT acknowledges is what God will do). Not only that but Jesus clearly was the spiritual rock which followed the Israelites in the desert, the pre-existing God.
Your equation of 'God's Holy Spirit' as being synonymous with 'the Spirit of Christ', is also something that I think you're taking too far in the correlation.
Odd then that the Spirit of Christ should be credited with the inspiration of the Prophets, and therefore Scripture
(1 Peter 1:11). Very odd then that Peter would contradict himself by later then saying it was the Holy Spirit who did this
(2 Peter 1:21).
If your method of understanding this is applied universally to the Scriptures, then would we not, likewise, be just as much "God" (as in "100%) that Jesus supposedly is? . . . "and to know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled up to all the fullness of God". (Ephesians 3:19)
Your point is rediculous. The Bible clearly tell us that we now see as in a mirror dimly, but then face to face and transformed from Glory to Glory and that God shall be all in all. I do not say that Jesus was made full, or made God, because He was and is God, through whom that fullness comes.
God's plan is to sum all things up in Christ
(Ephesians 1:10).
Again, the biblical claim that "through Christ all things were made", does not mean "Christ made all things". The Greek words rendered into English as "through" (and in some versions as "by"), is absolutely renderable as "with respect to" - or better yet, "because of". An excellent example of this, where the exact same Greek contruct is used, is found in Galatians 1:24. "And they were glorifying God because of me (literally, "in me")". In other words, Paul is the reason for their being glad and glorifying God. Paul did not make them glorify God, as though they had no choice but to glorify. Rather, Paul is the impetus for glorifying God. Likewise, as God made the world "because of", or "in" or "through" or "with respect to", the son - then the understanding becomes crystal clear. Jesus is, through the mind / thoughts / expressions of God, (i.e. logos), God's rationale for creating in the first place. I don't know how to put it in more simple terms than that. God created all things, so that His plan, purpose and promise to Abraham to bless all nations in his seed (Jesus), would be realized.
Nothing more than semantic sinuosity. How clear is "and apart from him nothing was made that was made"? Or can't you read?
Or how clear is "by whom are all things, and we exist through Him"
(1 Corinthians 8:6)? Well gee, I wonder who people existed in before Jesus same around... oh, there must not have been anyone in existance before Jesus came in the flesh! Here's your answer: "
For in him we live and move and have our being"
(Acts 17:28). Jesus is the true God who upholds all things by the word of his power.
And how much sinuosity must be used to dodge: "
For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things have been created through Him and for Him"
(Colossians 1:16). The comprehensive terminilogy of "by", and "for", and "through" is typical of Paul's super-abundant language to describe all-encompasing participation, as he often uses in his epistles, especially Ephesians. To challenge the scope of this would be to challenge the tautology of all of Paul's encompasing language which he uses in almost every epistle. Only a fool would seek to run from the comprehensiveness of Paul's statement.
Yes, bondage. Perhaps that word comes across as too harsh, but I think it's a fitting expression of trinitarianism. My view of Christ isn't diminished in the least. In fact, the belief in Jesus' humanity (minus his so-called "deity") makes him far more impressive to consider. Which is to say, if Jesus was and is Almighty God - then what's the big deal? Sure, God can do anything. It's for more inspiring and encouraging to consider that what he did was drawn out by his faith in God. "The righteous will live by faith". How could it possibly be any less true of Jesus?
Becoming flesh and
emptying himself is the big deal, giving up the glory he had
before the world began (once again pointing to Jesus' pre-existance). Note also that Jesus must also have been preexistant to have seen Satan fall from Heaven like lightning and to know that he was a liar from the beginning, as he "claims" to have seen. Or perhaps Jesus was lying?
And so who or what is Jesus to you? A mere man, just some guy, just another prophet, rejected and killed just like the rest of them, just the last in a long line of those who died for their faith, just a righteous man who had the authority of God and the Spirit without measure? He would at least seem to have to be some form of demi-god according to your view since he is the son of the Holy Spirit and Mary, just like when Zeus had copulation with Danae to birth Perseus, right? Just a demi-god right? Only the one who is given the glory which the one and only God said "My glory I give to no other". Jesus is a massive idol to you, an idolatrous masquerader, stealing God's precious glory.
Pearls before swine is Jesus' glory to you it would seem.
The trinitarian Jesus on the other hand, doesn't need faith . . . he's God.
Hog wash. Jesus grew in his understanding and in favor of God (Luke 1) just as Samuel did, thus he is thoroughly human, but his faith was infact made perfect by realizing his unity with the Father, he knew why he had been sent and was merely the mouth piece of the Father, who inspires perfect faith. Jesus had such faith that he knew if he asked of his Father that He would give to him 12,000 legions of Angels to deviler him out of the Roman's hands. Jesus knew his authority and that God had given all things over into his hands, and even the Spirit without measure, having authority also to judge on the last day, and even presently on earth forgive men of their sins, and to give men authority to become the sons of God and to claim his name as high as his Father's and to claim that he was the only way to the Father, and that if one had seen him they had seen the Father. Jesus had complete divine power and authority, even to overcome Satan, but yet he humbles himself to the point of obedience in the flesh and was obedient unto death.
And you tell me Christ had no faith!!
Believing Jesus is God is perhaps the most legalistic view any Christian can have.
Where the Spirit of the Lord is there is freedom. Christ had the Spirit without measure, and was perfect only as God could be. Christ as God acknowledges the true power and
right (not privelage) that Jesus had to become the one, and only, eternal way to the Father. Jesus was a stumbling block because of his divine authority, but to those who enter through the narrow gate and realize that when we walk with Jesus, we walk with God, for Jesus is God, and the express image of his person: that realization is the most liberating reality that ever was and
ever will be!
I serve an
eternal Savior, not a "just add the Holy Spirit" microwavable, created Jesus.
Which reminds me, have you looked in your thread about an insight into the fundamental nature of sin lately? I'd like to you what your thoughts are on that sometime as well, since it ties in so directly with whether Jesus was a man, or a so-called God-man.
I'll try to look into it later.
~Josh
