The Trinity

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Free,

It is fallaciously begging the question to say that Yahweh is only the Father.

There is a very intimate connection between the One God, Yahweh, God the Father and the human Jesus the Son of God. In the expression of the Name Yahweh: "I will be/become who I will be/become", the One God, Yahweh, God the Father is the "I" and Jesus is the "who" that Yahweh would "become".

Why do you also ignore the many scriptures I gave that clearly state Jesus preexisted?

The "I" of "I will be/become who I will be/become" preexisted, but Jesus the "who" was a human born with God as his Father and Mary his mother Luke 1:34-35. Jesus was speaking His Father's words:
Deuteronomy 18:15,18 (KJV): 15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; 18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[RandyK]

To be seated with Christ in heaven is a promise not a now reality. Hope remains hope until it’s fulfilled by resurrection.

I agree, but I did not say otherwise. I was speaking of how we are seated with Christ now by means of our position with him through grace. That is, we are with Christ in heaven legally, though not physically.

It may be quite different with Christ, who did not require legal sanction to be with God his Father in heaven. He was positioned with God in heaven by means of his identifification with him spiritually. Jesus was the divine Person, and as such enjoyed the same attributes that his Father did, while remaining a distinct person on earth as a man.

There was an essential unity between the persons with a necessary distinction. That is the major point I had wished to make.

Throughout the gospels Christ belabored the point that he could do nothing of himself. That testimony of himself alone meant nothing. That his words were not his own. That his doctrine was not his own, that his power was not his own.
All things were credited by him to his God and Father.

He did not deny his own personal involvement in what he did. Obviously, this goes without saying.

He was, as you say, marking the necessary connection between himself and his Father, giving his Father the status as Divine originator. Without his Divine origins, all this Jesus did would've been purely human, and not Divine.

He wanted them to know that if they had seen him they had seen his God and Father who was in heaven.
Why? Because he spoke the words of the Father, taught the doctrines of the Father and did the works of the Father.
Read it yourself, I’m not going to waste my time posting all the text for those who care not to read it themselves.

I'll say it again. The essential point is that what Jesus did originated with the Father in heaven, with an infinite starting point. Without that, all that Jesus did lacked value for us. It was nothing more than a model of good behavior, and certainly not redemptive.

The Father gave His son of His own Spirit without measure so that all that could be said of the son would be to the glory of the Father.

And this is the metaphor/parable for Jesus coming down from heaven.
The Father came down by His Spirit to fully dwell in Christ. ‘God (the Father) was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself.’

Jesus came down from heaven literally, and not metaphorically--whatever you mean by that? He preexisted as the Divine Word of God, and that was his Divine starting point. He was eternally generated from God as His Divine verbal expression. And what God expressed in Jesus was His own Divine Person in the form of a finite man.

Jesus thus represented not just one, but two persons, both his Divine Identity and his human identity. Jesus did not have a conjunctive relationship with the Father but an essential, spiritual connection--one that identified both persons with a single Divine Person. They were distinct persons unified by one Divine Substance, the Creeds say.

 

[LeviR]

I agree, but I did not say otherwise. I was speaking of how we are seated with Christ now by means of our position with him through grace. That is, we are with Christ in heaven legally, though not physically.

It may be quite different with Christ, who did not require legal sanction to be with God his Father in heaven. He was positioned with God in heaven by means of his identifification with him spiritually. Jesus was the divine Person, and as such enjoyed the same attributes that his Father did, while remaining a distinct person on earth as a man.

There was an essential unity between the persons with a necessary distinction. That is the major point I had wished to make.

He did not deny his own personal involvement in what he did. Obviously, this goes without saying.

He was, as you say, marking the necessary connection between himself and his Father, giving his Father the status as Divine originator. Without his Divine origins, all this Jesus did would've been purely human, and not Divine.

I'll say it again. The essential point is that what Jesus did originated with the Father in heaven, with an infinite starting point. Without that, all that Jesus did lacked value for us. It was nothing more than a model of good behavior, and certainly not redemptive.

Jesus came down from heaven literally, and not metaphorically--whatever you mean by that? He preexisted as the Divine Word of God, and that was his Divine starting point. He was eternally generated from God as His Divine verbal expression. And what God expressed in Jesus was His own Divine Person in the form of a finite man.

Jesus thus represented not just one, but two persons, both his Divine Identity and his human identity. Jesus did not have a conjunctive relationship with the Father but an essential, spiritual connection--one that identified both persons with a single Divine Person. They were distinct persons unified by one Divine Substance, the Creeds say.

Jesus taught heavenly things in parables. You can deny it all you want, that doesn’t change the fact that he did.
John 3:13 is a heavenly thing. He said so himself right there.
“How shall you believe if I tell you heavenly things?”

Therefore, his coming down from heaven and being in heaven at the same time is a parable.

It is a parable that identifies himself as the Father. “He shall be called Everlasting Father”. “If you seen me you seen my Father”.

The parable is explained by the Father, who is in heaven, coming down from heaven by His Spirit which dwelt fully in Christ.
Therefore, Christ has come down from heaven and is in heaven at the same time.

 

[RandyK]

Jesus taught heavenly things in parables. You can deny it all you want, that doesn’t change the fact that he did.

Of course I deny it--it is patently and obviously untrue, unless you mean by "everything" only "some things as a regular practice.

Jesus taught his Disciples to pray to our "Father in heaven." That is a "heavenly thing" that Jesus taught without any use of a parable.

John 3:13 is a heavenly thing. He said so himself right there.
“How shall you believe if I tell you heavenly things?”

Obviously, *some things* that are heavenly Jesus chose to teach using parables. But the fact he did not need to was obvious by his claim to his Disciples that he used parables primarily to confuse his enemies.

There is even way back in ancient philosophy the belief that the finite world is symbolic of something greater, and thus constitutes a kind of parable of higher realities. This kind of Platonism is not what Jesus was using.

The idea of a spiritual world that the sinful world is blind to was more the product of mankind turning away from divine revelation than the essential use of symbolism to convey otherwise unattainable truths. If we turn to God, God will heal our blindness and we will be able to perceive spiritual realities--something that Jesus said Nicodemus should've understood.

Therefore, his coming down from heaven and being in heaven at the same time is a parable.

Not even close. It is not a parable to say that the Divine Word preexisted the Incarnation of Jesus on earth. It is literally true without reference to any parable whatsoever.

As such, heaven is an all-encompassing realm transcending the limitations of man in this world. The world is included in heaven, and yet heaven rises to include many more worlds and spiritual realities. It need not be referred to in parables.

The Word of God encompassed all reality in heaven, and descended to this physical earth to reveal God's Person in a finite human person. This was not a parable--not in the least.

It is a parable that identifies himself as the Father. “He shall be called Everlasting Father”. “If you seen me you seen my Father”.

Calling Jesus the "Everlasting Father" is identifying Jesus with the Divine Person, but not failing to distinguish him as Messiah and Man, thus distinguishing between the Father and the Son.

"Father," thus, is being used in a different context when identifying Jesus with the Creator. Reference to God as the Father of Jesus requires more of a distinction than just the establishing a unity of Substance between them.

The parable is explained by the Father, who is in heaven, coming down from heaven by His Spirit which dwelt fully in Christ.
Therefore, Christ has come down from heaven and is in heaven at the same time.

Jesus does exist in heaven in the form of God's Word, even as he existed on earth as a man. I don't see any need for a parable, nor is there one expressing this, in my opinion.

 

[LeviR]

Of course I deny it--it is patently and obviously untrue, unless you mean by "everything" only "some things as a regular practice.

Jesus taught his Disciples to pray to our "Father in heaven." That is a "heavenly thing" that Jesus taught without any use of a parable.

Obviously, *some things* that are heavenly Jesus chose to teach using parables. But the fact he did not need to was obvious by his claim to his Disciples that he used parables primarily to confuse his enemies.

There is even way back in ancient philosophy the belief that the finite world is symbolic of something greater, and thus constitutes a kind of parable of higher realities. This kind of Platonism is not what Jesus was using.

The idea of a spiritual world that the sinful world is blind to was more the product of mankind turning away from divine revelation than the essential use of symbolism to convey otherwise unattainable truths. If we turn to God, God will heal our blindness and we will be able to perceive spiritual realities--something that Jesus said Nicodemus should've understood.

Not even close. It is not a parable to say that the Divine Word preexisted the Incarnation of Jesus on earth. It is literally true without reference to any parable whatsoever.

As such, heaven is an all-encompassing realm transcending the limitations of man in this world. The world is included in heaven, and yet heaven rises to include many more worlds and spiritual realities. It need not be referred to in parables.

The Word of God encompassed all reality in heaven, and descended to this physical earth to reveal God's Person in a finite human person. This was not a parable--not in the least.

Calling Jesus the "Everlasting Father" is identifying Jesus with the Divine Person, but not failing to distinguish him as Messiah and Man, thus distinguishing between the Father and the Son.

"Father," thus, is being used in a different context when identifying Jesus with the Creator. Reference to God as the Father of Jesus requires more of a distinction than just the establishing a unity of Substance between them.

Jesus does exist in heaven in the form of God's Word, even as he existed on earth as a man. I don't see any need for a parable, nor is there one expressing this, in my opinion.

When did the Father give the son to have life within himself as the Father does?

 

[Randy]

You need to recognize and acknowledge both the unity between Father and Son and the distinctions beetween Father and Son. Obviously, the Father is unbegotten as Creator and originator of His Word, and the Son is begotten in time and in human flesh.

But the Son originates from the unbegotten Father and is a perfect expression of the same as the expression of God's Word. So he was begotten in order to express the unbegotten God. This is their unity as well as their distinction.

The Word goes out from God and remains God. But when it goes out it expresses God in creative ways. The Word of God issues from the unbegotten Father and generates God in the form of the Son. The Son, therefore, is generated from eternity by the eternal Word of God.

What is infinite can be expressed in finite terms. God can simply proclaim His existence in the form of the Son, and it becomes a perfect expression of His own infinite Deity in finite terms.

All of Jesus was God's verbal expression of Himself in the form of a man, body, soul, and human spirit. Every element of Jesus' life was generated by the Word of God to express the infinite God in finite, earthly terms.

Jesus preexisted his human body not as a man but as the Word of God. This revelation "descended" from heaven in the sense that what originated from infinity took shape on the finite earth.

Jesus had a human spirit and also possessed the full measure of God's Spirit within the limitations of his humanity. God's Spirit and Jesus' human spirit are two distinct things. Jesus' human spirit expressed the infinite Spirit of God, the Word of God, and the identity of God in human flesh.

The Word of God did not just express in Jesus a thing that God created, or a human person that He created. Rather, the Word of God is identified with Jesus' person and consciously expresses God in the identity of this human person.

The Word of God is capable of doing that. God is capable of appearing, as an infinite Being, in finite terms, using finite language.

Jesus is Gods first begotten, His spirit, and this was gifted, not formed, from the will of another, Col 1:19, at some point in history before the world began. The oneness is how Jesus taught. The Father living in Him.

God is Jesus's Father and God in all ways. Jesus has always been the Son.

Jesus is the Word of the Father. (God)
God spoke to us in these last days by His Son. As Jesus stated the Father living in Him doing His work. The Father gave Him what to state and how to state it.

The eternal life in the Son is the Father who is the only "true" God.

 

[LeviR]

Jesus is Gods first begotten, His spirit, and this was gifted, not formed, from the will of another, Col 1:19, at some point in history before the world began. The oneness is how Jesus taught. The Father living in Him.

God is Jesus's Father and God in all ways. Jesus has always been the Son.

Jesus is the Word of the Father. (God)
God spoke to us in these last days by His Son. As Jesus stated the Father living in Him doing His work. The Father gave Him what to state and how to state it.

The eternal life in the Son is the Father who is the only "true" God.

Correct. The Father is the only true God. There is none else.
The Father is both the God and Father of the son.
This means the son has a God who is also his Father.

The ones who deny this truth have made up all sorts of things.
One thing they made up is the idea that the son has two minds, two wills and two souls.

They make the son be as two persons but then claim he is only one person.

This means the son, who is only one person, has a God.

The God of the son is the Father. Maybe He ought to be the one true God we recognize also.

That way we’d be in agreement with the son rather than having some other god the son does not recognize as his God.

 

[Randy]

You said you believed Jesus is God. But now you say that the Father is "the only true God." Contradiction?

Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

Jesus and the Father are one. How then could He not be called God? His spirit is not the only unbegotten God. The Deity of the ONLY unbegotten God in Him with His spirit has always been the Father. Gifted not formed Col 1:19

Yes. The creeds do work well for me.

Nobody here is questioning whether Jesus was generated in time as a revelation from God's preexistent Word in eternity

They state He is begotten of the Father alone before all things as a Son but not made.
I agree in part. How could He be from another yet have no beginning? And the source Deity, the Father, would never change. The Deity in Him has always been the Father. As in He has the Fathers nature not His own. God was the Logos and the Logos was with God. God created all things, by His Son. The Deity in the Son doing the Fathers works.

.

Confusing the Father and the Son as indistinct would go against the creeds, and in particular the prohibition against Modalism.

Jesus has His own spirit, mind and will. The Fathers Spirit, without limit, lives in Him.
The Father doesn't have Deity living in Him as He is Deity and the only unbegotten Deity at that. As Jesus stated to the Father, the only true God.

Sorry, I'll have to revisit this later....

Is Jesus God?
He never dies.
Yes, He is all that the Father is.
No, He has always been the Son.

 

[RandyK]

Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

Jesus and the Father are one. How then could He not be called God? His spirit is not the only unbegotten God.

What do you mean that Jesus' "spirit" is not the only unbegotten God? We are flat-out told that Jesus, body, soul, and spirit, is God. And you just seemed to acknowledge that.

But then you immediately proceed to say that Jesus' "spirit" is not God? That is a contradiction if I ever saw one.

The Deity of the ONLY unbegotten God in Him with His spirit has always been the Father. Gifted not formed Col 1:19

You are saying that God is "in him," but his "spirit" is not God. That is a contradiction and unbiblical. Jesus is God--body, soul, and spirit.

You are making the same claim some of the ancient Greek philosophers did, that there is a higher realm of being that is impassible. In your description you imply that what is "unbegotten" cannot be confused with what is "begotten?"

If so, that directly conflicts with the biblical notion that God's infinite Word is able to generate finite truths that are of the same Substance as that which belongs to the infinite God. The reduction from an infinite reality to a finite expression of that infinite reality is as simple for God as speaking, via His Word, words that depict who He is. If He could not do this, we would never be able to know HIm.

It's certainly true that the infinite God is "in" the Son. But that does not make the Son any less God, since the God that is in him is also the God who is depicting Himself through the Son.

 

[RandyK]

Jesus is Gods first begotten, His spirit, and this was gifted, not formed, from the will of another, Col 1:19, at some point in history before the world began. The oneness is how Jesus taught. The Father living in Him.

I don't think you have a clue what you're talking about? 1st of all, describing Jesus as God's "1st begotten" has to do with preeminent rights of a particular child. God has had many children, but He had only one Son of His Divinity, making Jesus the preeminent, or "1st born," of His many children.

The Law had set up the 1st born as preeminent children to show the importance Jesus' place would be among men as God's 1st and only Divine Son. There are, of course, other reasons God set up the preeminence of 1st born children under the Law. Order of authority is important on earth.

But what on earth do you mean by saying, "Jesus is God's first begotten, His spirit?"

Jesus was a finite expression of the infinite God, displaying in his human flesh who God is within that form, ie within the form of a human person. That human person displayed the Person of Deity, if only in a reduced image of all that He is in is infinite Being.

A segment of a line is not the whole, infinite line, but it is truly representative of the entire line in a reduced form. In Math we can see this.

God is Jesus's Father and God in all ways. Jesus has always been the Son.

What do you mean Jesus "has always been the Son?" He has always existed, but not always in the form of the "Son," which is defined in terms of his human Incarnation. He preexisted his humanity as the Word of God, and was revealed as the Son when he became a man.

So we may say that the Son has existed for all eternity. But we may not say he existed in the form of the Son from all eternity.

 

[Randy]

I don't think you have a clue what you're talking about? 1st of all, describing Jesus as God's "1st begotten" has to do with preeminent rights of a particular child. God has had many children, but He had only one Son of His Divinity, making Jesus the preeminent, or "1st born," of His many children.

The Law had set up the 1st born as preeminent children to show the importance Jesus' place would be among men as God's 1st and only Divine Son. There are, of course, other reasons God set up the preeminence of 1st born children under the Law. Order of authority is important on earth.

But what on earth do you mean by saying, "Jesus is God's first begotten, His spirit?"

Jesus was a finite expression of the infinite God, displaying in his human flesh who God is within that form, ie within the form of a human person. That human person displayed the Person of Deity, if only in a reduced image of all that He is in is infinite Being.

A segment of a line is not the whole, infinite line, but it is truly representative of the entire line in a reduced form. In Math we can see this.

What do you mean Jesus "has always been the Son?" He has always existed, but not always in the form of the "Son," which is defined in terms of his human Incarnation. He preexisted his humanity as the Word of God, and was revealed as the Son when he became a man.

So we may say that the Son has existed for all eternity. But we may not say he existed in the form of the Son from all eternity.

"Father into your hands I commit My spirit"

It's clear to me the Son who was, His spirit, was in the body prepared for Him. He did in fact descend and ascend to where He was before. If He had a human spirit and a human body what part of Him was God? What part of Him descended from above if not His own spirit? As the firstborn of God He has His own spirit-not Deity. The Deity in Him is the person of the Father always. They are one as Jesus taught.

He's the beginning of the even of resurrection He spoke of and the firstborn from the dead. (first to rise from the dead in a glorified body)

He's the beginning of the event of the creation of God and the firstborn of all creation.
(first spirit born from the Fathers Spirit who gives birth to all spirits) hence God His Father and His God. God OUR Father. If Jesus's spirit gave birth to my spirit He would be God my Father and my Heavenly Father. He is NOT. He is Christ my Lord. That does not take away from Him that all the fullness of God lives in Him.

From your perspective why the need?
Hebrews 1:6

You just state things are so without any reasonable explanation. A foundation of mystery.
He's FROM the Father as a Son but has no beginning. The Son of Man had a human body and a human spirit but was fully God as well.

I don't think God shares your view of a God with no beginning. Yet its clear God from whom all things come, identified as the only true God our Father is unbegotten.
"If the Father has a beginning it could not be by any other being" Jesus is begotten from the Father alone before all things with a beginning.

"No God "was formed" before me"

I hold to that which was from the beginning.
yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

In regard to the Son I hold to this
The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being,sustaining all things by his powerful word.

Just 2
Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Why would Jesus need to ask and receive from the Father for His own spirit? Why would Jesus speak of another advocate if its His own spirit?

Jesus spoke of the Fathers promise.
On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: “Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about.

What was that promise?
"In the last days I will pour out "MY" Spirit"
the Spirit Jesus sends He received from the Father. Acts 2
The Spirit the Father sends in Jesus's name.

I assure you just as Jesus taught about who was living in Him is the Deity of the First and Last doing His work, His God and Father

But in regard to Jesus's own being.
KJV Rev 3:14
14And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;

I agree in part
Begotten of the Father alone before all things but not made

 

[Randy]

What do you mean that Jesus' "spirit" is not the only unbegotten God? We are flat-out told that Jesus, body, soul, and spirit, is God. And you just seemed to acknowledge that.

But then you immediately proceed to say that Jesus' "spirit" is not God? That is a contradiction if I ever saw one.

No it's not as in the context He is ALL that the Father He is God. In the context He has always been the Son He is not God. Yes and No.

You are saying that God is "in him," but his "spirit" is not God. That is a contradiction and unbiblical. Jesus is God--body, soul, and spirit.

You're free to believe that but He did not ask for and receive His own spirit from the Father to send to us.
You have a hint here FROM HIM
There's only one Divine Spirit not two.
Matt:10:20
for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.

You are making the same claim some of the ancient Greek philosophers did, that there is a higher realm of being that is impassible. In your description you imply that what is "unbegotten" cannot be confused with what is "begotten?"

What does the word unbegotten mean? Can you show any history of the concept of the word begotten to show a Son from/of a Father that has no beginning? Again you're just stating things so without a reasonable explanation. I prefer truth as giving from above.

There is no way John would use begotten in the manner stated as so.

John 1:18 Greek Text Analysis

If so, that directly conflicts with the biblical notion that God's infinite Word is able to generate finite truths that are of the same Substance as that which belongs to the infinite God. The reduction from an infinite reality to a finite expression of that infinite reality is as simple for God as speaking, via His Word, words that depict who He is. If He could not do this, we would never be able to know HIm.

It's certainly true that the infinite God is "in" the Son. But that does not make the Son any less God, since the God that is in him is also the God who is depicting Himself through the Son.

Again the Father is in the Son, His Spirit without limit, and they are one. As one with the Father how could Jesus NOT be ALL that the Father is?

In regard to Sovereign authority the Father has placed all things in Jesus's hands so only in respect to His own throne is His authority greater than His Son's.

God, singular, did speak to us in these last days by His Son.
In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.

We don't need to reason who the God that spoke to us by Jesus.
Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work

 

[RandyK]

No it's not as in the context He is ALL that the Father He is God. In the context He has always been the Son He is not God. Yes and No.

I cannot understand those sentences? It is a difficult subject, but on this subject precision in description is pretty important.

You're free to believe that but He did not ask for and receive His own spirit from the Father to send to us.

Certainly not as a man did Jesus request his own spirit, whatever that means? Why would Jesus need to request his own human spirit once he already had it? I'm not clear whether you're talking about Jesus' human spirit or the Holy Spirit--two very different things?

You have a hint here FROM HIM
There's only one Divine Spirit not two.
Matt:10:20
for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.

I never said there were two Holy Spirits, but if you're saying that Jesus' human spirit was not God, whereas the Holy Spirit was God, you're wrong. Clearly, the Bible indicates that Man is body, soul, and spirit. In Jesus, his human spirit was not replaced by the Holy Spirit.

A created human spirit is generated as part of creation. The Holy Spirit appears from an ungenerated source to manifest within the generated finite world. That is, He is omnipresent, and yet appears to us as in various locations in space.

Jesus also appeared in a location in space, ie on earth. And yet, he was the Divine Son. He originated from the eternal Word and appeared in time as a human spirit. This is in distinction from the Holy Spirit who by definition is distinct from Jesus while experiencing unity with him at the same time.

The Holy Spirit is, by definition, the appearance of God in time and space apart from His revelation as entities created out of matter. He is generated as God's expression of Himself apart from physical creation and yet appearing as an expression of God Himself within the material universe.

What does the word unbegotten mean? Can you show any history of the concept of the word begotten to show a Son from/of a Father that has no beginning? Again you're just stating things so without a reasonable explanation. I prefer truth as giving from above.

Seriously, "begotten" is a standard description in this whole conversation, historically and presently. God originates from before any expression of Himself in time as we know it. He preexists His own creation by necessity. If He did not preexist it He could not have created it.

So any ideas that God put into effect in the material universe originates from an "unbegotten Creator" who generates realities in time as we know it. It is "generated" or is "begotten."

And the fact Christ was generated in time, or even the Holy Spirit is "generated" as God's existence within our universe, does not mean these expressions must be less than God. They certainly *follow* the unbegotten God, but they can generate pictures of God Himself within our world. Anything expressing God's Person in time is not nullified nor contradicted by the fact of God's origin from before creation, from eternity.

There is no way John would use begotten in the manner stated as so.

John 1:18 Greek Text Analysis

Again the Father is in the Son, His Spirit without limit, and they are one. As one with the Father how could Jesus NOT be ALL that the Father is?

Everything I'm saying is common sense, unless you just don't want to believe the Scriptures. The Scriptures teach that all that is created in our world originates from the eternal God. Every representation of God Himself within our creation, whether Christ, theophanies, or the Holy Spirit, originate from the eternal unbegotten God as Creator and yet present Him in forms generated in our world so that we can see them.

In regard to Sovereign authority the Father has placed all things in Jesus's hands so only in respect to His own throne is His authority greater than His Son's.

The measure of "greatness" is not expressed biblically as higher and lower levels of Godhood. Rather, it expresses the difference between the origins of God's revelation and the result of His revelation of Himself in time. The result, coming to be in time, is always "less" than its infinite origin, just as things in space are smaller than things that encompass all of space.

God, singular, did speak to us in these last days by His Son.
In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.

We don't need to reason who the God that spoke to us by Jesus.
Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work

We both believe God spoke to us in these times via His Son. It was so that we could experience true and genuine reconciliation with God. Reconnecting with God fully and for all eternity required the sacrifice and avenue of God's Son Jesus. But this does not speak to our subject of the Trinity.

 

[RandyK]

"Father into your hands I commit My spirit"

It's clear to me the Son who was, His spirit, was in the body prepared for Him. He did in fact descend and ascend to where He was before. If He had a human spirit and a human body what part of Him was God? What part of Him descended from above if not His own spirit? As the firstborn of God He has His own spirit-not Deity. The Deity in Him is the person of the Father always. They are one as Jesus taught.

God's Word is an idea originating with God. It is different from our "word" or "idea" in that God's ideas can generate all of our material universe as well as images of Himself within the created universe.

So when God generated the Son in the material universe, the entire image of the Son--body, soul, and spirit, as well as his historical experience, expressed God's Person in this form. God was expressed not just in parts of Jesus, but in all of Jesus--body, soul, and human spirit.

You see it as a contradiction to have the infinite God expressing Himself in finite forms, which can be divided into parts. But in reality, God's creative Word used, of necessity, representations within our world to express Himself within those forms, even though they represented something transcendant and infinite.

For example, God can inform us that His presence in our worship is in fact Himself. And He can reveal to us the fact that He is an infinite God, transcending all that we know about Him, and even originating before our universe as the Creator of that universe.

We can understand these things as concepts, even though we cannot fully grrasp anything that is infinite in its full reality. But those concepts can truly and really be understood by us both as conceptualizations and as experiences. We can really and truly know and experience the infinite God--not in His full transcendence, but certainly, within our limited experience.

He's the beginning of the even of resurrection He spoke of and the firstborn from the dead. (first to rise from the dead in a glorified body)

Yes, but being the 1st to resurrect into glory is part of the redemption story. It is not connected to discussion of God's transcendence and immanence.

He's the beginning of the event of the creation of God and the firstborn of all creation.
(first spirit born from the Fathers Spirit who gives birth to all spirits) hence God His Father and His God.

Yes, Jesus was God's "1st Born Son," being that he was the 1st and only man to be born *as God."

God OUR Father. If Jesus's spirit gave birth to my spirit He would be God my Father and my Heavenly Father. He is NOT. He is Christ my Lord. That does not take away from Him that all the fullness of God lives in Him.

Jesus' Deity is not referred to, language-wise, in the same way that the Father's Deity is referred to. And that's because Jesus expresses God in the form of a Man, whereas the Father does not do this--the Father remains uncreated and ungenerated, except that the concept of God as origin and Creator is indeed generated as a concept by His Word.

From your perspective why the need?
Hebrews 1:6

You just state things are so without any reasonable explanation. A foundation of mystery.
He's FROM the Father as a Son but has no beginning. The Son of Man had a human body and a human spirit but was fully God as well.

The Son with respect to His Divine origin in eternity had no beginning. But the *form* of the Son was generated in time since by definition the "Son" is God expressed in the form of a Man.

Yet its clear God from whom all things come, identified as the only true God our Father is unbegotten.
"If the Father has a beginning it could not be by any other being" Jesus is begotten from the Father alone before all things with a beginning.

Jesus was not "begotten" before God conceived of Himself in the form of a man in time. Yet, being God, Jesus originated before his conception in the form of God's Word.

The Son was therefore "from eternity" and yet not in the form of "the Son" from eternity. The creation or generation of thoughts that come to be in our materiial universe are not perfectly synonymous with the eternal God. They issue from the eternal God, can represent God Himself, and yet are not exactly congruous with Him.

Ideas about God and ideas that represent God appear in time and space. But God exists before the things He created, even though He can present forms of Himself within time and space as well.

 

[Randy]

I cannot understand those sentences? It is a difficult subject, but on this subject precision in description is pretty important.

Certainly not as a man did Jesus request his own spirit, whatever that means? Why would Jesus need to request his own human spirit once he already had it? I'm not clear whether you're talking about Jesus' human spirit or the Holy Spirit--two very different things?

I never said there were two Holy Spirits, but if you're saying that Jesus' human spirit was not God, whereas the Holy Spirit was God, you're wrong. Clearly, the Bible indicates that Man is body, soul, and spirit. In Jesus, his human spirit was not replaced by the Holy Spirit.

A created human spirit is generated as part of creation. The Holy Spirit appears from an ungenerated source to manifest within the generated finite world. That is, He is omnipresent, and yet appears to us as in various locations in space.

Jesus also appeared in a location in space, ie on earth. And yet, he was the Divine Son. He originated from the eternal Word and appeared in time as a human spirit. This is in distinction from the Holy Spirit who by definition is distinct from Jesus while experiencing unity with him at the same time.

The Holy Spirit is, by definition, the appearance of God in time and space apart from His revelation as entities created out of matter. He is generated as God's expression of Himself apart from physical creation and yet appearing as an expression of God Himself within the material universe.

Seriously, "begotten" is a standard description in this whole conversation, historically and presently. God originates from before any expression of Himself in time as we know it. He preexists His own creation by necessity. If He did not preexist it He could not have created it.

So any ideas that God put into effect in the material universe originates from an "unbegotten Creator" who generates realities in time as we know it. It is "generated" or is "begotten."

And the fact Christ was generated in time, or even the Holy Spirit is "generated" as God's existence within our universe, does not mean these expressions must be less than God. They certainly *follow* the unbegotten God, but they can generate pictures of God Himself within our world. Anything expressing God's Person in time is not nullified nor contradicted by the fact of God's origin from before creation, from eternity.

Everything I'm saying is common sense, unless you just don't want to believe the Scriptures. The Scriptures teach that all that is created in our world originates from the eternal God. Every representation of God Himself within our creation, whether Christ, theophanies, or the Holy Spirit, originate from the eternal unbegotten God as Creator and yet present Him in forms generated in our world so that we can see them.

The measure of "greatness" is not expressed biblically as higher and lower levels of Godhood. Rather, it expresses the difference between the origins of God's revelation and the result of His revelation of Himself in time. The result, coming to be in time, is always "less" than its infinite origin, just as things in space are smaller than things that encompass all of space.

We both believe God spoke to us in these times via His Son. It was so that we could experience true and genuine reconciliation with God. Reconnecting with God fully and for all eternity required the sacrifice and avenue of God's Son Jesus. But this does not speak to our subject of the Trinity.

I think we will agree to disagree.
I believe in only one true God the Father.
I believe the eternal life found in the Son is the Fathers Spirit without limit. Col 1:19
The Father in the Son. They are one. And in that oneness as Jesus taught He is all that the Father is. The very imprint of the Fathers being. God in that context.

Col 1:19 -free the will of another - not coeternal - a creation of God who is defining Jesus's being.

There is only one Spirit of God and its the Fathers always as from Him all things come and He as Jesus states is the only true God

Jesus would not be asking for and receiving His own spirit from another nor would He call His own spirit "another" advocate.

And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever—

Jesus spoke of this gift as the Fathers promise.
What is that promise? In the last days I will pour out "My" Spirit - The Father doesn't speak of that Spirit as another but calls it His own. Jesus does not.

The Father sends His Spirit in Jesus's name
But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

The church, not the NT in regard to His spirit, states Jesus as the Son of Man had a human spirit. So He had a human body and a human spirit. They state He was fully God as well. What part of Him was God? As I pointed out this is just stating things so without a reasonable explanation. A foundation of Mystery.

We read He has a spirit He calls His own. As a begotten Son of the Father before all things He would have a spirit that is not deity. Again the Deity in Him was and remains the Fathers. Its His Spirit always.The Father in the Son doing His work.

If Jesus had a newly formed human spirit in Mary's womb what part of Him descended from above if not His own spirit?

It's clear to me the Son who was, His spirit, was in the body prepared for Him. He did in fact descend and ascend to where He was before. "Father into your hands I commit My spirit'

He did in fact speak of things He saw and heard in the Fathers presence from His mind not a human mind. The only such eyewitness of God that appeared in flesh.

31The one who comes from above is above all; the one who is from the earth belongs to the earth, and speaks as one from the earth. The one who comes from heaven is above all. 32He testifies to what he has seen and heard, but no one accepts his testimony. 33Whoever has accepted it has certified that God is truthful. 34For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the Spirit without limit. 35The Father loves the Son and has placed everything in his hands. 36Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them.

I hold to this distinction and declaration and read 2 not 3.
yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.


Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

Then I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all that is in them, saying: “To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory and power, for ever and ever!

The Father is on the throne in heaven. He sent His Spirit into the world who testifies to the truth and is Holy.

It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me.

The Spirit speaks what He hears from the mind of the Spirit not as a person who speaks from their own distinct mind. There is no 3rd person witness yet the Spirit bears witness to the truth. You should see the person of the Father as its His Spirit always. That Spirit is the only Spirit that gives birth to spirit as in God our Father. Jesus is not our Heavenly Father as it's not His spirit. God is His Father as well as He is also a child of God. Gods firstborn and He has always been the Son.

But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

Is Jesus God?
He never dies.
Yes, He is all that the Father is.
No, He has always been the Son.

 

[Randy]

God's Word is an idea originating with God. It is different from our "word" or "idea" in that God's ideas can generate all of our material universe as well as images of Himself within the created universe.

Jesus is the Word of the Father and has always been the Son, a living being with His own spirit. There was no Jesus the Son of Man in the beginning with the Father so you wouldn't state In the beginning was Jesus. But the Son has the Fathers nature in Him. Col 1:19. God was the Logos. But that's in Him not His spirit. The Father doesn't have Deity living in Him as He is Deity in Himself. The only true unbegotten God from whom all things come which includes His firstborn child who we now call Christ the Lord.
God has spoken to us in these last days by His Son. The one living in Jesus doing His work as Jesus stated. God created by/through His Son. My reasoning would be as Jesus stated as the Son of Man- the Father/Deity living in Him doing His work

So when God generated the Son in the material universe, the entire image of the Son--body, soul, and spirit, as well as his historical experience, expressed God's Person in this form. God was expressed not just in parts of Jesus, but in all of Jesus--body, soul, and human spirit.

You see it as a contradiction to have the infinite God expressing Himself in finite forms, which can be divided into parts. But in reality, God's creative Word used, of necessity, representations within our world to express Himself within those forms, even though they represented something transcendant and infinite.

For example, God can inform us that His presence in our worship is in fact Himself. And He can reveal to us the fact that He is an infinite God, transcending all that we know about Him, and even originating before our universe as the Creator of that universe.

We can understand these things as concepts, even though we cannot fully grrasp anything that is infinite in its full reality. But those concepts can truly and really be understood by us both as conceptualizations and as experiences. We can really and truly know and experience the infinite God--not in His full transcendence, but certainly, within our limited experience.

Yes, but being the 1st to resurrect into glory is part of the redemption story. It is not connected to discussion of God's transcendence and immanence.

Yes, Jesus was God's "1st Born Son," being that he was the 1st and only man to be born *as God."

Jesus' Deity is not referred to, language-wise, in the same way that the Father's Deity is referred to. And that's because Jesus expresses God in the form of a Man, whereas the Father does not do this--the Father remains uncreated and ungenerated, except that the concept of God as origin and Creator is indeed generated as a concept by His Word.

The Son with respect to His Divine origin in eternity had no beginning. But the *form* of the Son was generated in time since by definition the "Son" is God expressed in the form of a Man.

Jesus was not "begotten" before God conceived of Himself in the form of a man in time. Yet, being God, Jesus originated before his conception in the form of God's Word.

The Son was therefore "from eternity" and yet not in the form of "the Son" from eternity. The creation or generation of thoughts that come to be in our materiial universe are not perfectly synonymous with the eternal God. They issue from the eternal God, can represent God Himself, and yet are not exactly congruous with Him.

Ideas about God and ideas that represent God appear in time and space. But God exists before the things He created, even though He can present forms of Himself within time and space as well.

 

[Free]

For some reason Trinitarian translations omit the complete verse of John 3:13.
Probably because they don’t understand it. Just like Nicodemus.
Clueless teachers.

So, you continue to dodge. To be expected, but not a good look, especially when it seems you don't understand the verse and can't account for what it plainly states.

Jhn 3:13 - And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down fromheaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

Some translations omit “the son of man who is in heaven” even though there is no valid reason to do so.

This suggests that you likely haven't studied the issue and seem to not understand the translation process and issues that arise. Some translations omit it because it is not in every manuscript; it's all about the manuscript evidence. So, yes, there is a valid reason to omit it.

If anything, the alteration of the text is the omission of it.

Based on what, exactly?

It is most reasonable to suggest that the omission of the text is because it is something which is hard to understand.

No, not really.

It would have been something hard for Nicodemus to understand because Nicodemus struggled to understand earthly things, and this was a heavenly thing Jesus spoke of.

I agree.

Jesus is telling Nicodemus that while he is standing there speaking with Nicodemus he is also in heaven at the same time.

Yes, he would have been saying that. And what would that suggest? The verse can only be understood as showing the full deity of Christ, even more so with the omitted phrase. You would have done well to just ignore it and especially not to argue that that is how it should be.

But Jesus was not in heaven at that time. He would not ascend to the Father in heaven until after his resurrection.

So, when Jesus (supposedly) says, "even the Son of man which is in heaven," in the present tense, you want to make it say something about the future?

Do you see what you did here? You are again ignoring a plain meaning of the text. On the one hand, you charge that some Trinitarian translations omit the phrase because it might be "something which is hard to understand." On the other hand, you take what is plainly stated and twist it into something else that makes no sense of the context. It is indeed hard to understand for those who deny the plain meaning of it and many other verses which clearly show that Jesus is truly God in human flesh, having preexisted with the Father as the Son and Word.

Could Jesus, or rather the Son, have actually been, in some sense, in heaven at the same time? Yes.

Joh 10:38 but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.” (ESV)

Joh 14:10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works.
Joh 14:11 Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves. (ESV)

Yet, the Father was in heaven.

Eph 2:4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us,
Eph 2:5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved—
Eph 2:6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, (ESV)

In some sense, perhaps the same or a similiar sense, believers are "in Christ" and are "seated . . . with him in the heavenly places."

Mat 18:20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.” (ESV)

This speaks of omnipresence, which is an attribute of God alone.

So, far from creating a difficulty for Trinitarians, the removed phrase in John 3:13 actually makes the case stronger.

Therefore, in order to correctly understand what Jesus says, it must be realized that it was the Father who came down from heaven by His Spirit

Where is this ever stated? Where is it ever stated that the Father came down from heaven in any form?

Mat 3:16 And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him;
Mat 3:17 and behold, a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.” (ESV)

The Father is in heaven and the Spirit descends like a dove onto the Son.

which was given to the son and which enabled the son to speak God’s words, teach His doctrines and do His works.
Which is what Jesus tells us everywhere throughout the N.T.

Throughout the NT, as I've shown, Jesus unequivocally claims to have come down from heaven, to have preexisted with the Father prior to all creation. That is why John, Paul, and the writer of Hebrews repeat the very same claim.

 

[RandyK]

I think we will agree to disagree.
I believe in only one true God the Father.
I believe the eternal life found in the Son is the Fathers Spirit without limit. Col 1:19
The Father in the Son. They are one. And in that oneness as Jesus taught He is all that the Father is. The very imprint of the Fathers being. God in that context.

Col 1:19 -free the will of another - not coeternal - a creation of God who is defining Jesus's being.

There is only one Spirit of God and its the Fathers always as from Him all things come and He as Jesus states is the only true God

Jesus would not be asking for and receiving His own spirit from another nor would He call His own spirit "another" advocate.

And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever—

Jesus spoke of this gift as the Fathers promise.
What is that promise? In the last days I will pour out "My" Spirit - The Father doesn't speak of that Spirit as another but calls it His own. Jesus does not.

The Father sends His Spirit in Jesus's name
But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

The church, not the NT in regard to His spirit, states Jesus as the Son of Man had a human spirit. So He had a human body and a human spirit. They state He was fully God as well. What part of Him was God? As I pointed out this is just stating things so without a reasonable explanation. A foundation of Mystery.

We read He has a spirit He calls His own. As a begotten Son of the Father before all things He would have a spirit that is not deity. Again the Deity in Him was and remains the Fathers. Its His Spirit always.The Father in the Son doing His work.

If Jesus had a newly formed human spirit in Mary's womb what part of Him descended from above if not His own spirit?

It's clear to me the Son who was, His spirit, was in the body prepared for Him. He did in fact descend and ascend to where He was before. "Father into your hands I commit My spirit'

He did in fact speak of things He saw and heard in the Fathers presence from His mind not a human mind. The only such eyewitness of God that appeared in flesh.

31The one who comes from above is above all; the one who is from the earth belongs to the earth, and speaks as one from the earth. The one who comes from heaven is above all. 32He testifies to what he has seen and heard, but no one accepts his testimony. 33Whoever has accepted it has certified that God is truthful. 34For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the Spirit without limit. 35The Father loves the Son and has placed everything in his hands. 36Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them.

I hold to this distinction and declaration and read 2 not 3.
yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.


Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

Then I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all that is in them, saying: “To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory and power, for ever and ever!

The Father is on the throne in heaven. He sent His Spirit into the world who testifies to the truth and is Holy.

It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me.

The Spirit speaks what He hears from the mind of the Spirit not as a person who speaks from their own distinct mind. There is no 3rd person witness yet the Spirit bears witness to the truth. You should see the person of the Father as its His Spirit always. That Spirit is the only Spirit that gives birth to spirit as in God our Father. Jesus is not our Heavenly Father as it's not His spirit. God is His Father as well as He is also a child of God. Gods firstborn and He has always been the Son.

But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

Is Jesus God?
He never dies.
Yes, He is all that the Father is.
No, He has always been the Son.

I guess we are not seeing eye to eye, just talking past each other. You are distinguishing between the Persons of the Trinity, and in so doing stating that Jesus' human spirit is not a Divine Spirit.

You are failing to distinguish between God being a transcendent spirit and the role of the Holy Spirit in the life of a believer. The Holy Spirit enters into time and space on our behalf, to aid in our redemption, whereas stating that the Father is spirit is simply stating what substance He consists of, with no concern about the role His transcendent Spirit can play within our time and space.

To say that Jesus' human spirit is limited and cannot be associated with God's transcendent Spirit is an error and a heresy. But I believe you do not mean to act in opposition to Christ, and that matters. You just can't recognize that there is any association between a transcendent Spirit and a finite human spirit.

But as I understand it, this is precisely what the Bible is advocating for, that the transcendent, infinite God can express His Person as a limited, finite human person in Jesus. That is, his human spirit, human body, and human experience are all intended to be expressive of Deity, communicated in such a way that limited creatures like us can relate to it, understand it, and benefit from it.

God's Word is so powerful, so infinite, that what God expresses in human language is equal to its origin in an omnipotent, heavenly God. When we hear God say, "This is my beloved Son," it comes to be, for us, equal to God's voice from heaven.

When we see Jesus we see God in human form. We certainly do not see all of God. We do not see just a "piece" of God. But what we see is all God in a kind of "compressed" finite form.

I don't think you have bad motives here. But if your language if too flawed, people with bad motives will pick it up and run with it. It may indicate Jesus is God to you, but to them, saying Jesus' "human spirit" is not God will become an excuse for them to see Jesus as an "example," and not as a "Divine Savior."

Otherwise, the human spirit of Jesus is not God, and you are contradicting yourself to say he is God if you deny that his human spirit is God, as well. In effect, you're either confused or rebellious.

 

[RandyK]

Jesus is the Word of the Father and has always been the Son, a living being with His own spirit.

This is strange to me. You say that Jesus' human spirit is not God. And yet you say his spirit is from eternity? If his spirit is from eternity, that spirit must be Divine. If you say his *human* spirit is from eternity, then you contradict the Scriptures that indicate God created humans in time, and not from all eternity.

So the Son as a Divine Person certain preexixted the world. John said he was "with God" from eternity, and "was God" from eternity. So there is an eternal relationship between God and His Word, the latter of which became known as the Son.

There was no Jesus the Son of Man in the beginning with the Father so you wouldn't state In the beginning was Jesus. But the Son has the Fathers nature in Him. Col 1:19. God was the Logos. But that's in Him not His spirit. The Father doesn't have Deity living in Him as He is Deity in Himself. The only true unbegotten God from whom all things come which includes His firstborn child who we now call Christ the Lord.
God has spoken to us in these last days by His Son. The one living in Jesus doing His work as Jesus stated. God created by/through His Son. My reasoning would be as Jesus stated as the Son of Man- the Father/Deity living in Him doing His work

 

[RandyK]

Jesus is the Word of the Father and has always been the Son, a living being with His own spirit. There was no Jesus the Son of Man in the beginning with the Father so you wouldn't state In the beginning was Jesus. But the Son has the Fathers nature in Him. Col 1:19. God was the Logos. But that's in Him not His spirit. The Father doesn't have Deity living in Him as He is Deity in Himself. The only true unbegotten God from whom all things come which includes His firstborn child who we now call Christ the Lord.
God has spoken to us in these last days by His Son. The one living in Jesus doing His work as Jesus stated. God created by/through His Son. My reasoning would be as Jesus stated as the Son of Man- the Father/Deity living in Him doing His work

Sorry, I got interrupted while I was responding earlier, and just sent my response without editting. Anyway, you seem to be saying here that Jesus was two people, which you call "two natures." The human side was not from the beginning, was not God. The Divine side was an independent spirit of some kind that was from the beginning and was God.

So you have, essentially, two Jesuses, one human and one Divine. And dividing up a single human person into two people is "off." It doesn't make sense. It is just a conjuration or rationalization meant to meet the biblical test of what was said while maintaining your own independent sense of what it means.

It is true that Jesus had two natures, one Divine and one human. But it was all resident in a single person, indicating that the human spirit of Jesus was both human and Divine. Both natures were emanated, or generated, from eternity. Both were Divine. The Divine Spirit came to be in the form of a Divine Man, a Divine Word expressing God in that form.

How can a strictly human person emanate from eternity, you ask? Well, this is the essence of what Divine revelation, or the Word, can do. It originates with God in eternity and is generated in time, still consistent with the Divine Person from which it comes, or emanates.

The words we hear the Father say here and now about His Son is the Word, or revelation, that is being generated from eternity, and remains completely consistent with God's eternal Word and God's eternal Being. It is just His transcendent Being being expressed in time.

All this can become gibberish if you don't care to understand this simple reality, that God spoke out of eternity and into time without stopping from being who He was and the fact He was really saying it. If you can understand that, you won't have any trouble with seeing Jesus' human spirit as being *from* eternity, if only being generated within time.