Dual Nature of Christ

[NickHassan]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 26 2006,23:56)

Hi W, ETERNAL is not necessarily a retrospective term. If it was… then when we are given eternal life, we must have already have had it.

Hi W,
1Jn 2
“25And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life. “
Eternal life for us is a PROMISE, to do with our future.
It starts now.
So how can you say it proves Christ has had no beginning when ETERNAL is applied to him?

[NickHassan]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 27 2006,01:52)

Quote So do we need to be saved twice? Do we need two saviours? Nonsense. NH Exactly my point, why would God need another Saviour. So according to Hsa 13:4 Yet I [am] the LORD thy God from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no god but me: for [there is] no saviour beside me.” and 1tim 1 ”  1Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope;” Do you have two Saviors?

Hi W,
Do you really think the Son of God works on his own initiative and saves us outside of the will and authorty of His Father?

If so you have never grasped the unity between the Father and the Son.

[music4two]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 27 2006,02:42)

Hi m42, We test doctrines, not people. We test all things. We hope you are open enough to walk with us for longer. But those who have been teachers for thirty years often find it hard to reappraise their beliefs even though we must do so to make sure we continue please the Master in whose name we work.

Nick,
I am in a constant state of examining my beliefs. I think it presumptious of you to think I am not. My decission is based on the idea that I do not believe debating doctrine (as defined in today's Christianity) is a worthwhile venture. Doctrine today, and as seems to be the type on this board, is more akin to intelectual mental exercise rather then matters of the heart and wisdom. People or so tied up in small matters of intelectual knowledge, they miss the entire concept of common sence. They are so bent on proving their pet doctrine is scriptural they forget the most important proof. That proof being the functionality of the teaching.

Dozens of scriptures describe Jesus as fully human. There is no clear scripture that define Jesus as dual natured 100% God and 100% man. MORE THEN THAT – If Jesus is different in nature then the rest of humanity then He is not human. Our single human nature is what makes up our being.This being true He can never be an example for us. Without Jesus as an example to follow all of the plan of God is foolishness and unfare.  Will not the judge of all the earth do what is right? For YHWH to judge us in comparison of a non human with a divine nature would not be within God's character.

The only fruitfull way to discuss these matters is to come from a purely funtional standpoint. The entire purpose of teaching is to make us more like Christ. Without that function it is only philosophy and intelectual chatter.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote

Hi W, Do you really think the Son of God works on his own initiative and saves us outside of the will and authorty of His Father? If so you have never grasped the unity between the Father and the Son.

NH

No because that is impossible. They are of the same Godhead!

Blessings

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote

Hi W, 1Jn 2 “25And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life. “ Eternal life for us is a PROMISE, to do with our future. It starts now. So how can you say it proves Christ has had no beginning when ETERNAL is applied to him?

NH

You really like closing your eyes and ears to the truth NH.

[NickHassan]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 27 2006,16:03)

Quote Hi W, Do you really think the Son of God works on his own initiative and saves us outside of the will and authorty of His Father? If so you have never grasped the unity between the Father and the Son. NH No because that is impossible. They are of the same Godhead! Blessings

Hi w,
What is a GODHEAD?

[NickHassan]

Quote (music4two @ Nov. 27 2006,15:52)

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 27 2006,02:42) Hi m42, We test doctrines, not people. We test all things. We hope you are open enough to walk with us for longer. But those who have been teachers for thirty years often find it hard to reappraise their beliefs even though we must do so to make sure we continue please the Master in whose name we work. Nick, I am in a constant state of examining my beliefs. I think it presumptious of you to think I am not. My decission is based on the idea that I do not believe debating doctrine (as defined in today's Christianity) is a worthwhile venture. Doctrine today, and as seems to be the type on this board, is more akin to intelectual mental exercise rather then matters of the heart and wisdom. People or so tied up in small matters of intelectual knowledge, they miss the entire concept of common sence. They are so bent on proving their pet doctrine is scriptural they forget the most important proof. That proof being the functionality of the teaching. Dozens of scriptures describe Jesus as fully human. There is no clear scripture that define Jesus as dual natured 100% God and 100% man. MORE THEN THAT – If Jesus is different in nature then the rest of humanity then He is not human. Our single human nature is what makes up our being.This being true He can never be an example for us. Without Jesus as an example to follow all of the plan of God is foolishness and unfare.  Will not the judge of all the earth do what is right? For YHWH to judge us in comparison of a non human with a divine nature would not be within God's character. The only fruitfull way to discuss these matters is to come from a purely funtional standpoint. The entire purpose of teaching is to make us more like Christ. Without that function it is only philosophy and intelectual chatter.

Hi m42,
Scripture speaks of man in two ways;

As outer man, flesh
“remember man that thou art dust..”
and as inner man.
“…and man became a living being”

So Christ too is outer and inner man if he is like to us.

He can be spoken of according to the flesh
or according to the spirit.

As outer man, the Son of man, his flesh was not superior.

Is 53
“1Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?

2For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.

3He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.”

As inner man he was the glorious vessel for God Himself, the monogenes Son of God, seen only by those with spiritual eyes.
But he was not that which indwelled him. He himself was not our God but the Son of God.

Our inner man vessel is of the same nature but of earthenware stock. Our vessels too can hold the great treasure. We can follow him.

[music4two]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 27 2006,19:36)

Quote (music4two @ Nov. 27 2006,15:52) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 27 2006,02:42) Hi m42, We test doctrines, not people. We test all things. We hope you are open enough to walk with us for longer. But those who have been teachers for thirty years often find it hard to reappraise their beliefs even though we must do so to make sure we continue please the Master in whose name we work. Nick, I am in a constant state of examining my beliefs. I think it presumptious of you to think I am not. My decission is based on the idea that I do not believe debating doctrine (as defined in today's Christianity) is a worthwhile venture. Doctrine today, and as seems to be the type on this board, is more akin to intelectual mental exercise rather then matters of the heart and wisdom. People or so tied up in small matters of intelectual knowledge, they miss the entire concept of common sence. They are so bent on proving their pet doctrine is scriptural they forget the most important proof. That proof being the functionality of the teaching. Dozens of scriptures describe Jesus as fully human. There is no clear scripture that define Jesus as dual natured 100% God and 100% man. MORE THEN THAT – If Jesus is different in nature then the rest of humanity then He is not human. Our single human nature is what makes up our being.This being true He can never be an example for us. Without Jesus as an example to follow all of the plan of God is foolishness and unfare.  Will not the judge of all the earth do what is right? For YHWH to judge us in comparison of a non human with a divine nature would not be within God's character. The only fruitfull way to discuss these matters is to come from a purely funtional standpoint. The entire purpose of teaching is to make us more like Christ. Without that function it is only philosophy and intelectual chatter. Hi m42, Scripture speaks of man in two ways; As outer man, flesh “remember man that thou art dust..” and as inner man. “…and man became a living being” So Christ too is outer and inner man if he is like to us. He can be spoken of according to the flesh or according to the spirit. As outer man, the Son of man, his flesh was not superior. Is 53 “1Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed? 2For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. 3He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.” As inner man he was the glorious vessel for God Himself, the monogenes Son of God, seen only by those with spiritual eyes. But he was not that which indwelled him. He himself was not our God but the Son of God. Our inner man vessel is of the same nature but of earthenware stock. Our vessels too can hold the great treasure. We can follow him.

It seems you think of the flesh as many do in terms of dualism. This dualism philosophy denotes that things of the material physical realm are somehow of lesser value or evil.

Dualism is a Greek Philosophy that takes gnosticim even farther. It teaches there are two realms, one evil and one holy. Dualists believe that only the transcendental spiritual realm of God like forces is holy. The lower natural earthly realm was considered evil and nothing good could be of that world.

When Christianity spread to the Greek thinking world it was heavily influenced by their philosophies. Many students of Greek philosophy were being saved and as such brought their concepts into the church. As is often the case some so called “scholars”, from this period forward, began to interpret scripture with preconceived ideas of a gnostic or dualistic world. From gnosticim came the concept of Jesus being a separate God from the God of the Old Testament. From Dualism came the concept that Jesus could never be fully of the natural realm or fully human. His humanity needed to be augmented in some way to avoid him being of the evil natural realm.

Gnosticism is strongly related to Dualism. A one-sentence description of Gnosticism is; A religion that differentiates the evil god of this world (who is identified with the God of the Old Testament) from a higher more abstract God revealed by Jesus Christ, a religion that regards this world as the creation of a series of evil archons/powers who wish to keep the human soul trapped in an evil physical body. Gnostics conjured up the idea that Christ was a spiritual being in a physical shell in order to avoid the concept of him having an “Evil Physical Body of the “Evil physical realm”.

Dualism was contrary to Hebrew belief and culture. Hebrews thought of all creation as part of the kingdom of God. Because God was infinite they believed that God was an integral part of the physical realm and, in fact, revealed himself thru the natural world. To the Hebrews everything in the natural realm was in the presence of God and He overshadowed everyhing there.

When the Hebrews spoke of the flesh, they were speaking of the natural, physical, material realm in which we live. The Hebrews did not see the flesh as evil but as part of he kingdom of God even as the spiritual realm. They saw no separation into good or bad concerning the spiritual realm and the physical natural realm. When they spoke of something coming in the flesh, they were speaking of it being of the same nature as the rest of the natural realm.  It’s nature being one of the natural, physical, material, earthly realm. It was later that the world of Dualism redefined “flesh”.

Paul often speaks of the flesh. In Philippians 1 verses 19 through 28, we see Paul again using the term “flesh” refering to his life/death in the material/physical realm. this was not an admonition concerning good or bad behaviour, but a simple statement concerning his presence in the “flesh” compared to his presence with Christ after death.

19  for I know that this will turn out for my deliverance through your prayers and the provision of the Spirit of Jesus Christ,

 20  according to my earnest expectation and hope, that I will not be put to shame in anything, but that with all boldness, Christ will even now, as always, be exalted in my body, whether by life or by death.

 21  For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain.

 22  But if I am to live on in the flesh, this will mean fruitful labor for me; and I do not know which to choose.

 23  But I am hard-pressed from both directions, having the desire to depart and be with Christ, for that is very much better;

 24  yet to remain on in the flesh is more necessary for your sake.

 25  Convinced of this, I know that I will remain and continue with you all for your progress and joy in the faith,

 26  so that your proud confidence in me may abound in Christ Jesus through my coming to you again.  

Both Paul and John speak very strongly about Christ coming according to the flesh and being in the flesh.

Gnosticism and dualism would deny Jesus coming in th
e natural flesh because of their philosophy that the natural, physical realm is evil. They qualify his nature to avoid the conclusion that Jesus could be of the lower evil realm. They teach a mystical, spiritual Jesus wrapped in a shell of flesh or 100% God and 100% man unlike the rest of humanity.

If one reads scripture with a dualistic mindset, they cannot see God's creation as good. They must change Jesus from fully human to some hybrid creature to avoid his natural human nature

[NickHassan]

Hi m42,
Paul told us the flesh was the source of sin via our natural bodies and is condemned. It cannot inherit eternal life and as a tent must be shed or covered over by the new heavenly Body.

There is a god of this world and Adam and Eve submitted to him leading to this situation. Outer man cannot be saved only inner man.

Rom 7
“5For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.

6But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

7What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

8But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.

9For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

10And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

11For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

12Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

13Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

14For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

15For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.

16If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.

17Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

18For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

19For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

20Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

21I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.

22For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:

23But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.

24O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

25I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.”

[music4two]

In the world, past and present, there are two major types of cultures; the Hebrew (or eastern) culture and the Greek (or western) culture. Both of these cultures view their surroundings, lives, and purpose in ways which would seem foreign to the other. With the exception of a few Bedouin nomadic tribes living in the Near East today, the ancient Hebrew culture has disappeared.

What happened to this ancient Hebrew thought and culture? Around 800 BCE, a new culture arose to the north. This new culture began to view the world very much differently than the Hebrews. This culture was the Greeks. Around 200 BCE the Greeks began to move south causing a coming together of the Greek and Hebrew culture. This was a very tumultuous time as the two vastly different cultures collided. Over the following 400 years the battle raged until finally the Greek culture won and virtually eliminated all trace of the ancient Hebrew culture. The Greek culture then in turn influenced all following cultures including the Roman and European cultures, our own American culture and even the modern Hebrew culture in Israel today.

As 20th Century Americans with a strong Greek thought influence, we read the Hebrew Bible as if a 20th Century American had written it. In order to understand the ancient Hebrew culture in which the Tenack was written in, we must examine some of the differences between Hebrew and Greek thought.

Abstract vs. concrete thought

Greek thought views the world through the mind (abstract thought). Ancient Hebrew thought views the world through the senses (concrete thought).

Concrete thought is the expression of concepts and ideas in ways that can be seen, touched, smelled, tasted and/or heard. All five of the senses are used when speaking and hearing and writing and reading the Hebrew language. An example of this can be found in Psalms 1:3; “He is like a tree planted by streams of water, which yields its fruit in season, and whose leaf does not wither”. In this passage we have concrete words expressing abstract thoughts, such as a tree (one who is upright, righteous), streams of water (grace), fruit (good character) and a unwithered leaf (prosperity).

Abstract thought is the expression of concepts and ideas in ways that can not be seen, touched, smelled, tasted or heard. Hebrew never uses abstract thought as English does. Examples of Abstract thought can be found in Psalms 103:8; “The LORD is compassionate and gracious, Slow to anger, abounding in love”. As you noticed I said that Hebrew uses concrete and not abstract thoughts, but here we have such abstract concepts as compassionate, gracious, anger, and love in a Hebrew passage. Actually these are abstract English words translating the original Hebrew concrete words. The translators often translate this way because the original Hebrew makes no sense when literally translated into English.

Let us take one of the abstract words above to demonstrate how this works. Anger, an abstract word, is actually the Hebrew word  (awph) which literally means “nose”, a concrete word. When one is very angry, he begins to breath hard and the nostrils begin to flare. A Hebrew sees anger as “the flaring of the nose (nostrils)”. If the translator literally translated the above passage “slow to nose”, it would make no sense to the English reader, so  a nose, is translated to “anger” in this passage.

Appearance vs. Functional Description

Greek thought describes objects in relation to its appearance. Hebrew thought describes objects in relation to its function.

A deer and an oak are two very different objects and we would never describe them in the same way with our Greek form of descriptions. The Hebrew word for both of these objects is  (ayil) because the functional description of these two objects are identical to the ancient Hebrews, therefore, the same Hebrew word is used for both. The Hebraic definition of  is “a strong leader”.

A deer stag is one of the most powerful animals of the forest and is seen as “a strong leader” among the other animals of the forest. Also the oak tree's wood is very hard compared to other trees such as the pine which is soft and is seen as a “strong leader” among the trees of the forest.

Notice the two different translations of the Hebrew word  in Psalms 29.9. The NASB and KJV translates it as “The voice of the LORD makes the deer to calve” while the NIV translates it as “The voice of the LORD twists the oaks”. The literal translation of this verse in Hebrew thought would be; “The voice of the LORD makes the strong leaders turn”.

When translating the Hebrew into English, the translator must give a Greek description to this word which is why we have two different ways of translating this verse. This same word is also translated as a “ruler” in 2 Kings 24.15, who is a man who is a strong leader.

Another example of Greek thought would be the following description of a common pencil: “it is yellow and about 8 inches long”. A Hebrew description of the pencil would be related to its function such as “I write words with it”. Notice that the Hebrew description uses the verb “write” while the Greek description uses the adjectives “yellow” and “long”. Because of Hebrew's form of functional descriptions, verbs are used much more frequently then adjectives.

Impersonal vs. Personal Description

The Greek culture describes objects in relation to the object itself. The Hebrew culture describes objects in relation to the Hebrew himself.

As in the example above of the pencil, the Greek description portrays the pencil's relationship to itself by using the word “is”. The Hebrew describes the pencil in relation to himself by saying “I write”. Because Hebrew does not describe objects in relation to itself, the Hebrew vocabulary does not have the word “is”.

A Greek description of God would be “God is love” which describes God in relation to God. A Hebrew description would be “God loves me” describing God in relationship to myself.

Passive vs. Active Nouns

Greek nouns are words which refer to a person, place or thing. Hebrew nouns refer to the action of a person place or thing.

The Hebrews are active people and their vocabulary reflects this lifestyle. The Greek culture recognizes the words such as a knee and a gift as nouns which by themselves impart no action. But in the Hebrew vocabulary the nouns come from the same root word  (BRK) because they are related, not in appearance, but in action. The Hebrew word for knee is  (berak) and literally means “the part of the body that bends”. The Hebrew word for a gift is  (berakah), meaning “what is brought with a bent knee”. The verb from the root word is  (barak), meaning “to bend the knee”. As you can see, both Hebrew verbs and nouns have action associated with them where the Greek nouns do not.

Even the Hebrew nouns for father and mother are descriptive of action. The Hebrew word for father is  (av) and literally means “the one who gives strength to the family” and mother  (em) means “the one that binds the family together”.
————————————————————————
Copyright © 2006
Ancient Hebrew Research Center

[NickHassan]

Hi m42,
Thanks.
And what are you saying in this context?

[music4two]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 28 2006,04:23)

Hi m42, Thanks. And what are you saying in this context?

My post was just by example of showing that the way in which the Hebrew writers of the Bible thought was far different then those of us raised in our Greek thinking cultures.

For example in your post to me earlier you said (and I quote)
“Hi m42,
Scripture speaks of man in two ways;
As outer man, flesh
“remember man that thou art dust..”
and as inner man.
“…and man became a living being”
So Christ too is outer and inner man if he is like to us.
He can be spoken of according to the flesh
or according to the spirit.
As outer man, the Son of man, his flesh was not superior.”

This was in response to my rebuttle of a dual nature in man. The only defense I can see you making (wrong as it may be) is to say that the “flesh” has the ability to make decissions regardless of the will or soul of the man.

In Romans Paul explains what he means by flesh
Romans 7
    5When we were living in the flesh (mere physical lives), the sinful passions that were awakened and aroused up by [what] the Law [makes sin] were constantly operating in our natural powers (in our bodily organs, in the sensitive appetites and wills of the flesh), so that we bore fruit for death.

In otherwords, while we live our natural earthly lives we are constantly being tempted by those things which tickle the sences.

Romans 7
    23But I discern in my bodily members [in the sensitive appetites and wills of the flesh] a different law (rule of action) at war against the law of my mind (my reason) and making me a prisoner to the law of sin that dwells in my bodily organs [in the sensitive appetites and wills of the flesh].

    24O unhappy and pitiable and wretched man that I am! Who will release and deliver me from [the shackles of] this body of death?

    25O thank God! [He will!] through Jesus Christ (the Anointed One) our Lord! So then indeed I, of myself with the mind and heart, serve the Law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.

Romans 8
 1THEREFORE, [there is] now no condemnation (no adjudging guilty of wrong) for those who are in Christ Jesus, who live [and] walk not after the dictates of the flesh, but after the dictates of the Spirit.

    2For the law of the Spirit of life [which is] in Christ Jesus [the law of our new being] has freed me from the law of sin and of death.

    3For God has done what the Law could not do, [its power] being weakened by the flesh [the entire nature of man without the Holy Spirit]. Sending His own Son in the guise of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, [God] condemned sin in the flesh [subdued, overcame, deprived it of its power over all who accept that sacrifice],

    4So that the righteous and just requirement of the Law might be fully met in us who live and move not in the ways of the flesh but in the ways of the Spirit [our lives governed not by the standards and according to the dictates of the flesh, but controlled by the Holy Spirit]. 

5For those who are according to the flesh and are controlled by its unholy desires set their minds on and [d]pursue those things which gratify the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit and are controlled by the desires of the Spirit set their minds on and seek those things which gratify the [Holy] Spirit.

    6Now the mind of the flesh [which is sense and reason without the Holy Spirit] is death [death that [f]comprises all the miseries arising from sin, both here and hereafter]. But the mind of the [Holy] Spirit is life and [soul] peace [both now and forever].

    8So then those who are living the life of the flesh [catering to the appetites and impulses of their carnal nature] cannot please or satisfy God, or be acceptable to Him.

    9But you are not living the life of the flesh, you are living the life of the Spirit, if the [Holy] Spirit of God [really] dwells within you [directs and controls you]. But if anyone does not possess the [Holy] Spirit of Christ, he is none of His [he does not belong to Christ, is not truly a child of God].

    10But if Christ lives in you, [then although] your [natural] body is dead by reason of sin and guilt, the spirit is alive because of [the] righteousness [that He imputes to you].

    11And if the Spirit of Him Who raised up Jesus from the dead dwells in you, [then] He Who raised up Christ Jesus from the dead will also restore to life your mortal (short-lived, perishable) bodies through His Spirit Who dwells in you.

    12So then, brethren, we are debtors, but not to the flesh [we are not obligated to our carnal nature], to live [a life ruled by the standards set up by the dictates] of the flesh.

    13For if you live according to [the dictates of] the flesh, you will surely die. But if through the power of the [Holy] Spirit you are [habitually] putting to death (making extinct, deadening) the [evil] deeds prompted by the body, you shall [really and genuinely] live forever.

    14For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.

 Nowhere in the scriptures does Paul teach a seperate animation of the flesh with it’s own dicission making capabilirty. Rather he teaches that man is tempted thru the inticements that effect our natural bodies and our apptites outside of God.
Paul teaches that there are two ways in which to overcome those appitites. When we die those influinces no longer have any effect on us. This is simple enough to understand.  The other is to overcome those appitites thru the Holy Spirit dwelling in us and resisting the temptations.

The flesh itself is not evil. It is only the means by which we are tested in a natural realm. If we did not have bodies comprised in conjunction with the physical realm we would not be effected by it. This is actually a blessing. Without temptation, without testing, we could never overcome let alone be perfected. If we choose to live according to the temptations that come our way our bodies (as well as our souls) are doomed to death.

If we choose to live according to the Spirit and the wisdom taught us by our Father. If we choose to follow the example of our brother Jesus Christ, our mortal bodies are given new life as well as our eternal souls. This is not just in heaven but here on this Earth.

[NickHassan]

Hi m42,
You say
“If we choose to live according to the Spirit and the wisdom taught us by our Father. If we choose to follow the example of our brother Jesus Christ, our mortal bodies are given new life as well as our eternal souls. This is not just in heaven but here on this Earth. “

So do we not first have seek the kingdom and that righteousness and to be reborn of water and the Spirit to be enabled to follow Jesus?

[Cult Buster]

Sscott.
Re. your 5 questions.

Q1. Your comments. God is a Trinity..without one member of the Trinity you do not have God.

There are a number of models of the “trinity” being used in Christianity today and your question I assume deals with the Catholic trinity.

In a nutshell the Catholics teach that originally there was God the Father and that He copulated with Himself to produce God the Son, and then out of them both came the Holy Spirit. A three in one, one in three blend. This is unbiblical rubbish borrowed from paganism. No wonder it does not provide answers to your questions.

The word trinity is not found in scripture and I prefer not to use it. In the old testament we have the word “Elohiym” meaning God in the plurality or Gods. The new testament uses words like Godhead and Deity. (Theos Theios, Theiotes,)

The Bible Godhead consist of The Father, Son and the Holy Ghost. Each is a separate divine Person and each the Eternal God. The new testament Greek word for God “Theos”  sometime refers individually to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit: and at other times refers to the Godhead. We must read scripture in its context to know Who it refers to.

Mat 28:19  Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: /I]

Your question

So when Jesus cries out “My God My God why have you forsaken me”….how is it possible that God forsook God?

With the Catholic “trinity” it does not make sense, but with the Bible Godhead  then it makes perfect sense. At the cross God withdrew His presence from Christ because of our sins.

2Co 5:21  For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

This was the first time in eternity that Christ was separated from God. This started in Gethsemane; hence His suffering.

Isa 59:2  But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.

It was our  sins placed on the spotless Lamb of God that separated Christ from God.

Q2.  Your comments

If Jesus was 100% God and 100% man how could He sin? God cannot be tempted to sin. Jesus had to have the possibility of sinning or else he could not be a faithful High Priest able to sympathize with our weakness.

There has on this forum been much confusion between Christ’s mission or “office” as Messiah and that of His substance which is The Eternal God. With respect to Matt Slick I’d rather follow what the Bible teaches.

When Christ was to leave heaven and was to take the form of a man He did not cease to be God. He simply put aside His own divine power and was dependent on God for power. This makes Him our example to follow because we too are to depend totally on God.

Heb 2:14  Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

He had to overcome Satan while living as a man. Christ did not come to earth to show what a God can do, but what  man can do when he depends on God for power. He succeeded where Adam failed.

Heb 2:16  For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
Heb 2:17  Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
Heb 2:18  For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

Heb 2:9  But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

A human body was fashioned for Christ. A body which had sinful propensities just like ours. A body less than what Adam had,  weakened by the curse of sin.

Rom 8:3  For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

Christ condemned sin in the flesh. He resisted sin. Don’t forget that He laid aside His divine power and did not use it for His own benefit, overcoming temptation relying on God for power. We too can resist temptation if we rely on God for power. Christ was our example.

Heb 2:17  Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
Heb 2:18  For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

Luk 4:2  (Jesus)  Being forty days tempted of the devil.
Luk 4:12  And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

Who was being tempted here? Jesus;    The Lord thy God.

1Ti 3:16  And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

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

Q.3 Your comments

There are many instances in the scripture where Jesus calls the Father..His God and says the Father is greater than I. I always thought this was in reference to Jesus being a Man on earth. But you also have accounts of Jesus calling the Father His God after the resurection. He calls the Father His God when speaking to Mary and again in Revelations. (Rev 3:12) Why is Jesus still calling the Father His God? There is also a passage that says the head of Jesus is God. (1 Cor 11:3)

In many of these instances Jesus was encumbered with humanity or within the context of Him being the  Messiah.  Don’t forget that Christ is still ministering for us right now as our High Priest in the heavenly sanctuary.  So His mission is not yet over.

Even within the Godhead each Divine Person recognise and have reverence for the other as God.

Heb 1:8  But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

Q.4 Your comments

In John 5:26 Jesus says:
26 For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself,

This is also in the context of Christ mission as Messiah. Within the Godhead a plan was made for the salvation of man. It is evident that each divine  Person within the Godhead takes on a different office or role. It is a pity that we too cannot learn to work together and to serve each other.

Q.5 Your comments

John 6:58 says:
57 As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who feeds on Me will live because of Me.

This also is in the context of Christ’s mission as Messiah. I have already covered this.

sscott. The catholic trinity concept is clearly wrong, however most of the other Christian churches are teaching the Bible Godhead which is truth. However it is unfortunate that they use the word “trinity” which sometimes confuses theirs with the Catholic teaching.

Beware of the false teachers here on this forum; they will lead you astray.

Christ describes them well.

Mat 23:24  Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.

Col 2:8  Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Col 2:9  For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Col 2:10  And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

They are wilfully blind.

2 Timothy 4:3   For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;  
 4:4   And they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.    

sscott. I hope that I have addressed all of your concerns.

[NickHassan]

Hi CB,
God is not a Godhead.
Godhead is an aspect of God.

Rom 1
“Romans 1:20
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:”

So God's power and godhead are two aspects of God Himself, according to this greek word translated as godhead.

Jesus told the jews the Father was the one they called God and I believe him.

[Henoch]

Did you know that Ethiopia is one of the Christian country in the world and keep it with out adding and chage it over 2000 years?  check out the following likes about THE ISSUE BETWEEN MONOPHYSITISM AND DYOPHYSITISM

http://www.ethiopianorthodox.org/english….tm#mono

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote

Hi CB, God is not a Godhead. Godhead is an aspect of God. Rom 1 “Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:” So God's power and godhead are two aspects of God Himself, according to this greek word translated as godhead. Jesus told the jews the Father was the one they called God and I believe him.

NH

Actually the Gr word for Godhead is, theiotes, which comes from the root word, theos, which means:

“A general name of deities or divinities as used by the Greeks”

Col. 2:9
For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

Acts 17:29
Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

[NickHassan]

Hi W,
Which of the three greek words each translated once as godhead are you referring to?

If the godhead dwells in Christ and the godhead is a trinity, then Christ dwells in himself??

[music4two]

Since the Trinity is being discussed in several places you will read this post in several threads.

Did the apostles ever teach that God could come down to live as a man? No! In fact they were utterly disgusted with that concept.

Acts 14 
8At Lystra a man was sitting who had no strength in his feet, lame from his mother's womb, who had never walked.

 9This man was listening to Paul as he spoke, who, when he had fixed his gaze on him and had seen that he had faith to be made well,

 10said with a loud voice, “Stand upright on your feet.” And he leaped up and began to walk.

 11When the crowds saw what Paul had done, they raised their voice, saying in the Lycaonian language, “The gods have become like men and have come down to us.”

 12And they began calling Barnabas, Zeus, and Paul, Hermes, because he was the chief speaker.

 13The priest of Zeus, whose temple was just outside the city, brought oxen and garlands to the gates, and wanted to offer sacrifice with the crowds.

 14But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it, they tore their robes and rushed out into the crowd, crying out

 15and saying, “Men, why are you doing these things? We are also men of the same nature as you, and preach the gospel to you that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, WHO MADE THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH AND THE SEA AND ALL THAT IS IN THEM.

Notice the clear things said in this portion of scripture.
Paul and Barnabus are in Lystra. The native Lyconium population had mythology detailing the Gods coming to live as men on Earth.

Verses 8 through 10 – God heals a man through the hands of Paul.

Verses 11 through 13 – Witnessing the miracle the people of Lystra imediately conclude and act upon a major tennant of their mythogy. First in importance was the concept as follows – “The gods have become like men and have come down to us.” After which they proposed names of Gods for Paul and Barnabus. The first thought was not who these gods were (Paul and Barnabus). The first thought was that their deity had become like a man and come to live with them. Pure Lyconium/Greek mythology.

Verses 14 and 15 – Paul and Barnabus react violently to the actions and words of the Lyconiuns. Tearing of ones robe is done to indicate complete abhorance and violent disgust at what is occuring. With this type of reaction the first thing the apostles would do would be to counter and correct that which has disgusted them.
What do they say? “Men, why are you doing these things? We are also men of the same nature as you,– The first thing they do is correct the concept that God can come down and live as a man. They do not formost correct them for believing in Hermes and Zeus, but instead correct their concept of God becoming a man.
Paul continues – and preach the gospel to you that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, WHO MADE THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH AND THE SEA AND ALL THAT IS IN THEM.
Paul calls what they are doing “vain things”. What is he refering to? “ Vain things” refers to “these things” which in return refers to the belief that God can come down to live as a man. Paul says they come to preach the good news that they would turn from this mythology to a living God. Then Paul goes on to say why the living God is different then those whom they worship. (remember the context is still worshipping Gods that come down to live as men) the kiving God “MADE THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH AND THE SEA AND ALL THAT IS IN THEM.” This seperates Him from those things which He created. He would not live as one of the things He created. He is above that.

As I have posted before and as the Trinitarians have ignored and refused to deal with:

Malachi 3:6
For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

Instead of taking God at His word here, they teach that God became a man.
One of the most defining aspects of the Judeo-Christian God is His immutable nature. He cannot stop being God. He cannot give up any of His attribute withour ceasing to be God.

Numbers 23:19
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

The Hebrew word here for man is “eesh”. It means man and is a contraction of the word en-oshe, meaning a human or man in general.
Over 90 times Jesus is refered to as the son of man. The word used in the NT for man is “anthropos” which can only mean human being. It does not mean a dual natured being. Not only does this denote his full humanity, but clearly shows he cannot be a God without contradicting these scriptures. Again they ignor these verses and claim that Jesus was a man and a God at the same time. In fact there is not one clear scripture that describes Jesus as being a dual natured being.
The very core and heart of being a member of the human race is our single human nature. When trinitarians make Jesus of a dual nature, they remove Him from the ranks of humanity and make him a diferent creature.
When the trinity doctrine proclaims things like God became a man or that Jesus is fully God and fully man at the same time, they are in clear contradiction of scripture and are not worshipping the God of the bible.

Where do these false concepts come from?
Through allusion and unclear scripture. By reading their doctrine into scripture. By taking scripture out of context. By not considering the vast difference in meaning between Hebrew culture and writing and that of the western world. Through 1800 years of false tradition. Through philosophy and mythology added to Christianity after the apostolic period. Through threats of death and banishment by a Sun worshipping Roman Emperior, Constantine. Through Constantine’s philosophies and concepts of Christ and God being of the same substance. Through hundreds of years of persecution by the Catholic Church established by Constantine.

MYTHOLOGY UPON ILLUSION UPON DISHONESTY UPON TRADITION UPON MISINTERPRETATION AND MISSUNDERSTANDING.

This is at the root and the core of the Trinity and Dual-natured Christ doctrine.

Those who push these doctrines are no longer scriptural but have become doctrinal. They are not about seeking truth in scripture, but about proving their doctrine at all cost. They ignor any proof that does not support their doctrine. They refuse to admit that these doctrines have no functionality toward the plan of God. Their doctrines do not work to draw you closer to Christ, but the concepts within them actually make Christ a different creature. He is no longer our brother and example. All of the accomplishments Christ did are at least partially attributable to Him being deity. He did it as a God! We are not God therefore we cannot do it! Their doctrine, in effect, scraps the plan of God and is anti Christianity/Anti-Christ.

I do not have time to respond to several threads. If you wish to respond to this post please do so on the “Trinity” thread.
Thanks — >

[NickHassan]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 12 2006,22:09)

Quote Hi CB, God is not a Godhead. Godhead is an aspect of God. Rom 1 “Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:” So God's power and godhead are two aspects of God Himself, according to this greek word translated as godhead. Jesus told the jews the Father was the one they called God and I believe him. NH Actually the Gr word for Godhead is, theiotes, which comes from the root word, theos, which means: “A general name of deities or divinities as used by the Greeks” Col. 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. Acts 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

Hi W,
Here you have told us one greek word is used in the two scriptures shown.
Not so.
In col 2.9

Number 2320
Transliteration:
theotes {theh-ot'-ace}
Word Origin:
from 2316
TDNT:
3:119,322
Part of Speech:
noun feminine
Usage in the KJV:
Godhead 1

Total: 1
Definition:
deity
the state of being God, Godhead For Synonyms see entry 5849

In Acts 17.29
Number 2304
Transliteration:
theios {thi'-os}
Word Origin:
from 2316
TDNT:
3:122,322
Part of Speech:
adjective
Usage in the KJV:
divine 2, Godhead 1

Total: 3
Definition:
a general name of deities or divinities as used by the Greeks
spoken of the only and true God, trinity
of Christ
Holy Spirit
the Father

Rom 1.20
Number 2305
Transliteration:
theiotes {thi-ot'-ace}
Word Origin:
from 2304
TDNT:
3:123,322
Part of Speech:
noun feminine
Usage in the KJV:
Godhead 1

Total: 1
Definition:
divinity, divine nature For Synonyms see entry 5849

Three DIFFERENT greek words,
one for each time “godhead” appears.
Hardly a solid foundation.

[Author]

Posts