- This topic has 713 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
t8,
You are correct, God can be in you too and you are not YHWH. God the Father is in Jesus and Jesus is in the Father and that is not what makes Him YHWH. It is his true original nature that makes Him YHWH. It is His relationship to YHWH the Father that makes Him YHWH the Son. They both have the true original eternal nature that makes on YHWH. No one can become YHWH, one would have to always exist to have the nature from eternity and be YHWH.LU, this is a case for divinity, not being YHWH.
We can partake of divine nature. Jesus existed with divine nature and emptied himself and took our nature for a time.It is not his nature that is superior in the sense that we too will partake of that. Rather it is his name which is superior (which BTW isn't YHWH).
The body that we will receive is like his one and he calls us brothers meaning that we are the same kind as him. See Philippians 3:21.
A son of God is applied to those who come directly from God like Adam, the angels, and Jesus Christ. We are the sons of God through faith through Jesus Christ. We are born again not of adam, but of the incorruptible seed. We are born of God and thus sons as he is.
Philippians 3:21
who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body.Now if it is his nature that makes him YHWH, then add us into the equation for we too can partake. Also if it is his unity with the Father that makes him YHWH, then add us again. Jesus is our brother and our bodies will be like his.
And this same Jesus has the same confession as we have. His Father is his God and our God.
Your reasons for Jesus being YHWH are not good reasons and the fact that you do not make redeemed man YHWH for the same reasons shows a bias. Of course I am not arguing that we are YHWH, but showing your inconsistency.
t8,
Too bad that you lack scripture that specifically tells us all that the Son emptied Himself 'of His divine nature' when He became flesh. He continued as divine nature when He also took on human nature. You don't seem to be able to distinguish what He does according to the flesh and what He does according to His divinity. According to His glorified flesh nature, He is a brother to those who believe in Him and are adopted sons of God, no one is His brother according to His divinity.His is the First and the Last…that represents His eternal YHWH nature.
t8,
By not responding, you inadvertently admit that you do not have scripture to back up your doctrine that the Son gave up His divine nature to take on the nature of man, as if original divine nature is something that is possible to give up anyway.You need to adjust your doctrine and realize that one with an original divine nature, who was the only begotten God with God in the beginning, and through whom all things were created, cannot be equated to one who partakes of divine nature who wasn't always divine nature.
t8,
you said:Quote A son of God is applied to those who come directly from God like Adam, the angels, and Jesus Christ. We are the sons of God through faith through Jesus Christ. We are born again not of adam, but of the incorruptible seed. We are born of God and thus sons as he is. Adam and angels did not come directly from God, the Father…
John 1
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.You jump to conclusions.
I have said he existed in the FORM of God, emptied himself, came in the flesh, died, glorified at the right hand of God.
You are trying too hard to connect the dots and falsely imagining what it is I am saying.
That said, when Jesus dies, he was glorified and his body was able to do things that an earthly body cannot. What changed since he walked the Earth in his 33 or so years he spent here.
I am fixed on these points, and speculate between these points.
So your post is off track here.
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 03 2012,15:18) It is his true original nature that makes Him YHWH. It is His relationship to YHWH the Father that makes Him YHWH the Son. They both have the true original eternal nature that makes on YHWH. No one can become YHWH, one would have to always exist to have the nature from eternity and be YHWH.
Too much of your own understanding combined with bias to take you serious here.Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 18 2012,07:56) t8,
By not responding, you inadvertently admit that you do not have scripture to back up your doctrine that the Son gave up His divine nature to take on the nature of man, as if original divine nature is something that is possible to give up anyway.
Ha ha.Did it not occur to you that I might have priorities above debating this subject with you. It should have crossed your mind that there was another reason as to why I have not answered. If not, I will enlighten you.
I hadn't read your post till now.
You might need to think outside the box a bit, otherwise you will remain boxed in.
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 18 2012,08:00) Adam and angels did not come directly from God, the Father…
John 1
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.
Have another look LU.All things came FROM God, and through his Word.
All things come from God and through Jesus Christ.Adam, Jesus, and the angels are fathered by God directly.
Cain and Abel onward were fathered by others. In other words they were not prototypes.
This is my point.
How about getting back to the real points instead of trying to discredit me on minor points.
When a person tries to get off a charge in court via a technicality, it is often because he is guilty and is looking to avoid punishment. An innocent and true person tries to win by using their own testimony because their testimony is true. Those who look for technicalities often do so because that is the best shot a guilty man has. Not always of course.
LU. Your doctrine lacks proof and I am open to seeing some.
You have a ton of conjecture, but nothing that would make someone take you seriously.Surely you can understand that a man needs to have something concrete before he buys into it? Only a fool would subscribe wholeheartedly based on your so-called evidence to date.
I am open to you or anyone else having a valid point or being right about something.
But need much more than what you are saying. In fact there hasn't even been one time where you made me think, “hang on a minute she has a point”. Likewise with Gene B. You both have this in common with me at least.
It is in your own interest to teach that which was taught. And to know what was taught, you need to show scriptural proof at least. We are told that teachers are more responsible and our judgement is harder. For this reason, you should never teach a theory as fact. If you are wrong, you are responsible for any repercussions your teaching has wrought. And you also responsible to using other people's precious time in order to refute you.
Refutation is of course necessary, but woe to the person who is proven wrong (or teaches lies) and does not repent.
t8,
Welcome back
So you admit that you post and don't bother to check the response for weeks, not because you haven't been able to spend time on HN but you just don't think/care to check, even in a hot seat discussion that you set up…hmmm. If I jump to conclusions that are wrong, then please explain what you do mean by this:Quote Jesus existed with divine nature and emptied himself and took our nature for a time. It is not his nature that is superior in the sense that we too will partake of that.
Do you equate nature with body type?
What would you call the eternal aspect of God the Father? Would it be an aspect of His nature, or what?
Please explain what the nature of God the Father is according to scripture. Enlighten me
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 19 2012,03:40) So you admit that you post and don't bother to check the response for weeks, not because you haven't been able to spend time on HN but you just don't think/care to check, even in a hot seat discussion that you set up…hmmm. If I jump to conclusions that are wrong, then please explain what you do mean by this:
Yes I admit that. It is not priority. Family first, then job, then HN stuff with left over time that I have.I could honestly spend my whole life refuting yourself, Gene, and others. But to what benefit? To not provide for my family and the likely outcome would be a more stubborn person at the other end.
That said, I will still debate with you on this. Just not giving it priority for the reasons I have stated.
And even if this only makes you more stubborn, it will help others. So it is worth it to me, but all things in their time and season.
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 19 2012,03:40) Do you equate nature with body type?
Yes nature is tied up with body type. Human nature, divine nature, etc. It might not be nature per se, but the body would in that case affect the nature. So a human body means a fallen nature. A spiritual body could well give us divine nature.However, even though we are human, we are redeemed because we have a new spirit and that saves our soul. So it could be that we have divine nature while in the flesh body and all the more so, when we are given our new bodies.
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 19 2012,03:40) What would you call the eternal aspect of God the Father? Would it be an aspect of His nature, or what?
God's existence is what is eternal. He has always been. Who knows within the realms of eternity when certain things like father-hood and nature apply.Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 19 2012,03:40) Please explain what the nature of God the Father is according to scripture. Enlighten me
It could be that he is spirit. It could be his qualities like love, life, grace.
The fact that he changes not, likely means that he has always had divine nature.He has always existed and is the Father of all spirits. All spirits originally come from him.
t8,
Thanks for those answers. I didn't see any scriptural references though, do you have any scriptural defense of your ideas?you said this:
Quote Who knows within the realms of eternity when certain things like father-hood and nature apply. If you believe what you said here, then you cannot say that you know for sure that the offspring wasn't always within the Father from eternity and that the Father wasn't always a Father of a Son.
Can you admit that?
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 22 2012,18:34) t8,
Thanks for those answers. I didn't see any scriptural references though, do you have any scriptural defense of your ideas?you said this:
Quote Who knows within the realms of eternity when certain things like father-hood and nature apply. If you believe what you said here, then you cannot say that you know for sure that the offspring wasn't always within the Father from eternity and that the Father wasn't always a Father of a Son.
Can you admit that?
No problem. I would likely have not used the word “could be” if I had scriptural references.Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 22 2012,18:34) If you believe what you said here, then you cannot say that you know for sure that the offspring wasn't always within the Father from eternity and that the Father wasn't always a Father of a Son.
A son is an offspring or comes from a father.The Father is the source of the son.
That is good enough to me. I don't need to argue about genealogies and dates. Father – Son says it all to me because God blessed me with 2 sons and so I understand what it means. God is not in the business of confusing us.
I also don't have the need to imagine such a notion that even though he is a son, he is as old as the Father. That prevalent thinking is entering dodgy territory and doesn't even line up with the experience that God gives us when he blesses us with children.
To recap, you have not shown anything that proves you are right.
What you have demonstrated thus far is an opinion and you are dressing it up as fact.It is an opinion and why not be honest about that.
I have no agenda here. I usually know truth when I hear it, but the thing is you need to hear it. Truth makes everything make sense too. Nothing you have said about the duopoly God convinces me that you have discovered some lost secret.
Discovering a lost secret is unlikely but possible. But you need to have evidence to back up your claims. Why would anyone listen to a mysterious revealed secret when there is not evidence and when it flies in the face of scripture.
You need a reality check LU.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
