- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Jesus is not God (James 1:13) but rather he is a human being (1 Timothy 2:5) that was appointed to be Lord of all things in heaven and on earth. (Matthew 28:18-18)
God chose him to be the Christ before the world came to be (2 Timothy 1:9) and before he made him in his mother’s womb.(Galatians 4:4)
God imparted his Spirit on him. (Matthew 12:18)
Jesus walked according to the Spirit and so did not sin though tempted by evil even as we are (Hebrews 4:15) and commanded that his people to follow him by doing likewise.(Mark 8:34)Hi Kerwin.
Yes, Jesus was all that.
He was ‘not God’ but (came as) a human being. He was appointed to be the Lord of all things in heaven and on earth. He walked in the Spirit, and did not sin although he was tempted with evil, even as we are. But then he asked to be glorified with the Father, and the glory he had with him, before the world was made!
That doesn’t do justice to all the biblical claims about Christ, some of which do in fact clearly identify Christ with God. Scripture is simply not systematic here or approaches anything like metaphysics.
Thanks, Miia. My spiritual values emphasize a healthy skepticism about tradition, creativity, personal experience over doctrine and also Scripture, and interfaith dialogues based on respect, the realization that all religions contain truth as well as falsehood, not finger-pointing and denunciations or forms of Christian Imperialism, whereby only Bible-believing Christians are saved.
As Christians we all believe in Father, Son and Holy Ghost and worship them in a special way whether we call them trinity or not. Despite what some here may think I am no trinitarian but rather that proud Arian but do understand the dogma and have not that immature hate I once had.
Christ is a god who hath called us to peace and prayed we’d be one,though the majority ignore and despise his prayers.
hoghead1,
Scripture calls human beings gods because they received the word of God (John 10:35) does that mean they are gods?
The people worshiped King David (1 Chronicles 29:20) does that mean he is God?
The bottom line is those that believe God cannot be tempted by evil and also believe Jesus was tempted as is common to man also believe is not God.
The same is true of those that received the word as well as for King David.
hogshead1,
The prologue the word that comes out of God’s mouth is God; not Jesus.
We have been wrongly taught “the word” is a title of Jesus.
Philo of Alexandria, a man who lived in the first century, also taught the word is God but he was not speaking of the Christ nor of the identity of the word. Instead he taught about the characteristics of the word.
Scripture is not broken (John 10:35) but the teaching of the Trinity is. Too many act like Sadducees who stubbornly held to a broken teaching.
I Chron. 29 does not say they worshipped David, however. Jn. 10 has to be taken in the context of the prologue, which clearly does establish that Christ is God. Also, note Jn. 10:30. Jn. 10:34-35 is using “gods” in the sense of superior ones or leaders.
Let me add that the passages you brought up here are very problematic and require more attention that I can give at present. No doubt about that. The problem is who the “you” refers to in Ps. 82. Some think it refers to the Israelites who thought they were gods because they received the law. Others think the reference is to judges, who were “gods” in that they exercised the law. Either way, Christ is claiming he has superior authority over these “gods.” As to being tempted, I see no reason why God could not experience temptation. I believe God enjoys a direct empathic reaction of all creaturely feeling, including temptation.
Andrew, the main thrust of Arius was that Christ cannot be God because God cannot suffer or change. Is that your belief about God?
hoghead1….WHERE it say you are GOD’S is given in a possessive sense, as GOD’S people. IT is not saying they are actually A GOD. JESUS said in prayer, “for thou are the “only” true God’, leaving all other so-called God’s as false God’s, seeing there is only one “true” GOD. IMO
peace and love to you and yours. ……gene
Dear Hoghead,
Thank you for bringing up that point on whether God changes as a point of Arianism.I was merely thinking about Christ being a lesser being than the Father but even many trinitarians will claim that and there are so many ways of seeing these things;so many theological perspectives.But as to God not changing so Christ cannot be God,being the main thrust of Arianism I hadn’t realized. Maybe I’m not so much an Arian as I thought.I do know there are various interpretations of Arianism itself and many know not the historical beliefs of Arius/Arians and what the whole debate was about. It really is confusing sometimes,but I studied it a few years ago. Some think Arians only considered Christ to be a normal man like us but I do know that wasn’t how they saw it,but that he was a created being that wasn’t the Most High whom they still worshipped as a divine saviour. It left you with two Gods which many found too objectionable so the formulation of Trinity to be one God won the day.
But I do see that God has changed/evolved throughout the Bible so I don’t hold strongly to that point. When I attend church I go to trinitarian congregations and don’t let it bother me.I’ve had my own personal/devotional thoughts about it to make it relevant to myself. And I do enjoy reading your thoughts about these things.I’m glad you’re here! 🙂
Thanks for the compliment, Andrew. Glad I am helping. I am a theologian and education is my mission. Yes, the Arians did say Christ was a supernatural being, just not God. And, as I aid, they really stressed that God cannot change or experience any emotion, let alone suffering. This was typical of both the Arians and also Trinitarians. What the Trinitarians then did was to argue Christ had two separate natures. The divine or God part, which was was immutable and impassible (no emotion) and the human part, which was subject to change and emotion. For me, that traditional formulation is nonsense, as it divides Christ up into two separate natures or heads, which is not biblical. and which is also irrational and unrealistic. I, too, regularly attend church. I am PCUSA, Methodist, Salvationist, and I recently joined the local Unitarian Church, simply because they have better discussion groups and I, in conjunction with the minister, are going to set up an adult RE group this fall. I’m comfortable with just abut any congregation, as long as they are comfortable with me. Most churches I have been affiliated with don’t care a hoot about doctrine, which is one of my main criticisms. For example, I am a good brass player (French horn and conducting), so, at the invitation of a friend, I started playing at the Salvation Army se4rvices up here. They asked me to join. I said I wasn’t into temperance. They said go ahead anyway, so I did. I was raised PCUSA, but became a Methodist simply because they had a really near regularly performing concert bad on Sundays. I do think churches should be more intellectual and study their doctrines more, however.
My dad explains God (Father Son and Holy Spirit) as similar to an Irish Shamrock.
It is in the nature of man to create and formulate his own gods. But God reveals himself to his people. If people do not know God, then they need to strive to have fellowship with him.
Well, t8, as I just said in my previous post here, I am not interested in making Trinitarian distinctions just to comply with tradition. However, I do have in mind several formulations that I feel do real justice to the Trinity, which I have shared above.
Why do you feel the need to do this? The Trinity is not mentioned in scripture or taught. Instead, God is one. For us there is one God the Father. He is the one true God. We are clearly taught this in scripture.
If you truly believe that the God in scripture is a Trinity of some sort, then let’s see you apply that word where God is mentioned and watch it fail.
“For the Trinity so loved the world that the Trinity gave his only begotten son.”
It breaks nearly every scripture out there. But if you replace the word ‘God’ for ‘Father’ it keeps the scripture in harmony. Here are 100 verses you could try. Just look at a few randomly.
There is a reason that this discussion is in the Truth and Tradition forum. Men love to adhere to traditions. But they nullify the power of God.
I said that Scripture implies a Trinity, but does not work it out in any real detail. The prologue to Jn. is one such major passage that points to the Trinity. Also, traditions are important. They give meaning and organization. Of course, we also want to think creatively and that means a healthy skepticism about traditions. Whichever way you argue on the Trinity, you are still affirming a tradition.
Hello, t8,
I’m not sure where you are going with the shamrock analogy. Are you affirming it or denying it? Yes, true, humans do speculate about God. That is only natural, not a problem, however. The Bible is not a book of metaphysics, give but snap shots of God which often conflict. So it’s up to us to piece these together into a meaningful whole.
He, Gene,
Bear with me here. I thought I did respond to it. Can you tell me why you feel I didn’t, so that can fix it?
hogshead1,
I Chron. 29 does not say they worshipped David, however. Jn. 10 has to be taken in the context of the prologue, which clearly does establish that Christ is God. Also, note Jn. 10:30. Jn. 10:34-35 is using “gods” in the sense of superior ones or leaders.
I have to disagree as the words “bowed down their heads, and worshipped the Lord, and the king” means they worshiped both God and King David.
1 Chronicles 29:20 Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)20 And David said to all the congregation, Now bless the Lord your God. And all the congregation blessed the Lord God of their fathers, and bowed down their heads, and worshipped the Lord, and the king.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
