- This topic is empty.
- AuthorPosts
- April 9, 2007 at 7:47 pm#48168Not3in1Participant
Sorry, my last paragraph doesn't make a lot of sense – I was distracted, and my attention away from the computer for a minute. My point is that Christ has a sign of authority over his head – just like man does – just like the women does. This is/was the whole point of this passage. God is above Christ. It doesn't say: “….and God is the head of Christ only when he became a man…” I know you want it to. BUT IT DOESN'T SAY THAT.
April 9, 2007 at 7:55 pm#48172Tim2ParticipantQuote (Not3in1 @ April 10 2007,07:37) Tim2,
Jesus prayed that we would be “one” with the Father. IN THE SAME WAY that Jesus was one with the Father. Does that mean that we are God, too, then?
Hi Not 3in1,Since it is not said anywhere that we are God, I will conclude that we are not God. But that Jesus is explicitly called God (John 1:1, 1:18, 20:28), and referred to as God throughout the Bible (see Trinity Verses thread), and since everyone who heard him say, “The Father and I are one” took that to mean that He is God, then I will make the same conclusion that Thomas made, “Jesus is my God.”
1 Corinthians is the only place that says, “God is the head of Christ,” so it's hard for me to find other places that address this topic. But Philippians 2:6 does. But all of the Scriptures that assert His equality with God are more convincing.
Tim
April 9, 2007 at 8:02 pm#48175Not3in1Participantand since everyone who heard him say,”The Father and I are one” took that to mean that He is God, then I will make the same conclusion that Thomas made, “Jesus is my God.”
*************************
But noone is recorded as calling Jesus God (except Thomas and that is doubtful – no pun intended:)) Is anywhere else it recorded that a follower or disciple called Jesus God? Anywhere? If they believed it, and certainly had to confess it to be saved as you claim, where are all these confessions?April 9, 2007 at 8:06 pm#48177NickHassanParticipantHi Tim 2,
We had one person here who said praying to a trinity was like going to a place of business and you never knew which partner would answer the door.
Tradition reaches some foolish conclusions and it is better to rely on what is written.April 9, 2007 at 8:35 pm#48178NickHassanParticipantQuote (Tim2 @ April 10 2007,07:55) Quote (Not3in1 @ April 10 2007,07:37) Tim2,
Jesus prayed that we would be “one” with the Father. IN THE SAME WAY that Jesus was one with the Father. Does that mean that we are God, too, then?
Hi Not 3in1,Since it is not said anywhere that we are God, I will conclude that we are not God. But that Jesus is explicitly called God (John 1:1, 1:18, 20:28), and referred to as God throughout the Bible (see Trinity Verses thread), and since everyone who heard him say, “The Father and I are one” took that to mean that He is God, then I will make the same conclusion that Thomas made, “Jesus is my God.”
1 Corinthians is the only place that says, “God is the head of Christ,” so it's hard for me to find other places that address this topic. But Philippians 2:6 does. But all of the Scriptures that assert His equality with God are more convincing.
Tim
Hi Tim2,
Are parts of the bible unconvincing to you?
Do you prefer what is not written to what is written?
Are you greater than the Author of the bible?April 9, 2007 at 9:02 pm#48181Tim2ParticipantQuote (Not3in1 @ April 10 2007,08:02) and since everyone who heard him say,”The Father and I are one” took that to mean that He is God, then I will make the same conclusion that Thomas made, “Jesus is my God.” *************************
But noone is recorded as calling Jesus God (except Thomas and that is doubtful – no pun intended:)) Is anywhere else it recorded that a follower or disciple called Jesus God? Anywhere? If they believed it, and certainly had to confess it to be saved as you claim, where are all these confessions?
Hi Not3in1,John calls Jesus God in John 1:1 and 1:18.
1 John 5:20 also says it. So does Titus 2:13.
Actually, many verses say it. They're on the “Trinity Verses” thread I posted. My hope is that a, “what other verses say it?” discussion could take place there.
But I would like to ask you what it means for Jesus to be called, “The Son of God.” Specifically, what is His nature? The answers I've seen on this site and elsewhere have been:
1. God (as in, God of God, or God out of God, every son of an animal in creation is of the same nature as the father)
2. A god/angel. This is the Jehovah's Witnesses/arian answer. In this case, Jesus isn't born “out of” God but is created as a son, and the title son simply means that God is the one that created him, not that he has the same nature as God.
3. A mode/manifestation of God.
4. A person adopted as a son by God.
Do you agree with any of these, or do you believe he has a different nature?
Thanks,
TimApril 9, 2007 at 9:22 pm#48189NickHassanParticipantHi Tim 2,
Some things are for sure.
He is not his own eternal Father.
He does not share a being with his own Father.A son with life in himself.
April 9, 2007 at 9:25 pm#48191Tim2ParticipantHi Nick,
Would you like to answer my question? I'll even answer one of yours.
tim
April 9, 2007 at 9:36 pm#48199NickHassanParticipantHi Tim2,
Should we speculate?
We know he is the Son of God.
Thus endeth the speculationApril 9, 2007 at 9:37 pm#48200Tim2ParticipantHi Nick,
We should understand what words mean.
Tim
April 9, 2007 at 9:42 pm#48204Not3in1ParticipantHi Tim2,
I believe Jesus is the literal Son of God. To my knowledge, I am the only one who believes this way on this board? I believe that God provided the seed that met the egg in Mary; together, they made the baby, who is Jesus. Jesus is therefore part of God, and part of Mary. He is not an incarnate being. He is my literal brother (I'm adopted – he is a genuine Son). Hope this helps.
April 9, 2007 at 9:44 pm#48206Not3in1ParticipantAs for the verses that call Jesus God – I'll check out the other Trinity thread there for the discussion. I know that some of the scriptures you quoted can be quoted differently in other versions. In other words, there are no undisputed scriptures that call Jesus God, except for maybe, John 1:1 – and even that has different meanings to some.
April 9, 2007 at 9:46 pm#48209Tim2ParticipantHi Not3in1,
So you don't believe that the Son existed as a person prior to his birth to Mary? Just trying to understand your view.
Thanks,
TimApril 9, 2007 at 9:59 pm#48216Not3in1ParticipantHi Tim,
I didn't exist prior to my birth as a person. Neither did you. Why do you believe that Jesus did? If Jesus is our brother, then he was born just like you and me.
If Jesus pre-existed already as a person…………………..why did God need Mary?
April 9, 2007 at 10:32 pm#48218Tim2ParticipantHi Not3in1,
I wasn't trying to challenge you on it, I just wanted to know your view on His preexistence
Of course, I do disagree with you, but we've argued enough for one day.
Tim
April 9, 2007 at 10:45 pm#48226NickHassanParticipantQuote (Not3in1 @ April 10 2007,09:59) Hi Tim, I didn't exist prior to my birth as a person. Neither did you. Why do you believe that Jesus did? If Jesus is our brother, then he was born just like you and me.
If Jesus pre-existed already as a person…………………..why did God need Mary?
Hi not3,
Jesus, the Son of God alone, needed to partake of flesh so we could follow him.April 9, 2007 at 10:47 pm#48228ProclaimerParticipantCorrect.
If God made everything through him, then it stands to reason that he redeemed everything through him too.
Although not all choose to be redeemed.
April 10, 2007 at 2:50 am#48244Not3in1ParticipantTim2 – are we arguing?
Nick and t8 – I do not agree with you brothers, I'm sorry. In your view, Mary was just the body that produced something that was already existing. This does not follow the conception and birth story. This is not what is written. Furthermore, it makes a mockery out of family, and how we produce after our own kind. Why would God do that?
If Jesus just needed flesh – God could have produced a flesh and blood body out of nothing (rocks). Why choose a virgin, of the line of David, go through the whole 9 months of growing, give birth, give a name, and so on. It's all so meaningless if Jesus already existed and just needed some flesh to take on. Everything we know about humans, conception, birth – throw it all out when you think about Jesus – right? Wrong.
April 10, 2007 at 2:51 am#48245Not3in1ParticipantNick, you say that Jesus is the Son of God alone. What makes you think this? Jesus is the Son of God AND of man, is he not?
April 10, 2007 at 3:18 am#48253ProclaimerParticipantQuote (Not3in1 @ April 11 2007,09:50) Nick and t8 – I do not agree with you brothers, I'm sorry. In your view, Mary was just the body that produced something that was already existing. This does not follow the conception and birth story. This is not what is written. Furthermore, it makes a mockery out of family, and how we produce after our own kind. Why would God do that?
God did that so the Word could become flesh.John 1:15
15 John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.' “Jude 1:25
to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.John 1:3
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.Revelation 22:16
“I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”If you wish to comment on these scriptures and Christ's preexistence, then I recommend the following discussion.
- AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.