Just WHO is the God of Jesus Christ?

[glad4mercy]

My friend, you are still hobbled by your failure to understand the dual nature of Jesus. Jesus, the man, prior to His resurrection, was limited, according to the flesh. Despite the inherent deity within Him, He had to conquer Satan, death, and hell, without using the power within, except as directed by God. He was given what He needed at the time he needed it; and He didn't need to know the time of His return when asked about it. He Himself stated His complete dependence on God a number of times. He stated that the the Father was greater than He (John 14:28), and that He could do nothing without the Father (John 5:19). When asked by the mother of James and John to grant them a seat on His right and His left in the kingdom, He stated that He lacked the authority to grant that right to them (Mark 10:40).After the resurrection however, Jesus proclaimed that all power in heaven and earth had been given to Him (Matthew 28:18-19). The limitations Jesus had prior to His resurrection were voluntarily accepted, and He reclaimed the full power and authority afterwards, that He has previously possessed, but had willingly divested Himself of. Until you understand the fusion of His humanity with deity, you will struggle with Jesus calling His Father His God.

Well stated and spot on.

Philippians 2: 5-11-

1. Christ left the glories of Heaven to descend to the sorrows of this world.

2. Christ poured Himself into a human body with all it's infirmities and limitations, yet without sin

3. Christ sojourned here among us, He pitched His tent with us.

4. The Sinless one suffered for our sins, and was raised from the dead.

5.God has highly exalted Him, with the Glory that He had with the Father before the foundation of the world.

6. Because He made Himself poor for a season, we become rich in Him for all eternity.

7. Let this mind be in us, which was also in Christ Jesus...( Philippians 2:5)

Man of Sorrows, what a name
For the Son of God who came
ruined sinners to reclaim
Hallelujah what a Saviour

Bearing shame and scoffing rude
in my place condemned He stood
Sealed my pardon with His Blood
Hallelujah what a saviour

Lifted up was He to die
it is finished was His cry
then in Heaven exalted high
Hallelujah, what a Saviour

When He comes, our Glorious King
All His ransomed home to bring.
Then anew this song we'll sing

Hallelujah, what a Saviour!!!

( Old gospel hymn)

[guestman]

My friend, you are still hobbled by your failure to understand the dual nature of Jesus. Jesus, the man, prior to His resurrection, was limited, according to the flesh. Despite the inherent deity within Him, He had to conquer Satan, death, and hell, without using the power within, except as directed by God. He was given what He needed at the time he needed it; and He didn't need to know the time of His return when asked about it. He Himself stated His complete dependence on God a number of times. He stated that the the Father was greater than He (John 14:28), and that He could do nothing without the Father (John 5:19). When asked by the mother of James and John to grant them a seat on His right and His left in the kingdom, He stated that He lacked the authority to grant that right to them (Mark 10:40).
After the resurrection however, Jesus proclaimed that all power in heaven and earth had been given to Him (Matthew 28:18-19). The limitations Jesus had prior to His resurrection were voluntarily accepted, and He reclaimed the full power and authority afterwards, that He has previously possessed, but had willingly divested Himself of. Until you understand the fusion of His humanity with deity, you will struggle with Jesus calling His Father His God.

I am walking fine and am not "hobbled" at all. Jesus had no "dual nature", but consistently said that he was "the only-begotten Son of God", not "God the Son." A few translations, in support of the Trinitarian “God the Son” concept, would invert the phrase mo·no·ge·nes′ the·os′ at John 1:18 ( mo·no·ge·nes′ the·os′, "only-begotten god") and render it as “God only begotten.” This is called tampering and would be Federal offense if someone tampers with evidence during a hearing of a grand jury.

It is you and others who accept the trinity are the ones that are "hobbled", unwilling to recognize just what "only-begotten" means. In the online interlinear, Scripture4all, the meaning of monogenes is "only-generated", as at John 3:16 and 18 concerning Jesus, Luke 7:12 with regard to the son of "widow of Nain", and Luke 8:42, concerning the daughter of Jairus. The word "generate" means "create: to bring something into existence."(Encarta Dictionary) The word "begotten" means "to be the father of a child."(Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2005)

Thus, when Jephthah's daughter was "begotten" or "generated", what did it mean ? Judges 11:34 says that "she was absolutely (Hebrew ayin, meaning "to be nothing or not exist", Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, H369) the only child.("only child", Hebrew yachiyd, meaning "sole", Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, H3173) Besides her he had neither son nor daughter." What about the widow of Nain son ? In his case, what does the word "begotten" mean at Luke 7:12 ? ("begotten", Greek monogenes, meaning "only-born, i.e. sole", Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, G3439)

Or of Jairus daughter ? Were not all these "generated" as we all were, being born and before our conception, did not exist. Hence, as was Jephthah's daughter, the widow of Nain, her son, Jairus' daughter, these were "generated" or brought into existence, so likewise Jesus was also "generated" or brought into existence, and had a beginning, just as any son or daughter, he being the only one directly created (only-begotten) by God.

No dual nature for Jesus, for he was created or "begotten". Only Jehovah God was not "begotten", being "from everlasting to everlasting".(Ps 90:2, King James Bible) Jesus was God's first act of creation. That is why Jesus himself says that he is the "beginning of the creation by God".(Rev 3:14) Nothing could be more plain, but because of the stranglehold of the trinity, many push it aside just as did the religious leaders did of Stephen's explanation concerning Jesus, 'gnashing their teeth'.(Acts 7:54)

At Habakkuk 1:12, it says of Jehovah God: "Are you not from long ago, O Jehovah? O my God, my Holy One, you do not die." Yet Jesus died, for Matthew 26:50 says that "Jesus cried out with a loud voice, and yielded up his spirit." The apostle Paul wrote that "Jesus died and rose again."(1 Thess 4:14)

The apostle Peter told the Jews in Jerusalem on Pentecost, that "this Jesus God resurrected....(and ) was exalted to the right hand of God and received the promised holy spirit from the Father."(Acts 2:32, 33) How could Jesus be "exalted" to God's right hand after his resurrection if he is God ? Is there any higher position than God, so how could Jesus be elevated yet further ?

If Jesus is God, then why did Jesus say: "For just as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted ("granted", Greek didomi, meaning "to give", Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, G1325) also to the Son to have life in himself " ?(John 5:26) Why would Jesus have to be "granted to have life in himself " from the Father, if he already has it, since you say that he is God ? If Jesus is God, did he not already have it before he came to the earth ?

And of Jesus not "knowing the day or hour" concerning the "great tribulation"(Matt 24:36), though perfect and able to remember everything, yet on this occasion he suddenly suffered from amnesia. Jesus is not much of a God to forget when exactly he is to bring down this wicked system of things, but the Father did not forget. Jesus could resurrect the dead, but failed in knowing a simple date. Ummm.

In addition, why was it noted that of Jesus, a passersby said: "He has put his trust in God; let Him now rescue him if He wants him, for he said, ‘I am God’s Son.’”(Matt 27:43) First century Jews who lived at the time of Jesus recognized what ? That he had "put his trust in God", and yet according to trinitarians he is God. Houston, we have a problem !

Yes, "all authority" was "given" to Jesus after his resurrection, but by whom ? If he is God, then why does he need to be given "all authority" after his resurrection ? Does God have any limitations ? Not according to the Bible, for was not Abraham told that God is "Almighty".("God Almighty", Hebrew ’El Shad·dai´, Gen 17:1)

And what does the word "Almighty" mean ? "All-powerful: having supreme unquestionable power over everything."(Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2005) Hence, God has no limitations, but Jesus did. Thus, there is no dual nature for Jesus, but instead he is Jehovah God's "only-begotten Son" who died on a torture stake as a ransom for obedient mankind.(Matt 20:28)

[guestman]

Guestman, you are not seeking the truth, or you would have at least considered some of the many passages presented to you. Instead, you brush them all aside, and seek to argue them away. Your mind is made up already, and no amount of Scripture, and nothing anyone says to you, will change it. Do you not realize that Christianity is founded on the truth that Jesus is God? I don't know how a person can hold to the tenets of the Christian faith, and not believe that truth.

Christianity was founded upon the truth that Jesus is God's "only-begotten Son" (John 3:16), not God, and is the "chief cornerstone" of God's kingdom, for Jesus, quoting from Isaiah 28:16, told the religious leaders: "Did you never read in the Scriptures, ‘The stone that the builders rejected is the one that has become the chief cornerstone. From Jehovah this has come to be, and it is marvelous in our eyes’? This is why I say to you, The kingdom of God will be taken from you and be given to a nation producing its fruits.(Matt 21:42, 43) How can Jesus be the "chief cornerstone" of God's kingdom and yet be God ? God owns the "kingdom", called a ' stone cut out of mountain ', and is not just a part of it.(Dan 2:45)

The "tenets of the Christian faith" are not genuine, but have been altered to fit the apostate thinking that Jesus said would encompass true Christianity that he established, giving an illustration of this at Matthew 13:24-30. It is like being handed counterfeit currency and an untrained eye being unable to tell that it is not genuine.

[Sojourner55]

Christianity was founded upon the truth that Jesus is God's "only-begotten Son" (John 3:16), not God, and is the "chief cornerstone" of God's kingdom, for Jesus, quoting from Isaiah 28:16, told the religious leaders: "Did you never read in the Scriptures, ‘The stone that the builders rejected is the one that has become the chief cornerstone. From Jehovah this has come to be, and it is marvelous in our eyes’? This is why I say to you, The kingdom of God will be taken from you and be given to a nation producing its fruits.(Matt 21:42, 43) How can Jesus be the "chief cornerstone" of God's kingdom and yet be God ? God owns the "kingdom", called a ' stone cut out of mountain ', and is not just a part of it.(Dan 2:45)

The "tenets of the Christian faith" are not genuine, but have been altered to fit the apostate thinking that Jesus said would encompass true Christianity that he established, giving an illustration of this at Matthew 13:24-30. It is like being handed counterfeit currency and an untrained eye being unable to tell that it is not genuine.

There are none so blind, as those who will not see. So you're saying that Jesus denied being God?

[Bandit]

"Jesus said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.""
...
As a final note, the correlation to Exodus 3:14, can only be made in translations based on the Latin Vulgate translation. This is because the Hebrew is not limited to simply meaning 'I am'. The choice of translation made when Jerome devised his Latin translation introduced this limitation to the meaning in that verse. Thus, the correct translation of the Latin is, 'I am that I am'. However, the Hebrew is translated along the lines of, 'I shall become whatsoever it is that I shall become'.

For those who are still confused as to whether God's name is, 'I AM', simply read on to the next verse where God expressly states that we are to make use of the name Jehovah, as it is rendered in English, to refer to our god.

TalonKarrde_X,

In your post you rambled a great deal, and then attempted to disconnect Jesus' claims in John 8 with the "I AM" in Exodus 3:14. First, from what I have read, most Hebrew scholars would not make the statement you have made. The "I AM" statement seems to refer to God's continual existence. And I noticed that you ignored/skipped the latter part of Exodus 3:14 where God says,
"Thus you [Moses] shall say to Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you'".
So there is precedence here for using such a term for God. God is the existing one; He refers to Himself this way. And you also are not considering all of John 8 leading up to John 8:58. In verse 56 Jesus says something very shocking. Not only did Abraham see Jesus, but it sounds as if this was a very great event in Abraham's life. Then Jesus uses an expression indicating His own continual existence. The reaction of the Jews indicates that they understood Jesus to be saying far more than he was just really old. Jesus claims to be the existing one; He refers to Himself this way.

[glad4mercy]

Jesus had no "dual nature

Hold on there, Guestman!!!!! With the above statement are you denying Jesus' humanity, or are you saying that He ceased being the LOGOS when He became a man?

Most of your objections can be answered by Philippians 2:5-11 and Hebrews 2: 9-18, which explain that the Preexistent LOGOS willingly became a man so that He could taste death for every man. Now would you agree that this Incarnation was an act of "self-abasement" for the Preexistent LOGOS?

Think about it, He who created all things, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or principalities or powers was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death! ( Hebrews 2:9)

Was He lower than the angels in His Pre-existent state? Of course not, how could the creator of the angels be lower than them. So we see that Christ willingly took a step down, so to speak, and abased Himself in becoming a man. The purpose for the Incarnation is clear, so that He could taste death for every man! ( Hebrews 2:9) So Christ ( the LOGOS), made Himself poor for a season, so that we might be rich in Him for all eternity. Once Christ finished His Work, He was glorified with the Glory He already possessed with the Father since before the worlds were made. ( John 17:5) This explains how Jesus could be tempted, hunger, thirst, tire physically, etc. The pre-existent LOGOS took on Himself the sorrows of humanity. He became the Son of man so that we could become the sons of God. This temporary self-abasement of Christ adequetely answers almost every one of your objections.


So Guestman, are you denying Jesus' humanity or His Divine nature when you say He had no dual nature?

[guestman]

There are none so blind, as those who will not see. So you're saying that Jesus denied being God?

Jesus repeatedly said that he was "God's Son" and not "God the Son". Jesus told the Jews: "do you say to me whom the Father sanctified and dispatched into the world, ' You blaspheme,' because I said, I am God's Son" ? (John 10:36) The angel Gabriel, when appearing before Mary, said: "Holy spirit will come upon you and power of the Most High will overshadow you. For that reason also what is born today will be called holy, God's Son."(Luke 1:35)

So, Jesus is not God, but as he himself told the Jews: "I am God's Son."(John 10:36) There could not be a clearer statement from Jesus regarding who he is, just as if someone asked a young man who he is, with him saying: "I am George's son." That is why Jesus, as Jehovah God's firstborn, and having proven himself loyal till death, that he was given "all authority in heaven and upon the earth."(Matt 28:18) God does not give himself authority nor does he have to prove to himself anything.

When on the torture stake, why would Jesus utter these words concerning the Roman soldiers: "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing" if he is God ?(Luke 23:34) Even the rulers were sneering: saying: "Others he saved; let him save himself, if this one is the Christ of God, the Chosen One."(Luke 23:35) Chosen by whom ? Himself ? How could Jesus be the "Christ of God" if he is God ?

When Jesus asked Peter who he thought Jesus was, Peter responded by saying, that "you are the Christ, the Son of the living God."(Matt 16:16) Jesus commended Peter for his accurate response, revealing that upon himself would he "build my congregation" or the Christian congregation (Matt 16:18) that initially was "a pillar and support of the truth."(1 Tim 3:15)

[MyRock]

If the watchtower has shed new light on things in the past (meaning old teachings/prophesies are now obsolete), how do you know what you are being taught now about the trinity is accurate?

[guestman]

TalonKarrde_X,

In your post you rambled a great deal, and then attempted to disconnect Jesus' claims in John 8 with the "I AM" in Exodus 3:14. First, from what I have read, most Hebrew scholars would not make the statement you have made. The "I AM" statement seems to refer to God's continual existence. And I noticed that you ignored/skipped the latter part of Exodus 3:14 where God says,
"Thus you [Moses] shall say to Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you'".
So there is precedence here for using such a term for God. God is the existing one; He refers to Himself this way. And you also are not considering all of John 8 leading up to John 8:58. In verse 56 Jesus says something very shocking. Not only did Abraham see Jesus, but it sounds as if this was a very great event in Abraham's life. Then Jesus uses an expression indicating His own continual existence. The reaction of the Jews indicates that they understood Jesus to be saying far more than he was just really old. Jesus claims to be the existing one; He refers to Himself this way.

The Greek Septuagint reads at Exodus 3:14 concerning the meaning of God's name, as E·go´ ei·mi ho on, “I am The Being,” or, “I am The Existing One” and not just ego eimi. In Hebrew, it reads as ’Eh·yeh´ ’Asher´ ’Eh·yeh´, with the word ’Eh·yeh´ coming from the Hebrew verb ha·yah´, meaning “become; prove to be.” Being that ’Eh·yeh´ is in the imperfect state, first person singular, meaning “I shall become”; or, “I shall prove to be", the reference here is not to God’s self-existence (as some feel of the inaccurate rendering of E·go´ ei·mi ho on as "I AM") but to what he has in mind to become toward others, that of being whatever Jehovah (the meaning being ’Eh·yeh´ ’Asher´ ’Eh·yeh´) God needs to be to accomplish his everlasting purpose of the earth being a paradise for "meek "ones.(Ps 37:11, 29; Luke 23:43) It is like a housewife, who is a mother, homemaker, accountant, cook, seamstress, nurse, etc. all wrapped into one, in order to effectively run a home.

At John 8:57, what were the Jews asking ? Who he was or how old he was ? They asked Jesus: "You are not yet fifty years old, and still you have seen Abraham ?” And therefore, how did Jesus reply ? "Most truly I say to you, Before Abraham came into existence, I have been.”(John 8:58; at John 9:9, the King James Bible adds the word "he" after ego eimi to complete the thought)

Hence, the Jews were asking Jesus how old he was, not who he was and Jesus responded by saying that "before Abraham came into existence, I have been." ("I was" or "I have been" according to several ancient manuscripts, such as the fourth/fifth century -Syriac-Edition:A Translation of the Four Gospels from the Syriac of the Sinaitic Palimpsest, by Agnes Smith Lewis, London, 1894 or the fifth Century, Curetonian Syriac-Edition:The Curetonian Version of the Four Gospels, by F.Crawford Burkitt, Vol. 1, Cambridge, England, 1904 )

[glad4mercy]

Guestman, will you please read post 36 and please answer the following question?

So Guestman, are you denying Jesus' humanity or His Divine nature when you say He had no dual nature?

[Sojourner55]

Jesus repeatedly said that he was "God's Son" and not "God the Son". Jesus told the Jews: "do you say to me whom the Father sanctified and dispatched into the world, ' You blaspheme,' because I said, I am God's Son" ? (John 10:36)

Yep, Jesus said He was the Son of God, alright. But let's frame your quote in the proper context (I'll be using the same ESV translation you are using throughout this response):

30 "I and the Father are one.” 31 The Jews picked up stones again to stone him. 32 Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?” 33 The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.” 34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? 35 If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be broken— 36 do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?

You choose to ignore the fact that this passage ties together: 1. Jesus being one with the Father, 2. Jesus being the Son of God, and 3. the perception of the Jews that Jesus was "making Himself God." Barring a lack of intellectual honesty, one will admit that this passage irrefutably portrays the Jews seeking to stone Jesus for calling Himself the Son of God--which they understood as making Himself equal to God. That is why they took up the stones, is it not? And do you see any denials by Jesus, when accused of being equal to God? If so, please point it out.

The angel Gabriel, when appearing before Mary, said: "Holy spirit will come upon you and power of the Most High will overshadow you. For that reason also what is born today will be called holy, God's Son."(Luke 1:35)

Again, being the Son of God in no way detracts from Jesus being God incarnate. That is a personal doctrine you cannot substantiate with the Scriptures. (With the New World Translation, maybe, but that is the word of man, not the inspired word of God).

So, Jesus is not God, but as he himself told the Jews: "I am God's Son."(John 10:36)

So then, Jesus saying He is the Son of God is the reason the Jews sought to stone Him for blasphemy? That seems strange, since the Jews called also themselves sons of God (John 8:41).

There could not be a clearer statement from Jesus regarding who he is, just as if someone asked a young man who he is, with him saying: "I am George's son." That is why Jesus, as Jehovah God's firstborn, and having proven himself loyal till death, that he was given "all authority in heaven and upon the earth."(Matt 28:18) God does not give himself authority nor does he have to prove to himself anything.

Though you have repeatedly refused to address the truths revealed in passages such as Philippians 2:5-10, Scripture makes it clear that Jesus voluntarily divested Himself of His divine prerogatives until He accomplished that for which He was sent:

5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant,b being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

As this passage clearly states, Jesus was in the form of God, and willingly laid aside His deity, and everything He possessed prior to the incarnation. Only as a man, was Jesus given anything. As the eternal Word of God, He simply reclaimed what belonged to Him. Jesus even chose the moment of His own death, for Pete's sake: He "gave up the spirit," when all things were fully accomplished (John 19:30). Jesus even stated the voluntary and temporary nature of His impending death:

The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. 18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. (John 10:18)

Jesus stated in fact, that He Himself would raise His body from the dead:
Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” (John 2:19) Wouldn't you have to be God to make a statement like that?

When on the torture stake, why would Jesus utter these words concerning the Roman soldiers: "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing" if he is God ?(Luke 23:34) Even the rulers were sneering: saying: "Others he saved; let him save himself, if this one is the Christ of God, the Chosen One."(Luke 23:35) Chosen by whom ? Himself ? How could Jesus be the "Christ of God" if he is God ?

If you would only look at Jesus through the lenses of the clear Biblical truth of His having two natures, you would have a tremendously different perspective. You are trying to twist Scripture to fit your doctrine, instead of twisting your doctrine to fit the Scriptures, which is the very reason you have such a skewed perception of Jesus.

When Jesus asked Peter who he thought Jesus was, Peter responded by saying, that "you are the Christ, the Son of the living God."(Matt 16:16) Jesus commended Peter for his accurate response, revealing that upon himself would he "build my congregation" or the Christian congregation (Matt 16:18) that initially was "a pillar and support of the truth."(1 Tim 3:15)

Again, still using your version of the Bible, Peter called Jesus God:
Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ (2 Pet 1:1)


There is an abundance of passages that declare Jesus' deity in the Scriptures, many of which have been presented to you. But you simply refuse to accept them for what they say. Indeed, We are told that Jesus is the flesh and blood embodiment of the fullness of God's being:
For in Christ lives all the fullness of God in a human body. (Col 2:9)

Jesus Himself spoke of the deity He possessed before being robed in humanity:
And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.(John 17:5)

Indeed, Jesus said that to see Him, was to see God:
Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? (John 14:8-9)


You are rejecting the dual nature of Jesus, which is the key that will unlock the proper understanding of His nature and relationship to God. Jesus is clearly seen as both God and man throughout the Scriptures. A few examples are:

As a man, Jesus hungered (Luke 4:2) As God, He called Himself the bread of life (John 6:48)
As a man, Jesus thirsted (John 19:28) as God He said said that those who drank of the water He would provide will never thirst again (John 4:14).
As a man, Jesus died upon a cross, and was buried. As God, He said, "I am the resurrection and the life."

[Bandit]

...
Hence, the Jews were asking Jesus how old he was, not who he was ...

"Are you greater than our father Abraham, who is dead, and the prophets [who] are dead? Whom do you make yourself out to be?"

[glad4mercy]

Guestman, consider the following verse.

Hebrews 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

You ask the question, "If Jesus is YHWH, why was He seemingly limited in His earthly ministry? The answer is simple. If He had fulfilled His ministry and overcome all things through His Divine attributes, it would not have been profitable to us. It was necessary that He submit to the Father, depend on the Holy Spirit, overcome temptation, and finish His race as a man, ( not depending on His own Divine attributes, though He still possessed them.) Why did He have to do it this way?

Hebrews 2:17 " 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"

( Notice that it says that it was necessary for Him to be made like His brethren in all things. This is very important to the points that I am setting forth.)

Your theology is faulty because you assume that just because Christ was made like us in His Incarnation that He has always been like us. The truth is the pre-existent LOGOS possessed every Divine attribute, ( and never stopped possessing them), yet He willingly took upon Himself our frailties and infirmities in order to save us. All of the supposed limitations that you keep mentioning are easily explained by this central Christian truth. ( even the one you mentioned where He said not even He knew the day and the hour. Consider this in light of the fact that He willingly became like us in every way during His earthly ministry and you might come to a startling realization. I assure you that Jesus in His ascended and glorified state knows the day and the hour now.

[guestman]

Hold on there, Guestman!!!!! With the above statement are you denying Jesus' humanity, or are you saying that He ceased being the LOGOS when He became a man?

Most of your objections can be answered by Philippians 2:5-11 and Hebrews 2: 9-18, which explain that the Preexistent LOGOS willingly became a man so that He could taste death for every man. Now would you agree that this Incarnation was an act of "self-abasement" for the Preexistent LOGOS?

Think about it, He who created all things, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or principalities or powers was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death! ( Hebrews 2:9)

Was He lower than the angels in His Pre-existent state? Of course not, how could the creator of the angels be lower than them. So we see that Christ willingly took a step down, so to speak, and abased Himself in becoming a man. The purpose for the Incarnation is clear, so that He could taste death for every man! ( Hebrews 2:9) So Christ ( the LOGOS), made Himself poor for a season, so that we might be rich in Him for all eternity. Once Christ finished His Work, He was glorified with the Glory He already possessed with the Father since before the worlds were made. ( John 17:5) This explains how Jesus could be tempted, hunger, thirst, tire physically, etc. The pre-existent LOGOS took on Himself the sorrows of humanity. He became the Son of man so that we could become the sons of God. This temporary self-abasement of Christ adequetely answers almost every one of your objections.


So Guestman, are you denying Jesus' humanity or His Divine nature when you say He had no dual nature?

I am not denying that Jesus became human, but Jesus did not have a dual nature. He left being a spirit "Son of God" in heaven and was born as a human through Mary. He remained being "the Word" or Logos", God's chief spokeman, but was now a human, not spirit. He is not the incarnate "Son of God", as if he is God in human form. In heaven he was a spirit, but gave that up to become as us, a human of flesh and blood, though perfect, that could stub his toe and feel pain or bleed if cut. It was Nestorius, an early 5th-century patriarch of Constantinople, who apparently taught that Christ was actually two persons in one, the human Jesus and the divine Son of God. According to this teaching, Mary gave birth to the man but not to the divine Son.

On the other hand, this view did not agree with Monophysitism ("one nature"), which held that the union between God and the Son was inseparable, and that although of two natures, Jesus was in reality only one, wholly God and at the same time wholly man. Accordingly, Mary would have given birth to God, not just to the human Jesus. Both of these theories were outgrowths of the controversy that had arisen during the previous century, in which Arius, an Alexandrian priest, argued that Christ was inferior to the Father.

The Council of Nicaea rejected his view in 325 C.E. In 451 C.E., the Council of Chalcedon stated that Christ is God incarnate. The Babylonian-Egyptian-Grecian concept of a triune God had now crowded out Christ's teaching that he and the Father are two separate individuals, in no way equal.(Mark 13:32; John 14:28)

At 1 Corinthians 15:50, the apostle Paul wrote that "flesh and blood cannot inherit God's kingdom, neither does corruption inherit incorruption." Hence, he says: "Look ! I tell you a sacred secret: We shall not all fall asleep (in death, in which in death, is awaiting until Christ's "presence" to be resurrected, 1 Cor 15:23), but we shall all be changed, in a moment." (1 Cor 15:51, 52) Therefore, just as those who "belong to Christ" (2 Cor 1:21) are changed from a fleshly body upon their death and receive a spiritual one, so likewise Jesus "emptied himself (as a spirit Son of God) and took a slave’s form and came to be in the likeness of men. More than that, when he found himself in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient as far as death, yes, death on a torture stake."(Phil 2:7, 8) What did Paul next say ? Was Jesus considered as God ?

"For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every [other] name, so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground, and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father."(Phil 2:9-11)

Thence, Jesus' life force was transferred to the womb of Mary to be born as a human Son of God. Had Jesus been "God incarnate", could the apostle Paul have written that Jesus gave a "corresponding ransom" (Greek antilytron) at 1 Timothy 2:5 ? Who did Jesus have to correspond to ? Who was it that brought sin and death upon the human race so that there was required a "corresponding" or an exactly equal perfect person to replace him ?

Therefore, Jesus left heaven as a spirit "Son of God", becoming "a little lower than angels" (Heb 2:9), in order to become flesh and blood like us, for the purpose buying back what Adam lost for his offspring, the hope of living forever on a paradise earth in perfection. Many of those whom he saves becomes his "brothers" (Heb 2:11) by reason of being chosen as "joint heirs" of the kingdom with him.(Rom 8:17) How could Jesus be God and yet fulfill verse 13, which says: "I will have trust in him" ( trust in whom ? quoting from Isaiah 8:17) And again: "Look ! I and the young children whom Jehovah gave me" ( how could Jesus be God and yet Jehovah give him "children" ? quoting from Isaiah 8:18) ?

Yes, following his resurrection from the dead, Jesus was given the glory as he had in heaven prior to coming to the earth.(John 17:5) How though could Jesus be God and yet be "exalted to a superior position" ? If he was God before coming to the earth, then he could only be placed back to where he was, not "exalted to a superior position". The ability to reason effectively on the Bible without already having prejudicial beliefs is that which many are unwilling to do. These do not let the Bible speak for itself, but is determined to put a square peg in a round hole.

[guestman]

"Are you greater than our father Abraham, who is dead, and the prophets [who] are dead? Whom do you make yourself out to be?"

Jesus answered that question at John 8:54-56, but in verse 57, the Jews asked a new question, wondering how he could of possibly have seen Abraham. Hence, Jesus said: "Most truly I say to you, Before Abraham came into existence, I have been.”(John 8:58) These were wanting to know how old he was, not who he was.