Both fully God and fully man

[LightofTruth]

Ok, no problem. I mentioned Heb 2 because of what was "told" to our forefathers, like David and Moses.

Moses was told in Deut 18 , "I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him"

So Moses was told that a coming Prophet was going to be "raised up" from among their people. He was going to be "like" Moses in a way. God was going to put words in his mouth and that person was going to speak what God commands him to speak. That is the opposite of the trinity.

.

It's interesting to note that Moses was a prophet and the one whom God would "raise up" (from the dead) would be a prophet like Moses. Compare Moses' prophecy in Deuteronomy with Jesus' prophecy in Revelation.

 

[LightofTruth]

Agreed, but that’s not the full story. He was fully God and fully man and not one or the other.
Actually, that is the full story. We know that he messiah had to be a man to conquer sin. If he was a God, or God himself, there would be no temptation.

You claim he was just a man. How is man able to do God's will?
Jesus could. You have to remember that God was Jesus's father and that he was working "through" his son at all times. Jesus had access to God's help and angels.

No man had been able to do God's will up until Christ and no man was able to do it after.
I think you just answered your own question.

"What then? Are we any better? Not at all. For we have already made the charge that Jews and Greeks alike are all under sin. As it is written: “There is no one righteous, not even one. There is no one who understands, no one who seeks God.…"
Since scripture cannot be broken, how do you account for this verse?
Paul's not talking about Christ. He's talking to the brother's & sisters that he's writing to.

Okay, now I'm confused.
Did Christ have the nature and will of man, or did he have the nature and will of God? You've already told us he can't possibly have both.
There were two wills, the will of Jesus and the will of God. Jesus's will was to do the will of his father. We read that in the Gospels. Jesus wanted to do everything the father wanted. We also read that Jesus couldnt do nothing without the father's help.

Look at Deut 18 on what Moses was told on a "coming Messiah".

So the Father is imposing His will to suppress Jesus' will as a man?
No one was supressing Jesus. Why would you say that?

Is that one will or two working in Jesus?
All ready answered that.

Also, is this a special case, where the Father only works in Jesus and no one else? Or did the Father try to work with other wills but failed?
God only didnt work with Jesus. But we have to remember that Jesus was God's son. No one in history was that. But God does work through other people. We read that all through scripture. Samsom, Moses, David, Apostles, etc........

And if the Father tried and failed with others, why did it work with Jesus?
OUr Creator doesnt fail in anything. Maybe it's something that we dont understand and we're blaming God.......

Okay, so you've told us
1. Christ had one will and
2. Christ had the nature and will of man
3. They were one in will purpose.
Who are they? It can't be God because God's will is not the will of man, and there is only one will in purpose, remember?
Not sure what your really saying here....... Christ's will was to do the father's will. We actually read that. Jesus came in the father's name, to do what the father wanted his son to accomplish.

Then how do you explain these verses?
Again, your making Jesus God. Your talking verses and your making them fit your beliefs. Jesus is not God and man at the same time. We only see that in the movies, like Clash of the Titans, or something like that.

Okay…if he is not a mere man what kind of non-mere man is he, and how can a non-mere man die for a mere man’s sins? Wouldn’t he have to die for other non-mere men?
When I say that his not just a mere man, I'm stating that because he has God as his father. Scripture tells us that Jesus was a man, like us, same nature. But.... God as his father. The questions that your asking is like your trying to make Jesus into something different than what scripture tells us.

How is he “like us” when he is no ordinary man? You appear to be describing Jesus as an extraordinary man who was programmed to obey the will of God much like an automaton, and then you say "he’s just like us".
Wow! Where is this coming from?.... Jesus was like is in nature. Born of a woman, prone to sin. There was a reason for that too. The messiah had to be like us. To overcome sin. Which he did with his father's "help". Could Jesus have sinned if he wanted to? Yes, because he was born with our nature. But he chose not to.

Plus, Jesus wasnt "programmed" to do anything. Why would you even say that? When you read the bible, do you see a programmed Jesus? I dont. He was like us. He suffered, cried, he felt pain, etc, etc.....

The Apostle John said that they are antichrist who deny that Jesus had come in the flesh. Meaning that his flesh was the same sinful flesh as the rest of us.
The mass majority in Christianity are antichrist.

 

[LightofTruth]

Jesus said that he had overcome the world. If he was not of the same sinful nature(flesh) as the rest of man he could not have been tempted as we are and the idea of him overcoming the world would have no meaning. Therefore, those who deny that Jesus was of the same flesh as we, rob him of his glory in overcoming the world.

 

[Muffled]

I have a brother. Adopted. One of my daughters, who is coming up to forty and still unmarried, is planning to go through social services to see if she can adopt a sibling group. So, genetically my brother isn't (he's actually a cousin), and my new grandchildren will be...who knows? I don't care. He is my brother, and the thought of new grandchildren is a glory and a wonder.

There is absolutely no difference in the position my brother has in our lives than that of my 'natural born' sisters, and those grandchildren, whoever they are, will be my GRANDCHILDREN. Mine. There is no difference between them, and I only think 'adopted' and 'different' with my brother at times like this, when the subject comes up. In other words, hardly ever.

Yes, we are all the children of God first, But then they are also OUR children, whether my womb (or my mother's) carried them for nine months or not, or whether they were breast or bottle fed for a year or so. They are ours for a very long time, and they are not different because of the way they appeared in our lives.

Of course, since I am LDS, and we believe that 'family is forever,' quite literally, perhaps adoption is seen a bit differently than you would. I don't think I've ever run into someone who thought the way you do, but (shrug) as long as you and your kids (both 'yours' and 'not yours') are OK with it, I shouldn't comment. I mean, I DID, but I shouldn't.

I believe that is an imaginary belief. The truth is that some people sometimes do like to stay together but I am one who does not. I like diversity so in each incarnation I may choose a different family to be associated with. Sometimes I incarnate on a different planet.

 

[Muffled]

You know it is more credible if your belief corresponds with the Bible
It would be more correct if your belief lines up what the Bible says
Not the other way around.

The Bible describes people who believe that Jesus is God and it ain't pretty

2 John 7-8 J.B. Phillips New Testament (PHILLIPS)
For the world is becoming full of impostors—men who will not admit that Jesus the Christ really became man. Now this is the very spirit of deceit and is anti-Christ. Take care of yourselves; don’t throw away all the labour that has been spent on you, but persevere till God gives you your reward.


2 John 7 The Message (MSG)
There are a lot of smooth-talking charlatans loose in the world who refuse to believe that Jesus Christ was truly human, a flesh-and-blood human being. Give them their true title: Deceiver! Antichrist!

My beliefs are Bible based beliefs. Too bad you don't understand the Bible. It probably means you don't have the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

I believe I chose my prettiest color to say that your ideas are just plain silly. God respects my ability to say what He wishes me to say. The Bible doesn't say anything about me because I am not in it.

II John 7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh.

I believe Jesus did come in the flesh as the scripture states but it does not state that the flesh is perfectly human.

 

[Muffled]

You believe.......... that he is God?
You believe.......... he has two natures? What does scripture tell us?...........

Read those verses again!!

"........thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" Oh.... dont stop there my friend!!!.... "But made himself of no reputation,........" Paul's explaining what the Jews thought that Jesus was doing. But he's saying, no, he didnt!!

Let's keep on reading..........

9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.


That's co-equal?!!!!! Are you serious? God gives Jesus everything!! Without God, Jesus can do NOTHING.

Everything is to the glory of God. Everything.

I believe you are being totally illogical. God is always going to be the Glory of God but not everything is. Rape and murder are not.

 

[MJFlores]

I believe Jesus did come in the flesh as the scripture states but it does not state that the flesh is perfectly human.

The Bible describes people who believe that Jesus is God and it ain't pretty

2 John 7-8 J.B. Phillips New Testament (PHILLIPS)
For the world is becoming full of impostors—men who will not admit that Jesus the Christ really became man. Now this is the very spirit of deceit and is anti-Christ. Take care of yourselves; don’t throw away all the labour that has been spent on you, but persevere till God gives you your reward.


2 John 7 The Message (MSG)
There are a lot of smooth-talking charlatans loose in the world who refuse to believe that Jesus Christ was truly human, a flesh-and-blood human being. Give them their true title: Deceiver! Antichrist!

 

[dianaiad]

I believe that is an imaginary belief.

I wasn't asking for your opinion. I was explaining why mine is what it is.

The truth is that some people sometimes do like to stay together but I am one who does not. I like diversity so in each incarnation I may choose a different family to be associated with. Sometimes I incarnate on a different planet.

I believe that yours is an imaginary belief. Or at least as imaginary as you believe mine to be.

No offense intended, of course.

 

[moorea944]

I believe you are being totally illogical. God is always going to be the Glory of God but not everything is. Rape and murder are not.

I believe you are being totally illogical.
lol, that's because you believe in the trinity. (no offense)
And in what sense am I illogical. Just curious.........

God is always going to be the Glory of God
huh? Dont really understand what your saying here..... God is the glory of himself?

but not everything is. Rape and murder are not.
I agree

 

[Muffled]

The Bible describes people who believe that Jesus is God and it ain't pretty

2 John 7-8 J.B. Phillips New Testament (PHILLIPS)
For the world is becoming full of impostors—men who will not admit that Jesus the Christ really became man. Now this is the very spirit of deceit and is anti-Christ. Take care of yourselves; don’t throw away all the labour that has been spent on you, but persevere till God gives you your reward.


2 John 7 The Message (MSG)
There are a lot of smooth-talking charlatans loose in the world who refuse to believe that Jesus Christ was truly human, a flesh-and-blood human being. Give them their true title: Deceiver! Antichrist!

I believe you have not responded logically to what I said and have simply reverted to name calling because you hav elost the argument.

 

[Muffled]

I wasn't asking for your opinion. I was explaining why mine is what it is.



I believe that yours is an imaginary belief. Or at least as imaginary as you believe mine to be.

No offense intended, of course.

I believe the Buddhists call it attachment and consider it undesirable. In my opinion you way is just as good as mine but yours is not the only way.

 

[Muffled]

I believe you are being totally illogical.
lol, that's because you believe in the trinity. (no offense)
And in what sense am I illogical. Just curious.........

God is always going to be the Glory of God
huh? Dont really understand what your saying here..... God is the glory of himself?

but not everything is. Rape and murder are not.
I agree

It is illogical to say that God giving everything to Jesus means that Jesus is not God. It is simply God giving things to Himself.

I believe He rightly sees Himself as Glorious.

 

[moorea944]

It is illogical to say that God giving everything to Jesus means that Jesus is not God. It is simply God giving things to Himself.

I believe He rightly sees Himself as Glorious.

It is illogical to say that God giving everything to Jesus means that Jesus is not God.

No..... that's because the bible says that God gave everything to Jesus..... Your making it into something else because you want it to mean the Trinity.

It is simply God giving things to Himself.

LOL!!! Sorry.....

 

[MJFlores]

I believe you have not responded logically to what I said and have simply reverted to name calling because you hav elost the argument.

What is written in the Bible cannot be changed.

2 John 7 Common English Bible (CEB)
Many deceivers have gone into the world who do not confess that Jesus Christ came as a human being. This kind of person is the deceiver and the antichrist.

The Bible clearly describes people who refuse to confess that Jesus is a human being as
the deceiver and the antichrist
It is written in the Bible and no one can change it.

2 John 7 Good News Translation (GNT)
Many deceivers have gone out over the world, people who do not acknowledge that Jesus Christ came as a human being. Such a person is a deceiver and the Enemy of Christ.

They do not acknowledge that Jesus Christ is a human being
And if they do not acknowledge that fact what do they acknowledge Jesus Christ as...
a god
And the bible records such people as a deceiver and the enemy of Christ

2 John 7 International Children’s Bible (ICB)
Many false teachers are in the world now. They refuse to say that Jesus Christ came to earth and became a man. Anyone who refuses to say this is a false teacher and an enemy of Christ.

They are many and they are called false teacher.
They refuse to say that Jesus Christ is a man
And if they refuse to say Jesus Christ is a man what do they say about him?
A lot actually, one is being god and another one is being a manifestation of god
What does the bible say about them?
False teacher and an enemy of Christ.

Are these recorded in the Bible?
Yes they are.
It is up to you to choose a side - what would that be?

 

[Clear]

The Apostle John said that they are antichrist who deny that Jesus had come in the flesh. Meaning that his flesh was the same sinful flesh as the rest of us. The mass majority in Christianity are antichrist.

Hi @LightofTruth
Why do you say Jesus had "sinful flesh"? Typically, Christians claim that Jesus was NOT "sinful", nor did he sin, rather they usually claim he was morally perfect. What sort of sin did Christs "sinful" flesh cause Jesus to commit?

Clear
δρεισεσεω

 

[moorea944]

Hi @LightofTruth
Why do you say Jesus had "sinful flesh"? Typically, Christians claim that Jesus was NOT "sinful", nor did he sin, rather they usually claim he was morally perfect. What sort of sin did Christs "sinful" flesh cause Jesus to commit?

Clear
δρεισεσεω

Jesus didnt commit sin, but he had the same sinful nature as us. Heb 2 for just one of many chapters that explain that. So how can a man not sin? Scripture tells us that God was working "through" his son. He was the son of man and the son of God. Why?.....

He had human nature; he shared every one of our sinful tendencies (Heb. 4:15), yet he overcame them by his commitment to God's ways and seeking His help to overcome sin. This God willingly gave, to the extent that "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself" through His very own Son (2 Cor. 5:19).

Because of his human nature, Jesus experienced minor illnesses, tiredness etc. just as we do. It therefore follows that if he had not died on the cross, he would have died any way of old age. In view of this, Jesus needed to be saved from death by God. Intensely recognizing this, Jesus "offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto Him (God) that was able to save him from death, and was heard for his piety" (Heb. 5:7 A.V.). The fact that Christ had to plead with God to save him from death rules out any possibility of him being God in person. After Christ's resurrection, death had "no more dominion over him" (Rom. 6:9), implying that beforehand....... it did.

If Christ was God in nature and then left that behind and took human nature, as trinitarians attempt to interpret this passage, then Jesus was not "very God" while on earth, yet trinitarians believe that he was. This all demonstrates the contradictions which are created by subscribing to a man-made definition such as the trinity.

He had to be Son of God because no man left to himself had or could achieve spotless rightousness as required by God as the basis for fogiveness.

He had to be Son of man in order to inherit the consequences of Adam's transgressions, a weak and mortal nature "prone to sin", so that he might condemn sin. He had to be tempted in all points like us and yet be sinless in order to be the Saviour. Sin could only be condemned by one possessing the same flesh with its tendency to sin. (Heb. 2v14, 4v15, Rom. 8v3)

 

[Clear]

Hi @LightofTruth

You theorize in post #182 that Jesus had “sinful flesh" (i.e. a flesh that was full of sin = sinful). IF Jesus’ flesh was “full of sin” then what sin was his flesh full of? What sin did his flesh commit?

In post #196 @moorea944 also theorizes that Jesus “had the same sinful nature as us” and that Jesus “shared every one of our sinful tendencies” but he also doesn’t tell us what specific sins Jesus' nature tended to commit. What specific sin was Jesus' nature full of in his “sinful nature”.

What is it about the Gospel message that makes you think Jesus HAD a nature that was sin-ful or full of sin. I am trying to understand why either you or Moorea944 theorize that Jesus’ had a nature that was “sinful”.

Can you explain your theory? What "sin" was in Jesus nature to commit? Was it in Jesus' nature to murder?; to lie? to steal? to commit adultery? What sin was in Jesus' nature?

Clear
δρεινετωω

 

[LightofTruth]

Hi @LightofTruth
Why do you say Jesus had "sinful flesh"? Typically, Christians claim that Jesus was NOT "sinful", nor did he sin, rather they usually claim he was morally perfect. What sort of sin did Christs "sinful" flesh cause Jesus to commit?

Clear
δρεισεσεω

It's not me who says Jesus had sinful flesh, the scripture says so.

Rom:8 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

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:

 

[moorea944]

Hi @LightofTruth

You theorize in post #182 that Jesus had “sinful flesh" (i.e. a flesh that was full of sin = sinful). IF Jesus’ flesh was “full of sin” then what sin was his flesh full of? What sin did his flesh commit?

In post #196 @moorea944 also theorizes that Jesus “had the same sinful nature as us” and that Jesus “shared every one of our sinful tendencies” but he also doesn’t tell us what specific sins Jesus' nature tended to commit. What specific sin was Jesus' nature full of in his “sinful nature”.

What is it about the Gospel message that makes you think Jesus HAD a nature that was sin-ful or full of sin. I am trying to understand why either you or Moorea944 theorize that Jesus’ had a nature that was “sinful”.

Can you explain your theory? What "sin" was in Jesus nature to commit? Was it in Jesus' nature to murder?; to lie? to steal? to commit adultery? What sin was in Jesus' nature?

Clear
δρεινετωω

I'll explain that in a different way.....

Jesus had a nature like us that was capable of sinning. He chose not to sin. His father was helping him all through his life. Scripture tells us that the messiah had to be like that. Jesus had to conquer sin in the flesh or that nature prone to sin that he inherited from Adam. And he did that. It doesnt mean that he sinned or had "sin" in his flesh. He was born of a woman for a reason. He could have sinned if he wanted to, but chose not to because he wanted to do the will of his father.

 

[LightofTruth]

I'll explain that in a different way.....

Jesus had a nature like us that was capable of sinning. He chose not to sin. His father was helping him all through his life. Scripture tells us that the messiah had to be like that. Jesus had to conquer sin in the flesh or that nature prone to sin that he inherited from Adam. And he did that. It doesnt mean that he sinned or had "sin" in his flesh. He was born of a woman for a reason. He could have sinned if he wanted to, but chose not to because he wanted to do the will of his father.

If Paul had sin in his flesh, then so did Jesus. If there was no sin in the flesh of Jesus then how was it condemned when Jesus offered himself?