Jesus' Four Failed Prophecies About Him Returning In The Lifetimes Of His Apostles

[Trailblazer]

@ samtonga43

Is this list of verses a rebuttal to mt list? Are they supposed to prove that Jesus is God? Okay, here goes my rebuttal to your rebuttal...

Matthew 1:23 - “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.”

So, Jesus came into this world through the direct intervention of the Holy Spirit, and that consequently His birth was quite miraculous, but that does not mean Jesus was God. Jesus is God with us because he was a Manifestation of God, but He was not God.

Isaiah 9:6 - For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Uh oh.... Isaiah 9:6 is not about Jesus just because it says a a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given.
Jesus came in the station of the Son, and Baha'u'llah came in the station of the Father. Isaiah 9:6-7 is about Baha'u'llah, not about Jesus.

Isaiah 9:6-7 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.

Baha’u’llah was the Prince of Peace because world peace will be established during His religious dispensation. Baha’u’llah set up a system of government and it has already been established among the Baha’is. The institutions of that government are fully operational, but still in their infancy. They will be more developed in the future as the prophecy says (increase in government).

These prophecies cannot refer to Jesus because Jesus disclaimed being the Mighty God when He called Himself “the Son of God” (John 5:18-47) and in those verses Jesus repudiates the charge that He claimed equality with God. Jesus disclaimed being the everlasting Father when He said, “my Father is greater than I” (John 14:28) and Jesus disclaimed being the Prince of Peace when He said, “I came not to send peace, but a sword” (Matthew 10:34). Jesus disclaimed bearing the government upon His shoulder when He said to “rend onto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's” (Mark 12:17, Matthew 22:21). Jesus disclaimed that He would establish a kingdom where he would rule with judgment and justice forever when He said, “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36).

Moving right along.... I have learned everything I know about the Bible from posting to Christians because I have to look up all the verses in the Bible to refute their various claims.

Isaiah 43:10,11 - “You are My witnesses,” says the Lord, “And My servant whom I have chosen, That you may know and believe Me, and understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, Nor shall there be after Me. I, even I, am the Lord, and besides Me there is no Savior.”

Do you actually believe this chapter is about Jesus? Think again, this chapter is about GOD, who is our Savior in the context of THIS verse. The verses are to the Jews, not to the Christians, who did not even exist at the time they were written. I just love how Christians try to commandeer all the Old Testament scriptures and make them be about Jesus when they are not about Jesus. the Lord is God, not Jesus.

2 Peter 1:1 (Jesus is the Redeemer) - “To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ”

KJ21
2 Peter 1:1 Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Savior Jesus Christ:

Notice the word and. The verse says through the righteousness of God and our Savior Jesus Christ:
The verse does not say through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ.
In this verse God is not our Savior; God is righteous and Jesus Christ is our Savior.

John 1:3; Colossians 1:16 - (Jesus made all things)

Dream on. Jesus did not create anything, God created everything. Everyone knows that, all they have to do is read the Old Testament. Paul cannot come along and abrogate the OT because he had been given no authority to do so. His attempts to elevate Jesus to someone He was not are rather pathetic to say the least.

John 1:1-3 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made... 1:14 - And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us,

Nice try but "All things were made through Him" is referring to God, not to Jesus.

John 1 King James Version (KJV)

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

· The Word was God and all things were made by God.

14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.

· Then God (the Word) was made flesh (Jesus) and dwelt among us. Then John bare witness of Jesus.

John 5:17,18 - “My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.” Therefore the Jews sought to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.

Jesus said God was His Father but that does not mean that Jesus was EQUAL to God and it does nit mean Jesus was God. If God was Jesus' Father that means Jesus was the Son of God. You cannot have Jesus being the Father and the Son at the same time because that is a contradiction.

John 8:24 - “Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I AM [He], you will die in your sins.”

I think you should stop mis-posting verses. Who is he? Jesus is from above (from heaven), not of those world, but that does not mean that Jesus was God.

John 8 KJV
23 And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.
24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

NIV
I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.”

John 8:58 - Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”

That's true, Jesus was before Abraham because the soul of Jesus was preexistent in the spiritual world before Abraham was born in this world, but that does not mean that Jesus is God. God existed before there was anything else in existence.

(96) PRE-EXISTENCE - of Prophets

The Prophets, unlike us, are pre-existent. The soul of Christ existed in the spiritual world before His birth in this world. We cannot imagine what that world is like, so words are inadequate to picture His state of being.
(Shoghi Effendi: High Endeavors, Page: 71)

John 10:30-33 - Jesus answered them, “I and My Father are one.” Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”

“I and my Father are one” (John 10:30) means that Jesus and God are one and the same, so whatever pertains to Jesus, all His acts and doings are identical with the Will of God Himself. Jesus and God also share the same Holy Spirit, so in that sense they are one and the same. Jesus also shares the Attributes of God so in that sense they are one and the same. The verse below says that God was manifest in the flesh; it does not say that God became flesh. (1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.)

John 14:6-7 - Jesus said to him, “I AM the way, the truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”

Baha'u'llah said:

“Thou hast gained admittance into the Paradise of God’s Remembrance, through thy recognition of Him Who is the Embodiment of that Remembrance amongst men.” Gleanings p. 303

Him Who is the Embodiment of that Remembrance amongst men is Baha'u'llah.

 

[samtonga43]

Wait a second. You are going to start with a fail? Once again there are parts of the Bible that you would be better off pretending did not exist. For one thing Jesus was never called Manny. Second, that was not even a prophesy, it was an event that was happening at that time and third, the word was not "virgin" in the original. The author of Matthew spoke and wrote in Greek. The Septuagint had an interpretation error in it. And when the author of Matthew went fishing for prophecies he abused that mistranslated word.



Are you just going to abuse non-prophecies?



I guess so.



Hey! Something else from the New Testament. Of course not by Peter. Not much help there.



And I already said that in John Jesus was God. That was not the case in Mark. Or Luke. And since your Matthew verse is fails on several levels even that does not help you.

Are you paying attention? If you were you would have seen that we agree about the claims in John and you would not have bothered to post them.

Are YOU paying attention, SZ?
Look again at my #1637. To whom am I responding?

You appear to have a short attention span.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Are YOU paying attention, SZ?
Look again at my #1637. To whom am I responding?

You appear to have a short attention span.

You are right. I did screw up there.

By the way, do you remember how I pointed out that by quote mining the Bible you could "refute God"? Quote mining is a way of lying by quoting out of context and trying to change the meaning of either a printed or oral recorded source.

 

[samtonga43]

You are right. I did screw up there.

You sure did. Is 'sorry' the word you are looking for?

By the way, do you remember how I pointed out that by quote mining the Bible you could "refute God"? Quote mining is a way of lying by quoting out of context and trying to change the meaning of either a printed or oral recorded source.

Don't do it then.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You sure did. Is 'sorry' the word you are looking for?



Don't do it then.

When you apologize for all of your false accusations then you can begin to ask for an apology. At least when I screw up I admit it. And as usual you missed the point You used a quote mine of the Bible in your post. This is why I liked to say when I am debating with some theists: "By your standards the Bible does say "There is no God". Do you think that you can find your quote mine? If you can't I can point it out to you.

 

[samtonga43]

LOL!! I see that you are still confused. Your use of him was an error. You could try to make his arguments for yourself, and get laughed at. But when you link to a poor source and pretend that you have made a point you have made a false appeal to authority fallacy. You should look into why people that see though his smoke screens laugh at him.

Anyone who laughs at Craig's work in the field of analytical philosophy and apologetics .... well, let's be polite and just say they lack comprehension, and so are confused.

Yes, and you persisted in your error.

Right. So you agree that you told me
why you rejected him. So why did you then say that I should have asked you why you rejected him?

Are you sure your memory is OK?

 

[samtonga43]

@ samtonga43

Is this list of verses a rebuttal to mt list? Are they supposed to prove that Jesus is God? Okay, here goes my rebuttal to your rebuttal...

Matthew 1:23 - “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.”

So, Jesus came into this world through the direct intervention of the Holy Spirit, and that consequently His birth was quite miraculous, but that does not mean Jesus was God. Jesus is God with us because he was a Manifestation of God, but He was not God.

Isaiah 9:6 - For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Uh oh.... Isaiah 9:6 is not about Jesus just because it says a a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given.
Jesus came in the station of the Son, and Baha'u'llah came in the station of the Father. Isaiah 9:6-7 is about Baha'u'llah, not about Jesus.

Isaiah 9:6-7 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.


2 Peter 1:1 (Jesus is the Redeemer) - “To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ”

KJ21
2 Peter 1:1 Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Savior Jesus Christ:

Notice the word and. The verse says through the righteousness of God and our Savior Jesus Christ:
The verse does not say through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ.
In this verse God is not our Savior; God is righteous and Jesus Christ is our Savior.

John 1:3; Colossians 1:16 - (Jesus made all things)

Dream on. Jesus did not create anything, God created everything. Everyone knows that, all they have to do is read the Old Testament. Paul cannot come along and abrogate the OT because he had been given no authority to do so. His attempts to elevate Jesus to someone He was not are rather pathetic to say the least.

John 1:1-3 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made... 1:14 - And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us,

Nice try but "All things were made through Him" is referring to God, not to Jesus.

John 1 King James Version (KJV)

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

· The Word was God and all things were made by God.

14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.

· Then God (the Word) was made flesh (Jesus) and dwelt among us. Then John bare witness of Jesus.

John 5:17,18 - “My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.” Therefore the Jews sought to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.

Jesus said God was His Father but that does not mean that Jesus was EQUAL to God and it does nit mean Jesus was God. If God was Jesus' Father that means Jesus was the Son of God. You cannot have Jesus being the Father and the Son at the same time because that is a contradiction.

John 8:24 - “Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I AM [He], you will die in your sins.”

I think you should stop mis-posting verses. Who is he? Jesus is from above (from heaven), not of those world, but that does not mean that Jesus was God.

John 8 KJV
23 And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.
24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

NIV
I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.”

John 8:58 - Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”

That's true, Jesus was before Abraham because the soul of Jesus was preexistent in the spiritual world before Abraham was born in this world, but that does not mean that Jesus is God. God existed before there was anything else in existence.

John 10:30-33 - Jesus answered them, “I and My Father are one.” Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”

“I and my Father are one” (John 10:30) means that Jesus and God are one and the same, so whatever pertains to Jesus, all His acts and doings are identical with the Will of God Himself. Jesus and God also share the same Holy Spirit, so in that sense they are one and the same. Jesus also shares the Attributes of God so in that sense they are one and the same. The verse below says that God was manifest in the flesh; it does not say that God became flesh. (1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.)

John 14:6-7 - Jesus said to him, “I AM the way, the truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”

Baha'u'llah said:

“Thou hast gained admittance into the Paradise of God’s Remembrance, through thy recognition of Him Who is the Embodiment of that Remembrance amongst men.” Gleanings p. 303

Him Who is the Embodiment of that Remembrance amongst men is Baha'u'llah.

We could trade verses all day long, Tb. I was trying to show you how silly it is to do this, but I'm not sure that you understand.

Shall we simplify matters?

Why do you think the Jews reacted so strongly to Jesus’ words in John10:30?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Anyone who laughs at Craig's work in the field of analytical philosophy and apologetics .... well, let's be polite and just say they lack comprehension, and so are confused.

Um, no. that is an extremely ignorant thing to say. You should be asking why. His arguments only work for either the simple minded or those that are merely looking for an excuses to believe and are fooled by his shell game

Right. So you agree that you told me
why you rejected him. So why did you then say that I should have asked you why you rejected him?

Are you sure your memory is OK?

I told you but you clearly did not listen very well.. Again, projection on your part. You should be trying to learn instead of repeatedly demonstrating prejudice and ignorance.

 

[Subduction Zone]

We could trade verses all day long, Tb. I was trying to show you how silly it is to do this, but I'm not sure that you understand.

Shall we simplify matters?

Why do you think the Jews reacted so strongly to Jesus’ words in John10:30?

Once again you do not understand your error. You made the error of quote mining the Bible. Something that we both agree is wrong. "Trading verses" will not fix that problem. You miss the point of my quote mining. This has been explained to you more than once, this is not a hard concept to understand.

As to the Jews reacting strongly to John 10 30 you are making a typical error of Christians. You are assuming that the Bible accurately recorded events. We do not even know if this actually happened. I could speculate about it, since odds are that an event written about over 60 years after it occurred and is largely based upon oral tradition before that is simply not accurate. This is going to be speculation, since it probably did not happen as written; The Jews would have reacted strongly to anyone that said "God agrees with me" which can be stated as "God and I are one" if their beliefs were radically different from theirs. The person did not have to be saying that he was God for such a reaction. Though I do generally agree that in John Jesus appears that he may be saying that he is God. In the other Gospels he denies it. The same approach to interpretation leads to contradicting results. That is one of the reasons that the Trinity concept was formed. A literal interpretation of the Bible made it self contradicting.

 

[Trailblazer]

We could trade verses all day long, Tb. I was trying to show you how silly it is to do this, but I'm not sure that you understand.

Shall we simplify matters?

Why do you think the Jews reacted so strongly to Jesus’ words in John10:30?

No doubt the Jews mistakenly thought that Jesus was saying that He was God, and that is blasphemy to a Jew.
But that is not what Jesus was saying. Jesus was not saying that He was God.

“I and my Father are one” (John 10:30) means that Jesus and God are one and the same, so whatever pertains to Jesus, all His acts and doings are identical with the Will of God Himself. Jesus and God also share the same Holy Spirit, so in that sense they are one and the same. Jesus also shares the Attributes of God so in that sense they are one and the same.

But Jesus is not God in the flesh because God is Spirit and cannot become flesh.
Jesus was God manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16) but Jesus was not God incarnated in the flesh, and there is a difference.

"The Christian equivalent to the Bahá'í concept of Manifestation is the concept of incarnation. The word to incarnate means 'to embody in flesh or 'to assume, or exist in, a bodily (esp. a human) form (Oxford English Dictionary). From a Bahá'í point of view, the important question regarding the subject of incarnation is, what does Jesus incarnate? Bahá'ís can certainly say that Jesus incarnated Gods attributes, in the sense that in Jesus, Gods attributes were perfectly reflected and expressed.[4] The Bahá'í scriptures, however, reject the belief that the ineffable essence of the Divinity was ever perfectly and completely contained in a single human body, because the Bahá'í scriptures emphasize the omnipresence and transcendence of the essence of God."

Jesus Christ in the Bahá'í Writings

 

[samtonga43]

When you apologize for all of your false accusations then you can begin to ask for an apology. At least when I screw up I admit it. And as usual you missed the point You used a quote mine of the Bible in your post. This is why I liked to say when I am debating with some theists: "By your standards the Bible does say "There is no God". Do you think that you can find your quote mine? If you can't I can point it out to you.

I will apologize when/if can you show me that I accused you falsely.

Post number for the quote mine you mention? Thanks.

We can all see how pleased you are with your "The Bible says there is no God" thing. You do realize that only the young-earth creationists / Bible Belters / literalists would ever fall for this silliness. Don't you??

 

[samtonga43]

As to the Jews reacting strongly to John 10 30 you are making a typical error of Christians. You are assuming that the Bible accurately recorded events. We do not even know if this actually happened. I could speculate about it, since odds are that an event written about over 60 years after it occurred and is largely based upon oral tradition before that is simply not accurate. This is going to be speculation, since it probably did not happen as written; The Jews would have reacted strongly to anyone that said "God agrees with me" which can be stated as "God and I are one" if their beliefs were radically different from theirs. The person did not have to be saying that he was God for such a reaction. Though I do generally agree that in John Jesus appears that he may be saying that he is God. In the other Gospels he denies it. The same approach to interpretation leads to contradicting results. That is one of the reasons that the Trinity concept was formed. A literal interpretation of the Bible made it self contradicting.

AGAIN: To whom did I address the post to which you are responding, SZ? Get a grip, please!

 

[Subduction Zone]

I will apologize when/if can you show me that I accused you falsely.

Post number for the quote mine you mention? Thanks.

We can all see how pleased you are with your "The Bible says there is no God" thing. You do realize that only the young-earth creationists / Bible Belters / literalists would ever fall for this silliness. Don't you??

I already explained several times. At this point I can see that when it comes to that you are just going to deny again and again.

And you still do not appear to understand the use of that argument. That indicates a major bit of prejudice when it comes to reasoning involving the Bible. The point of that argument is that it is wrong to quote mine the Bible.

Let's forget your error right now, please answer this simple question: Is it wrong to quote mine the Bible?

 

[Subduction Zone]

AGAIN: To whom did I address the post to which you are responding, SZ? Get a grip, please!

Wow! Two mistakes in two days. That must be some sort of record on my part. Oh noessss

The refutation still stands. I know. Your opponent makes the same error that you do. But the explanation of a reaction by the Jews is still a valid explanation.

 

[samtonga43]

Wow! Two mistakes in two days. That must be some sort of record on my part. Oh noessss

Having read your posts, I cannot bring myself to believe that it's a record.

 

[samtonga43]

I already explained several times.

No, you haven't. Who do you think you're fooling?

And you still do not appear to understand the use of that argument.

Wrong. I understand it very well.

That indicates a major bit of prejudice when it comes to reasoning involving the Bible. The point of that argument is that it is wrong to quote mine the Bible.
Let's forget your error right now, please answer this simple question: Is it wrong to quote mine the Bible?

Error? what error? Post number please...

Contextomy is wrong when quoting from any piece of writing. It is also, iin the long run, silly, especially when the 'opponent' understands how the hermeneutics process works.

So, I have now asked for two post numbers. Will they be along soon?

 

[samtonga43]

"The Christian equivalent to the Bahá'í concept of Manifestation is the concept of incarnation. The word to incarnate means 'to embody in flesh or 'to assume, or exist in, a bodily (esp. a human) form (Oxford English Dictionary). From a Bahá'í point of view, the important question regarding the subject of incarnation is, what does Jesus incarnate?

John 1:14
“The Word became flesh.” The Son from eternity became incarnate, not the divine nature. The Son, who is in eternal relation to the Father and Spirit, willingly humbled himself and chose to assume a human nature in obedience to his Father and for our salvation (Phil. 2:6–8).

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, you haven't. Who do you think you're fooling?

Yes, I have but you do not listen very well.

Wrong. I understand it very well.[/quoite]

Clearly you did not.

Error? what error? Post number please...

Contextomy is wrong when quoting from any piece of writing. It is also, iin the long run, silly, especially when the 'opponent' understands how the hermeneutics process works.

So, I have now asked for two post numbers. Will they be along soon?

Sorry, but until you agree to a polite conversation and actually engage in one can you make any demands. As it is I will not dig through old posts for you. This also was told and explained to you many times. Like I said early, you have not been listening very well. And I really really doubt if you have a firm grasp of hermeneutics at all. Empty claims and no evidence.

Why is it that the times I am willing to support my claims with evidence that you ignore those posts? The obvious ones you only bring up long after the point and then make unreasonable demands that you know will not be met and pretend that you have made a point.

 

[Trailblazer]

John 1:14
“The Word became flesh.” The Son from eternity became incarnate, not the divine nature. The Son, who is in eternal relation to the Father and Spirit, willingly humbled himself and chose to assume a human nature in obedience to his Father and for our salvation (Phil. 2:6–8).

Yes, Jesus was The Word of God, as explained in this passage but Jesus Christ was not God in the flesh God is one and alone, exalted beyond any human understanding, and forever remains in His own high place..

“As it is said in the Gospel of John, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God”; 1 then the Holy Spirit and the Word are the appearance of God. The Spirit and the Word mean the divine perfections that appeared in the Reality of Christ, and these perfections were with God; so the sun manifests all its glory in the mirror. For the Word does not signify the body of Christ, no, but the divine perfections manifested in Him. For Christ was like a clear mirror which was facing the Sun of Reality; and the perfections of the Sun of Reality—that is to say, its light and heat—were visible and apparent in this mirror. If we look into the mirror, we see the sun, and we say, “It is the sun.” Therefore, the Word and the Holy Spirit, which signify the perfections of God, are the divine appearance. This is the meaning of the verse in the Gospel which says: “The Word was with God, and the Word was God”; 2 for the divine perfections are not different from the Essence of Oneness. The perfections of Christ are called the Word because all the beings are in the condition of letters, and one letter has not a complete meaning, while the perfections of Christ have the power of the word because a complete meaning can be inferred from a word. As the Reality of Christ was the manifestation of the divine perfections, therefore, it was like the word. Why? Because He is the sum of perfect meanings. This is why He is called the Word.” Some Answered Questions, pp. 206-207

The Son, who is in eternal relation to the Father and Spirit, did not have to humble himself and choose to assume a human nature because the Son of God had BOTH a human nature and a divine nature.

“Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself. He hath, moreover, conferred upon Him a double station. The first station, which is related to His innermost reality, representeth Him as One Whose voice is the voice of God Himself …. The second station is the human station, exemplified by the following verses: “I am but a man like you.” “Say, praise be to my Lord! Am I more than a man, an apostle?” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 66-67

 

[samtonga43]

The Son, who is in eternal relation to the Father and Spirit, did not have to humble himself and choose to assume a human nature because the Son of God had BOTH a human nature and a divine nature.

This paragraph I do not understand, Tb. I wonder if you can explain it in your own words...?