The Christian idea about Two natures?

[ChristineES]

If it only takes a belief in a story, then everyone is full human being and 100% God after death.

Well, not to me.

 

[Awoon]

Well, not to me.

Well "believe" and make it so.

 

[nazz]

When you go down to the ocean and scoop out a cup of the water what do you have?

The cup is full of seawater which is the exact same substance and essence of the water in the ocean. It is just in a container.

 

[George-ananda]

The way I look at it, Jesus had a human body. But He also had a spirit (as we all do) and His spirit was One with God's. While we are working to get to that level; He was there; that's the difference.

 

[idav]

Before i ask my questions and enter a discussion in whoever wants to reply i want to say that i mean no disrespect towards Christianity nor am i trying to attack it.

My question is how does the Two natures of Jesuss(pbuh) actually works?

Each time i hear the argument that Jesus(pbuh) was fully God and fully Human at the same time i feel
confused and i get the assumption it is a argument based on no scriptural references and contradicts with basic logic and reasoning.
,
Let me give you a example: Human-beings are humans, animals are animals. If a man became a duck he wouldn't be longer a man but a duck. An another example the frog prince, the princess who kissed the frog who then becomes a prince well now he is no longer a frog but something different a prince. So basically if God becomes a man or a incarnate man then god is now a man and he isn't god anymore because they are two different distinct beings.

Now did i miss something? Or is there a explanation on how it could work..

My idea is that we are humans so that covers fully human and god is omnipresent so anyone has potential to be fully god, Jesus being someone that actualized it. I don't take to the trinity formula because it goes way beyond that as God has no bounds but humans do.

 

[Falvlun]

We believe that when Jesus walked with His apostles, that He was a full human being. And that He is 100% God when returned to His Kingdom. Confusing, yep.

So you don't think that Jesus was fully human and fully God at the same time? I never thought that was an option, but I think that would work.

 

[Desert Snake]

So you don't think that Jesus was fully human and fully God at the same time? I never thought that was an option, but I think that would work.

Nope, I agree with you, I was under the same impression. In fact, it's the first time I read that opinion.

 

[Conståntine]

My question is how does the Two natures of Jesuss(pbuh) actually works?

Each time i hear the argument that Jesus(pbuh) was fully God and fully Human at the same time i feel
confused and i get the assumption it is a argument based on no scriptural references and contradicts with basic logic and reasoning.

God (Jesus) is a spirit. The bible says that God was manifested in the flesh (in a human body). It must be noted that God manifesting himself in human form does not make Him human.

I 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.

 

[Shermana]

That's the thing, i'm not sure if you can't understand it, but those of us who can don't seem conflicted with the idea. This is similar to the trinity concept, which Christians also understand, ( i'd hope so, as many churches support this idea).
Jesus= God and man........incidentally, you probably know this, but Jesus also referred to himself as the "son of man" at least once...
Perhaps someone with a good theological vocabulary can explain it sufficiently.

There's a difference between "not being conflicted with it" and "not understanding" or "not caring if there's a contradiction", and probably more synomous with "accepts it even if it doesn't make sense" or "Doesn't care and accepts anyway".

They've been trying to explain it sufficiently for millenia. Most official positions are that "The human mind is not capable of understanding it".

To say that those who don't understand aren't meant to is a bit of a cop out I'd say. What makes you think you understand it? Are you SURE you understand it? Are you sure they understand it? Do you think you can attest to all the problems and holes in the doctrine? Are you aware of the conflicts to begin with? Scripturally speaking?

 

[Shermana]

God (Jesus) is a spirit. The bible says that God was manifested in the flesh (in a human body). It must be noted that God manifesting himself in human form does not make Him human.

I 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.

That's the KJV translation which is not what the manuscripts actually say (though some like the Darby translation follow suit). It's a great example of how Trinitarian translations will sometimes change the text or go by some fringe altered manuscript to support their doctrines however.

It should say "he".

New International Version (©1984)
Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.
New Living Translation (©2007)
Without question, this is the great mystery of our faith: Christ was revealed in a human body and vindicated by the Spirit. He was seen by angels and announced to the nations. He was believed in throughout the world and taken to heaven in glory.

English Standard Version (©2001)
Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
By common confession, great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, Was vindicated in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Proclaimed among the nations, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory.

Holman Christian Standard Bible (©2009)
And most certainly, the mystery of godliness is great: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.

International Standard Version (©2012)
By common confession, the secret of our godly worship is great: In flesh was he revealed to sight, kept righteous by the Spirit's might, adored by angels singing. To nations was he manifest, believing souls found peace and rest, our Lord in heaven reigning!

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
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.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
And this Mystery of Righteousness is truly great, which was revealed in the flesh and was justified in The Spirit; He appeared to Angels and was preached among the Gentiles; He was trusted in the world and he ascended into glory.



King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
And without doubt 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.

American King James Version
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached to the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

American Standard Version
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness; He who was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the spirit, Seen of angels, Preached among the nations, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory.

Douay-Rheims Bible
And evidently great is the mystery of godliness, which was manifested in the flesh, was justified in the spirit, appeared unto angels, hath been preached unto the Gentiles, is believed in the world, is taken up in glory.



English Revised Version
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness; He who was manifested in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of angels, preached among the nations, believed on in the world, received up in glory.



Weymouth New Testament
And, beyond controversy, great is the mystery of our religion-- that Christ appeared in human form, and His claims justified by the Spirit, was seen by angels and proclaimed among Gentile nations, was believed on in the world, and received up again into glory.

 

[Conståntine]

That's the KJV translation which is not what the manuscripts actually say (though some like the Darby translation follow suit). It's a great example of how Trinitarian translations will sometimes change the text or go by some fringe altered manuscript to support their doctrines however.

It should say "he".

???

On a quick and slightly unimportant note: in my Spanish bible, it also says Dios (God). That's not a King James copy either.

And who would the pronoun he be in reference to? God? Another angel? Or the guy across the street?

 

[Shermana]

???

On a quick and slightly unimportant note: in my Spanish bible, it also says Dios (God). That's not a King James copy either.

And who would the pronoun he be in reference to? God? Another angel? Or the guy across the street?

The "he" is in reference to Jesus, not God. Which edition is your Spanish Bible? It's not completely exclusive to the KJV and may be a trend set by it rather. But you will see that most translations say "he" instead for a reason.

 

[Shermana]

Compare the La Biblia de Las Americas and La Nueva Biblia de los Hispanos to the Reina Valera and Sagradas Escritures


La Biblia de las Américas (© 1997 Lockman)
E indiscutiblemente, grande es el misterio de la piedad: El fue manifestado en la carne, vindicado en el Espíritu, contemplado por ángeles, proclamado entre las naciones, creído en el mundo, recibido arriba en gloria.

La Nueva Biblia de los Hispanos (© 2005 Lockman)
E indiscutiblemente, grande es el misterio de la piedad: El fue manifestado en la carne, Vindicado (Justificado) en el Espíritu, Contemplado por ángeles, Proclamado entre las naciones, Creído en el mundo, Recibido arriba en gloria.

Reina Valera Gómez (© 2010)
Y sin contradicción, grande es el misterio de la piedad: Dios fue manifestado en carne; justificado en el Espíritu; visto de los ángeles; predicado a los gentiles; creído en el mundo; recibido arriba en gloria.

Reina Valera (1909)
Y sin cotradicción, grande es el misterio de la piedad: Dios ha sido manifestado en carne; ha sido justificado con el Espíritu; ha sido visto de los ángeles; ha sido predicado á los Gentiles; ha sido creído en el mundo; ha sido recibido en gloria.

Sagradas Escrituras (1569)
Y sin falta, grande es el misterio de la piedad: Dios se ha manifestado en carne; ha sido justificado con el Espíritu; ha sido visto de los Angeles; ha sido predicado a los gentiles; ha sido creído en el mundo; ha sido recibido en gloria.

 

[Conståntine]

The "he" is in reference to Jesus, not God. Which edition is your Spanish Bible? It's not completely exclusive to the KJV and may be a trend set by it rather. But you will see that most translations say "he" instead for a reason.

Am I to believe that my 1569 Spanish Bible is corrupted as well?

The last I checked in the scriptures, Jesus was, still is, and will be GOD.

But we can debate that later if you'd like. In any event, there are a slew of other scriptures that will attest to the fact that God himself was manifested in the flesh:

John 1:1: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 1:14: 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.

 

[Shermana]

John 1:1 should read "Word was a god", as numerous independent scholars have said long before the JWs ever followed suit.

(Trust me, I've debated and debunked this more times than I can count on this forum alone)

Pretty much everything "in the scriptures' that "says Jesus was God" is from a highly disputable rendition of the grammar that the orthodox decided to run with. I've seen just about every single one of these "proof texts", many times, and will be happy to help you, or direct you to other threads where they've been picked apart several times.

 

[Conståntine]

John 1:1 should read "Word was a god", as numerous independent scholars have said long before the JWs ever followed suit.

Unless you yourself are a scholar of sorts, it's neither here nor there in my opinion.

And why should it read the Word was a god? Moreover, why should I accept the word of so-called scholars as opposed to what the text says?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Trust me, I've debated and debunked this more times than I can count on this forum alone)

Feel free to take a stab at it. I'll be here.

 

[Shermana]

When you say "The text" you mean "My preferred translation" of course.

Quite simply, it's an Anarthrous Theos. Here's some examples:

70-John-1-1-Truths

15) James L. Tomanec, The Word was a God"
The New Testament of our Lord and Savior Jesus Anointed , 1958
PRINTED BY ARROWHEAD PRESS, POCATELLO, IDAHO, USA
James L. Tomanek - Internet Bible Catalog & http://www.thedcl.org/bible/index.html -- on CD >

(9) Hermann Heinfetter, [A]s a god the Command was"
Herman Heinfetter [Pseudonym of Frederick Parker], A Literal Translation of the New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, on definite rules of translation, from the text of the Vatican Manuscript. 6th ed. London: Evan Evans, 1863.
Although this is called the "sixth edition," in fact it is the first edition of Parker's translation of the entire New Testament.
http://books.google.com/books?id=-- actual text----http://www.archive.org/details/literaltranslati00parkrich -- downloadable version

19th Century English Versions & http://www.biblecollectors.org/literal_bible_translations.htm

(10) Robert Young, LL.D. , A]nd a God (i.e. a Divine Being) was the Word"--Concise Commentary on the Holy Bible, 1885
Grand Rapids: Baker, n.d., page 54--ISBN: 0801099102
Note this book was designed to flesh out his Literal translation and to compliment it.
s.google.co.uk/books?id=fq=Robert+Young,+Concise+Commentary+on+the+Holy+Bible&source=web&ots=f-_result&resnum
Google Books ( PDF of book )
Young's Literal Translation & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Young_(Biblical_scholar)

(11) Leicester Ambrose Sawyer, "And the logos was a god"--Leicester Ambrose Sawyer, 1879
THE FINAL THEOLOGY, Vol 1 "Introduction to the New Testament, Historic, Theologic and Critical, p. 353.
Google Books

Leicester Ambrose Sawyer - Internet Bible Catalog & Google Books
Plus Leicester Ambrose Sawyer

(12) A.N. Jannaris Ph D, [A]nd was a god"
A.N. Jannaris Lecturer of Post-Classical and Modern Greek - at the University of St. Andrews, Scotland
Zeitschrift fur die Newtestameutlich Wissencraft, (German periodical) 1901
An Historical Greek Grammar chiefly of the Attic Dialect, as written and spoken from classical antiquity down to present time, founded upon the ancient texts, inscriptions papyri and present popular Greek
London, Macmillan 1897 [(re)printed in Germany Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung, Hildensheim -1968, v-xi]. ISBN 3487018365 .
St John's Gospel and the Logos"ZNW 2 Zeitschrift fur die Newtestameutlich Wissencraft, pp13-25, German periodical, (1901)
http://www.lsn.se/2509/Announcements/Jannaris A.N. Biography.pdf---- JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

 

[Brickjectivity]

Foud, the Trinity purposely teaches a lesson about focusing too much on your conclusions, so that you have no excuse to become argumentative and divisive. There is no logical way to read the word Trinity or the description of it, because there isn't supposed to be. Of course Christianity could be more limited, but it isn't in order to make a point. Words are not perfect. People are not perfect. Knowledge is not perfect. Arguments suck. You might call this the 'Flipside' of the Trinity. When you study the Trinity, a person should focus upon learning humility in speech and thoughts which are clearly insufficient to comprehend one of the basic tenants of Christianity.

The general idea is illustrated with the following two passages in the NT:

1. All of I Corinthians 13, in which I highlight from verse 7 "bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things." Like the Trinity, believing 'All things' just doesn't make logical sense.

2. Hebrews 1:1 "In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways," In various ways? Some translations say 'In diverse manners'. This is completely unacceptable from a logical and hermeneutic stance. The solution is not to rely too heavily upon hermeneutics, rigor, etc.

 

[Conståntine]

When you say "The text" you mean "My preferred translation" of course.

Quite simply, it's an Anarthrous Theos. Here's some examples:

There are articles that are also out there that stress the legitimacy of the King James 1611 version of the English bible. We could go back and forth till thy kingdom come. In the end, it means nothing to me. If we really want to be 100% accurate, then to suggest other alternative English translations is a waste of time. Reading the scriptures in their original language would make more sense.


Revelation of John 21:6: And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
Revelation of John 21:7: He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.


Jesus might not be a God to you, but I'll take him up any day on his promise above. Having said that, what are those scriptures supposed to read in English, pray tell, according to the scholars?

 

[Shermana]

John 21:6 is the Father speaking, not Jesus.

Context helps, as well as reading the preceding verses. Jesus and the Father take turns speaking all throughout Revelation as two clearly different, separate beings, and it's important to know who is speaking and when before you try making the case. So it's not really Jesus's promise. It's the Father's. Cherry picking and the "Speaker Confusion issue" won't help you achieve an objective understanding of what the text states.

Same goes for Rev 22:13, many assume it's Jesus speaking when it's not, it's an Angel speaking a message from the Father. Same with Rev 1:8. (Though 1:11 contains a clearly spurious "Alpha and Omega" in the KJV and some others that is not in the manuscripts)

http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/ao-speaker-confusion.html#

There are articles that are also out there that stress the legitimacy of the King James 1611 version of the English bible. We could go back and forth till thy kingdom come

So how would you propose we find such a solution then?

Reading the scriptures in their original language would make more sense.

And that's the issue, of why the un-articulated Theos should read as "a god" instead of "God". The language is dead, so you can't really "read it in the original" without having modern linguists tell you what it should read, (Modern Greek ain't quite like it even), and then begins the issue of how to determine who is right, the orthodox church scholars or the independent non-church aligned ones.