1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Christian: Are Christians forgetting that Jesus IS God Himself?

Discussion in 'Same Faith Debates' started by Christy, Dec 29, 2004.

  1. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    There is no "hierarchy" in the Trinity -- all are coequal.
     
  2. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    Jesus talks that way because Jesus is in "Son" mode when teaching his disciples. Jesus here is acting in the role of exemplar -- reflector of God, teaching his disciples by example, not by commandment, how human beings can be reflectors of God.

    Do you not think it possible that Jesus could be both fully human (Son) and fully divine (God) at the same time? That's why the Trinity is a mystery. it's really beyond finite human understanding.

    The reason Jesus was male is beacuse, in that culture, women could not 1) inherit anything (such as a kingdom), and 2) women could not teach authoritatively (teach disciples). It wouldn't have done much good in that culture for Jesus to have been born a Rachel... In our own culture, Jesus might well be female...
     
  3. mormonman

    mormonman Ammon is awesome

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2005
    Messages:
    365
    Ratings:
    +31
    I've been taught that Elohim is the name that represents Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother.
     
  4. Nehustan

    Nehustan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2005
    Messages:
    2,208
    Ratings:
    +239
    Not wanting to pull you up on Islamic dogma, but you have addressed us directly, so I will presume it was not a rhetorical question and reply. As muslims you are correct we do not see Jesus as God, nor do we believe he died on the cross, however I must add NEITHER do we believe that God is in heaven. It is quite possible that there is a finite being within the heaven(s), this is not our God. Our God is beyond the Heavens, supports and sustains them but does not permeate them other than by his power. In fact Islamic Schloars state that anyone who believes that Allah/Eloah permeates the creation is an unbeliever even if he thinks himself a believer. As to the 'Iam' or IHVH....now that's a completely different topic best kept for another time. I just wouldn't want you to misrepresent Islamic Aqeeda....and by the way....I didn't laugh once.
     
  5. angellous_evangellous

    Ratings:
    +0
    Isn't modalism a heresy? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modalism I know that you aren't adopting this POV, but the "mode" semantic is a theological hot button.

    Anyway, I really think that in strict Jewish and then Christian monotheism, being the Son of God is equal to being God in every way.
     
  6. mormonman

    mormonman Ammon is awesome

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2005
    Messages:
    365
    Ratings:
    +31
    You know, the title of this thread really disturbed me. The first thought I had was, "Uhhh...what?" Does mainstream Christianity really believe this? If this was true I'ld think Christ was a lunitic. How can you be a son of your self? How can you back "Christ is God Himself" up. Oh, I know the scripture that says that their all one. Well, don't you think that it would make more sense if that was interpreted as they were one in purpose? I'm still amazed at this. I finally figured it out. Christ was a ventriloquist. He had to have been. Because when He was baptised Heavenly Father spoke. And you guys say that God is a spirit? If God was Christ, He was resurrected(regained His body). When Christ went back to Heaven He had a body. Why then would He, if He was God the Father, give up His body. I just don't get it.
    You know what would make sense. What would make sense, is that the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost were SEPARATE BEINGS :eek: . Why is that so hard for you guys to grasp? :confused:
     
  7. Squirt

    Squirt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,239
    Ratings:
    +158
    I disagree. Can you show me some verses from the Bible to prove your point? I can show you plenty of examples that indicate otherwise.
     
  8. i believe in tranquility

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Messages:
    107
    Ratings:
    +7
    whatever i dont BELIEVE that Jesus IS God. I believe that Jesus is the SON OF GOD.
     
  9. i believe in tranquility

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Messages:
    107
    Ratings:
    +7
    so if Jesus IS God, doesnt that mean that God commited sucide....lOL! thats one of the reasons I dont beilve that Jesus IS God.
     
  10. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    My use of the word "mode" doesn't denote modalism. Modalism says that the three parts of the Trinity are merely different aspects or "modes" of God.

    What I was saying was that Jesus, even though he is fully God, is also fully human. When he dealt with his disciples, he dealt with them as "fully human," since his job was to exemplify what it meant for a human to believe and follow. Therefore, Jesus was speaking out of "human mode" and not "God mode."
     
  11. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    John 1: "And the Word was God..."
    Too tired to look up the reference, but Jesus says "I and the Father are One..."
    At Jesus' baptism, the Spirit descended and a voice spoke saying, "This is my Son..."
    Philippians 2:6,7: "Who, though he [Jesus] was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form..."

    As far as I'm concerned, though, the Bible doesn't have to be the last word in formulating theology. The Trinity was largely "what made sense to the community" upon developing Christology. That's as compelling for me as any specific Biblical statements, themselves.
     
  12. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    No. God didn't kill himself. The Romans crucified Jesus. It was a self-sacrifice, not a suicide.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. i believe in tranquility

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Messages:
    107
    Ratings:
    +7
    but since God is alknowing, he knew that he was going to die, that in earthly terms is called sucide. If i know that if i go to iraq i will die, and i go anyways, i am in a sense commiting sucide.
     
  14. mormonman

    mormonman Ammon is awesome

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2005
    Messages:
    365
    Ratings:
    +31
    Sojourner is right. It's not suicide. Christ didn't stab himself.
     
  15. Squirt

    Squirt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,239
    Ratings:
    +158
    Okay, my question pertained specifically to the co-equality of the Father and the Son. Most of your responses did not address this issue, except in a very oblique way.

    I agree with you that the Word was God. But the use of the proposition “with” implies a relationship between two distinct entities. One entity cannot be “with” himself. More importantly, this verse says nothing at all about the co-equality of the Father and the Son. It states only that the Son was with the Father in the beginning.


    I’ll save you the trouble. It’s John 10:30. But John 17 makes it perfectly clear that Jesus was not referring to a physical “oneness” when He said that He and His Father were one. He was talking about a spiritual unity that He wanted His followers to be a part of. By your reasoning, if God were to answer Jesus’ prayer that His followers “may be one, even as we are one,” we would all be co-equal with God. Is that what you believe?


    I’m not even sure what point you are trying to make here. Yes, God the Father spoke from Heaven and said that Jesus Christ was His Son. I see nothing here about co-equality. I see a Father acknowledging His Son, in whom He is well pleased.


    This is the best verse you’ve come up with. It’s actually the only example you gave that I feel supports your position.


    As I said, I can give you a great many examples that I believe prove that the Son was subordinate to the Father. I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on these verses:

    Matthew 10:32-33 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

    Christ is the mediator between mankind and the Father. The Father, therefore, holds a position of greater authority than the Son.


    Mark 13:32 But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.


    The Father has knowledge which the Son does not have.

    Luke 22:41-42 And he was withdrawn from them about a stone's cast, and kneeled down, and prayed, saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.


    The Son prays to the Father, not visa versa. He accepts the Father’s will, not the other way around.


    John 5:22-23 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

    The Father sent the Son to earth. The Son did not send the Father.


    John 8:28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.


    The Son admits that He does only that which the Father commands. He acts as His Father’s agent.


    John 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.


    And right from the Savior’s mouth: “My Father is greater than I.”


    John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

    The Father gave the Son a mission to accomplish. The Son did not give the Father such a mission.


    John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

    The Son acknowledges the Father as His God. Nowhere do you see the Father acknowledging the Son as His God.


    What made sense to the community? I beg your pardon?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    Every single verse you cited contains an "I-you" formula. That's your reason for saying that there's no co-equality? By definition, these verses have to be "I-you" formulas, because there are three distinct persons in the Trinity. Jesus and HS are not simply different manifestations of the same personage. There is no blurring of personalities. Jesus is Jesus, God is God, HS is HS. Therefore, when Jesus speaks of God, he says "I this" and "you that." I still feel that the John 1 and Philippians 2 passages are compelling here.

    My last statement: The scriptures are only useful if we understand them. That understanding manifests itself in what makes sense to us -- and not what makes sense to us as individuals, but what makes sense to the community -- the Body of Christ. The community recognized early on what you, as an individual, cannot or will not accept: that there is a mystery to the Trinity that allows one omnipotent God to be manifest in three distinct persons. It's not a cop-out. It's not a justification of a weak position. It's mystery that has been revealed to us in scripture that we finite creatures cannot fully understand, but that we acknowledge as best we can. Human language cannot contain God. Since the Bible is made up of thuman language, its communication about God is a limited thing. We have to do the best we can to apply a deficient language to describe an infinite God.
     
  17. Squirt

    Squirt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,239
    Ratings:
    +158
    No, that's not my reason for saying they are not co-equal. Every verse I cited shows some way in which the Father holds a position of superiority over the Son. Did that just go over your head or what?
     
  18. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    God holds a position of authority over every human being, including Jesus, who was fully human, and Jesus rightfully submits to that authority (just as any son submits to the authority of his father...). Jesus was not playing the part of a human being -- Jesus was a human being.

    But...Jesus is also fully divine. And his stance of submission as a fully human person does not overshadow or usurp his divine being, or his divine status in any way.

    To say that Jesus cannot be fully divine because he was fully human (or that he can't really be fully human because he's fully divine) is not an argument. One does not define the other. If you want to argue that Jesus can't be fully divine, you'll have to do better than to qualify Jesus' divinity by his humanity.
     
  19. Squirt

    Squirt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,239
    Ratings:
    +158
    Thanks for the clarification. I agree that Jesus was fully divine. I never intended to imply otherwise. I was just saying that, within the Godhead, He holds a position of subordination to His Father.
     
  20. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    That's your interpretation of scripture. Interesting how two people, who read the same scriptures, can come up with two different beliefs! It certainly makes for a broader understanding of God, doesn't it?
     
Loading...