'Fully God and fully man'....or, 'God & man'? Is there a difference?

[Desert Snake]

No beIng 100% man and 100% god is nonsensical if god and man are different species.

It does make a little more sense in a pantheist theology though but even when saying everything is God it’s really pushing it to call anything fully God.

I believe that the human aspect is because He interrelates with humans, not because He is literally just like us. Jesus does many things in the Bible, that no ordinary human can do. Jesus on earth is immortal, ascends, so forth. Clearly not limited by the same physicality, as others.

 

[Desert Snake]

I think the Carpenter made some comment.....to show the difference

which is greater?....the Son?....or the Father?

But the answer involves comparison that can't be made. Jesus says, no one comes to the father, except through me, and that no one even knows, the Father, except through Him.

The answer to that question would be unanswerable, without Jesus, and this is by Jesus's own words, that the question is unanswerable.

More likely, it is meant as a way of saying, that they are equal.

Ie, I am the Lord here, the father is the Lord there, which is greater?

It is rhetorical, imo

 

[wizanda]

Exodus 6:3
And I appear unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, as El Shaddai; as to My name YHVH, I have not been known to them.

Here, El Shaddai clearly says that His name is YHVH.

Thank you for the questions, appreciate the analyzing...

Historically that doesn't add up, as unless they edited Genesis completely... YHVH already was called that:

Genesis 4:26 A son was also born to Seth, and he named him Enosh. At that time men began to call on Yahweh’s name.

Genesis 12:8 He left from there to go to the mountain on the east of Bethel and pitched his tent, having Bethel on the west, and Ai on the east. There he built an altar to Yahweh and called on Yahweh’s name.

Genesis 13:4 to the place of the altar, which he had made there at the first. There Abram called on Yahweh’s name.

Genesis 16:13 She called the name of Yahweh who spoke to her, “You are a God who sees,” for she said, “Have I even stayed alive after seeing him?”

Genesis 21:33 Abraham planted a tamarisk tree in Beersheba, and called there on the name of Yahweh, the Everlasting God.

Genesis 22:14 Abraham called the name of that place “Yahweh Will Provide”. As it is said to this day, “On Yahweh’s mountain, it will be provided.”

Genesis 26:25 He built an altar there, and called on Yahweh’s name, and pitched his tent there. There Isaac’s servants dug a well.

El Shaddai means God Almighty, Yahavah means Lord To Be, Ahayah means I Will Become...

God doesn't have a 'name', it has descriptors, as everything comes from the Source (CPU) which is beyond form...

Thus it creates forms for us to understand... Thus YHVH/the Lamb (Yeshua) are Divine representations (Elohim).

Thus Exodus 6:3 is clarifying that God Almighty appeared; yet to be clearer here is a name meaning, Lord Who Appears/Becomes.

Full name of Yehoshua is the Lord Who Saves; thus these are just aspects of the whole...

Yeshua is the Right Arm of the Lord who breathes reality into existence (YHVH).

In my opinion.

 

[idav]

I believe that the human aspect is because He interrelates with humans, not because He is literally just like us. Jesus does many things in the Bible, that no ordinary human can do. Jesus on earth is immortal, ascends, so forth. Clearly not limited by the same physicality, as others.

Great then he is half man half god like Hercules. The point is being 200 % of anything doesn’t make a lick of sense.

 

[wizanda]

Then you have your video game character which is an extension of your own mind and will. Except in a virtual world. See what I'm saying?

This is why using the CPU analogy, as it is far easier for us to quantify, and understand...

So just as the CPU manifests something within the Matrix, doesn't mean that being is fully the CPU, it is an aspect of it, a representation.

Jesus was indwelt with the Fullness of the Divine Nature. (Colossians 2:8-9)

Also find Paul to be contradictory to Christ on multiple points here.

Remove the faulty foundations of the Pharisees, John, Paul, and Simon, then we're left with a different theological understanding.

it is because of idolatry that Yeshua was manifest in the world.

We agree on this; yet to remove those who would turn a man into God, and to catch out the workers of iniquity who are like Ravenous beings.

In my opinion.

 

[syo]

Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should repent. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not make it good?

Psalms 146:3 Don’t put your trust in princes, each a son of man in whom there is no help.

Isaiah 51:12 “I, even I, am he who comforts you. Who are you, that you are afraid of man who shall die, and of the son of man who will be made as grass?

In my opinion.

i agree, i was talking when the Son came on earth as Jesus. Jesus is full god and full man when he came on earth. i believe in the nicene creed.

 

[Sleeppy]

Thank you for the questions, appreciate the analyzing...

Historically that doesn't add up, as unless they edited Genesis completely... YHVH already was called that:

Genesis 4:26 A son was also born to Seth, and he named him Enosh. At that time men began to call on Yahweh’s name.

Genesis 12:8 He left from there to go to the mountain on the east of Bethel and pitched his tent, having Bethel on the west, and Ai on the east. There he built an altar to Yahweh and called on Yahweh’s name.

Genesis 13:4 to the place of the altar, which he had made there at the first. There Abram called on Yahweh’s name.

Genesis 16:13 She called the name of Yahweh who spoke to her, “You are a God who sees,” for she said, “Have I even stayed alive after seeing him?”

Genesis 21:33 Abraham planted a tamarisk tree in Beersheba, and called there on the name of Yahweh, the Everlasting God.

Genesis 22:14 Abraham called the name of that place “Yahweh Will Provide”. As it is said to this day, “On Yahweh’s mountain, it will be provided.”

Genesis 26:25 He built an altar there, and called on Yahweh’s name, and pitched his tent there. There Isaac’s servants dug a well.

El Shaddai means God Almighty, Yahavah means Lord To Be, Ahayah means I Will Become...

God doesn't have a 'name', it has descriptors, as everything comes from the Source (CPU) which is beyond form...

Thus it creates forms for us to understand... Thus YHVH/the Lamb (Yeshua) are Divine representations (Elohim).

Thus Exodus 6:3 is clarifying that God Almighty appeared; yet to be clearer here is a name meaning, Lord Who Appears/Becomes.

Full name of Yehoshua is the Lord Who Saves; thus these are just aspects of the whole...

Yeshua is the Right Arm of the Lord who breathes reality into existence (YHVH).

In my opinion.

The archeology before the time of Moses, i.e. Genesis, all mention El, not YHVH. Hence, the major cities, other sites of worship, and childrens' names using El, not YHVH.

It makes sense that Moses would initiate the change in writing- but the archeology doesn't support your assertions about any verifiable history.


I understand what you're attempting to do, but Moses was as much a lying, genocidal dictator, as he was a cultural hero. This idea that there are 24 other gods/elders, or council of Elohim, was an attempt to morph prior polytheistic beliefs, into Moses' own attempt at monotheism. He was attempting to tame, and rule over a polytheistic people. As result, it really is not monotheism, but polytheism in denial.

The fact that you use Revelations further concerns me. It has literally done next to nothing of benefit, for the world. It has caused more confusion and disarray than it's worth.

 

[wizanda]

This idea that there are 24 other gods/elders, or council of Elohim, was an attempt to morph prior polytheistic beliefs, into Moses' own attempt at monotheism.

David declares the Divine Council as well...

The issue is people's understanding of Elohim, tho it could mean gods; within the Hebraic setting it is applied as Divine beings (Arch Angels), who are less than the Most High.... Similar to what we find in Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, etc.

In Deuteronomy 32:7-9 El Elyon shared the nations among the Elohim... So Moses recognized the Divine Council, and One God Most High.

The archeology before the time of Moses, i.e. Genesis, all mention El, not YHVH.

Genesis 22:14 Abraham called the name of that place “Yahweh Will Provide”. As it is said to this day, “On Yahweh’s mountain, it will be provided.”

any verifiable history.

We don't even know if Moses, David, or any of it existed.

The fact that you use Revelations further concerns me. It has literally done next to nothing of benefit, for the world. It has caused more confusion and disarray than it's worth.

Revelation when understood like a tapestry interlinking all the loose ends in the rest of the prophets, makes the Bible clear, for those with an ear.

In my opinion.

 

[Sleeppy]

David declares the Divine Council as well...

The issue is people's understanding of Elohim, tho it could mean gods; within the Hebraic setting it is applied as Divine beings (Arch Angels), who are less than the Most High.... Similar to what we find in Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, etc.

In Deuteronomy 32:7-9 El Elyon shared the nations among the Elohim... So Moses recognized the Divine Council, and One God Most High.

Genesis 22:14 Abraham called the name of that place “Yahweh Will Provide”. As it is said to this day, “On Yahweh’s mountain, it will be provided.”

We don't even know if Moses, David, or any of it existed.

Revelation when understood like a tapestry interlinking all the loose ends in the rest of the prophets, makes the Bible clear, for those with an ear.

In my opinion.

David did not precede Moses. Nor did YHVH-Yireh as the name of Mount Moriah.. This is all according to, and as result of Moses. The name doesn't precede him, as he very plainly admits in Genesis 6:3. There is no archeology to say otherwise.

Elohim, as we know, is a plural word meaning 'gods'. The singular is Eloah.


It doesn't seem odd that none of the other Elohim are even mentioned? What belongs to who? Why are the nations at war, if a unified council exists above them? Why don't any of these other nations, identify, or even know of their respective Eloah?


Isaiah 45:5
I am YHVH, and there is none else, Except Me there is no Elohim...

Why does Moses call one of these, YHVH, Elohim Elyon-- if YHVH himself says that there are no other Elohim?

 

[Thief]

But the answer involves comparison that can't be made. Jesus says, no one comes to the father, except through me, and that no one even knows, the Father, except through Him.

The answer to that question would be unanswerable, without Jesus, and this is by Jesus's own words, that the question is unanswerable.

More likely, it is meant as a way of saying, that they are equal.

Ie, I am the Lord here, the father is the Lord there, which is greater?

It is rhetorical, imo

when you get THERE......you will see hierarchy

seems the Father sits upon the throne of heaven....the Almighty
and the Son will be seen at His right hand

rhetoric?...can be applied
if I cut a deal with the Son.....the Father will honor it
it is not likely I shall deal with the throne of heaven on my own

 

[wizanda]

Elohim, as we know, is a plural word meaning 'gods'. The singular is Eloah.

Yet there are two terms, El is for God, and when H is added to something like Sara and Abram, it means God breathed.

Why don't any of these other nations, identify, or even know of their respective Eloah?

What if Buddha, Lao Tzu, Krishna, etc, are all Eloah/Avatars/Arch Angels as well.

Why are the nations at war, if a unified council exists above them?

Because we're down near Hell, and people get confused by language barriers, when they're all saying the same thing.

What belongs to who?

Think we can identify by religions; yet it would be interesting to know what originally was stipulated when El Elyon separated the nations, if that happened.

Isaiah 45:5
I am YHVH, and there is none else, Except Me there is no Elohim...

From the Source, where YHVH is the breath of creation, it created the other Elohim.

It seems you're stuck on physical objects, when this goes beyond individual objectification; God is beyond form, and the host of Heaven are as well...

They are divine aspects, not individuals, there is just a Oneness of consciousness from the Singularity.

Why does Moses call one of these, YHVH, Elohim Elyon-- if YHVH himself says that there are no other Elohim?

Not sure where he does... There is El Elyon (God Most High), who is not an Elohim... Please show where you're meaning?

In my opinion.

 

[Jumi]

Does this change His person?

Some would argue that it does.

Is fully God and fully man, clear, or confusing?

Depends on what is meant by it. Idea that God had an avatar that was fully human?

 

[Desert Snake]

Thank you for the questions, appreciate the analyzing...

Historically that doesn't add up, as unless they edited Genesis completely... YHVH already was called that:

Genesis 4:26 A son was also born to Seth, and he named him Enosh. At that time men began to call on Yahweh’s name.

Genesis 12:8 He left from there to go to the mountain on the east of Bethel and pitched his tent, having Bethel on the west, and Ai on the east. There he built an altar to Yahweh and called on Yahweh’s name.

Genesis 13:4 to the place of the altar, which he had made there at the first. There Abram called on Yahweh’s name.

Genesis 16:13 She called the name of Yahweh who spoke to her, “You are a God who sees,” for she said, “Have I even stayed alive after seeing him?”

Genesis 21:33 Abraham planted a tamarisk tree in Beersheba, and called there on the name of Yahweh, the Everlasting God.

Genesis 22:14 Abraham called the name of that place “Yahweh Will Provide”. As it is said to this day, “On Yahweh’s mountain, it will be provided.”

Genesis 26:25 He built an altar there, and called on Yahweh’s name, and pitched his tent there. There Isaac’s servants dug a well.

El Shaddai means God Almighty, Yahavah means Lord To Be, Ahayah means I Will Become...

God doesn't have a 'name', it has descriptors, as everything comes from the Source (CPU) which is beyond form...

Thus it creates forms for us to understand... Thus YHVH/the Lamb (Yeshua) are Divine representations (Elohim).

Thus Exodus 6:3 is clarifying that God Almighty appeared; yet to be clearer here is a name meaning, Lord Who Appears/Becomes.

Full name of Yehoshua is the Lord Who Saves; thus these are just aspects of the whole...

Yeshua is the Right Arm of the Lord who breathes reality into existence (YHVH).

In my opinion.

What I am saying, about the names, is that actually 'God', is used for the plurality, and the names. That is the meaning, or usage, of the name God. This is more than just theological standpoint, in other words. Hence, you may not agree with the usage of the name, God, or, you may not use the name, God, and simply always use specific names, however, the name God, has an actual known meaning, that correlates, to the Hebraic. When you want to change the plurality meaning, or all the names meaning, individually, it doesn't mean the same thing, as it is intended.
I do agree with some other points you have made, though.

Great then he is half man half god like Hercules. The point is being 200 % of anything doesn’t make a lick of sense.

Well, not if the understanding is different. Jesus does not really become another individual, whereas Hercules may have, not sure. Jesus not being separated from the Godhood, Elohim, He is never apart from this identity.
As far as 'fully god, fully man', I wouldn't use that description, since it can be interpreted as either contradictory, or it could be used to contextually separate the God nature from the man form, which is incorrect.

 

[74x12]

So just as the CPU manifests something within the Matrix, doesn't mean that being is fully the CPU, it is an aspect of it, a representation.

God is a Spirit and cannot be contained in any physical way. Not even the heavens of the heavens may contain Him but are considered an unfit house for His glory and may not give Him true rest. He must be manifest only in a Spiritual way. The manifestation of Christ was perfect in that He displays or shows all the good character of God in every way. This is why Jesus calls Himself the temple of God. Jesus came not only to show God to us, but to show forth God in us. We may only do this by becoming the members of His body. Therefore God may be shown forth in us the whole body. The true house of God is that which expresses God's nature in perfection without any expression of God being left in silence. This the temple will do. Not every member having the same function but built up together will express the nature of God in Christ Jesus. Becoming the perfect Lamp for the Light of God through the power that is in Jesus.

There is a very good reason God was manifest in the flesh. The resurrection is newness of Life. The power to make all things new. The power must be put in man so that man may prevail. The power was always with God. God had no need for Himself.

Jesus incarnation is only the beginning. As I said He begins to build through the resurrection and where is the end of the building? So that all the nature of God may be expressed in His body for all eternity.

It is once He is in the world that He is anointed as the Messiah(which means Anointed). The holy Spirit was not given by measure to Jesus, but He was allowed to operate in an unlimited way in the holy Spirit. That is if the analogy was electricity and you wanted the perfect conductor. That would be Jesus. So you have copper (good) but silver is better. Jesus is better than all being absolutely perfect; so that the Spirit of God flowed through Him without any resistance. All the gifts were in Him and all the anointing of the former prophets plus a much greater portion! The Spirit of God is more flowing than anything.

Remove the faulty foundations of the Pharisees, John, Paul, and Simon, then we're left with a different theological understanding.

Of all those, only Paul was a Pharisee as he claimed. John and Simon were simple fishermen. To be a true Pharisee required some money even being born with a silver spoon in your mouth was a big help; perhaps some servants so you could devote more time to studying the scriptures under a Rabbi. The sons of fishermen did not have time for this except on certain days like the Sabbath. The Pharisees were considered a religious elite of the Jews. Mostly from "good old" families. Jesus chose them not because they knew so much, but because they were hungry and thirsty.

As for Simon being called a stone it's a good thing if you would consider that what Jesus meant are living stones which together comprise the temple of God. Jesus Himself being the Chief Cornerstone.

We agree on this; yet to remove those who would turn a man into God, and to catch out the workers of iniquity who are like Ravenous beings.

In my opinion.

A man may not be turned into a God by anyone. Yet God who is All powerful may become a man.

Jesus came not to destroy but to turn us to God again. If He wanted to destroy then He could. This is why John the baptist came first to turn the hearts of the children to the fathers(the prophets of old) so that they may receive Christ. Because He is like a refiners fire and a fuller's soap as the scripture says ...

 

[wizanda]

This is why Jesus calls Himself the temple of God.

Not sure of anywhere?

Of all those, only Paul was a Pharisee as he claimed. John and Simon were simple fishermen.

John is written by the Sanhedrin as the evidence suggests, as only someone who was privy to all the private Pharisee conversations, could have recorded them so well.

John-Mark the Fisherman most likely wrote the Gospel of Mark, as it recorded the Transfiguration which he attended.

Simon says Yeshua is "the Christ", that is a Pharisaic concept, and Simon in John also went to betray Yeshua; which is why he denied him 3 times on the way back.

This is why John the baptist came first to turn the hearts of the children to the fathers

Malachi 4:5-6 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of Yahweh comes. (6) He will turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers, lest I come and strike the earth with a Curse (Deuteronomy 28).”

The Curse is currently over the world until all things are fulfilled, and the ungodly are removed from the world.

Jesus came not to destroy but to turn us to God again.

Matthew 10:34 “Don’t think that I came to send peace on the earth. I didn’t come to send peace, but a sword.

In my opinion.

 

[Muffled]

Some churches tend to call Jesus fully God and fully man. Is there a difference between this description, and, for instance, God & man?


Does this change His person?

Is fully God and fully man, clear, or confusing?


Thanks

I believe fully God is an answer for those who think somehow God can be separated into pieces and fail to see that the oneness holds even in the Trinity.

I believe the fully man is an answer to those who thought that God was above being a man so Jesus couldn't be a man like any other man. I don't believe we know whether God got creative when He created the male portion of Jesus but certainly the disciples perceived Him as a man.

 

[Muffled]

The Hindus take it even further: 'all selves' are, in reality, The One Supreme Self, playing itself as all selves. In this view, the oneness of divine union is preserved. You and I are none other than the divine nature itself, pretending that we're not. It's called 'Hide and Seek', but on a higher level.

I believe that belief has no basis in reality.

 

[Muffled]

fully god/man is the correct approach. it means that he is both with all the characteristics.

I believe that can be proven incorrect.

 

[tayla]

Some churches tend to call Jesus fully God and fully man. Is there a difference between this description, and, for instance, God & man?

This is a question of interest to Christians. I think the best answer is to consider the Nicene creed. There are and have been other forms of Christianity, so it depends on the scope of your inquiry.

 

[godnotgod]

I believe that belief has no basis in reality.

Of course you don't; you're a Christian, playing the game of Hide and Seek, pretending that you're not divine, and that God is some 'other', while atheists are God pretending that He does'nt exist.

The seeker is also God, pretending to be looking for himself.

"That which you are seeking is causing you to seek"