Is Jesus Christ true man AND true God?

[Deeje]

The flesh and blood body dies but the spirit did not die. Jesus was a human body ( which died ) and the spirit of God ( which did not die ). So Jesus was indeed human and God. The human part died and the God part did not die.How could Jesus be the son of God and not be God? Can the son of a human not be human?

Jesus is what he called himself....."the son of God". Never once did Jesus claim to be God, nor did he ever claim equality with his Father.

Jesus was 100% human as a man on earth....he was not a split half man half god. He was created as a spirit and willingly gave up that life to be born as a human child. After his mission was accomplished, he returned to his Father as the spirit he was before he became Jesus the Christ.

He is a creation of his God. (Revelation 3:14)

He calls his Father "My God" even in heaven. (Revelation 3:12)

Spirit beings can materialize human flesh as they did on many occasions when messengers were sent to God's servants on earth. At no time did angels appear as spirits. It was against their law to communicate with spirits (Deut 18:9-12)

When Jesus was raised "in the spirit" he too retained the ability to materialize bodies of flesh and blood as he did all throughout the 40 days after his resurrection.

 

[Oeste]

Yes. Just as Jesus foretold, "weeds" of false Christianity were sown whilst the "wheat" were sill in their early stages of growth

Nonsensical. If the "weeds" were simply "false Christianity" then anyone could become a Buddhist, Muslim, Jew, Hindu and/or atheist and be gathered up as wheat.

The tares are the wicked, and the good are the wheat. I think it's pretty clear this has nothing to do with your religious affiliation but has everything to do with your spiritual one.

. We never worshipped Jesus as God in the first place. We honoured him as the son of God and always have.

Doesn't matter whether you worshiped Jesus as God. If you didn't worship Jesus as God then obviously you were worshiping him as man. And if Jesus is not God but "a god", then you weren't conferring exclusive devotion to the Almighty.

Look, I'm trying to look at this through the lens of a Jehovah Witness Deeje. Remember, God approved of your worship in 1919, not 1954 or thereafter, and at that time you were worshiping Jesus and not simply giving him "obeisance". The Watchtower charter specifically states "worship", not "obeisance", even though both "obeisance" and the Greek word "proskuneo" were freely available to them:

I understand your prejudice and I also understand your need to prop up the teachings of Christendom, but the heretics are again accusing the true servants of the Master of heresy.

Naw. You yourselves accuse yourselves of heresy when you say God "approved" of the worship you gave Jesus in 1919, but since then you've decided to deviate from this approval. You call this "new light" which obviously means it deviates from the original light you had when Jesus was conducting his inspection.

You made the switch in 1954. Did Jesus make a second invisible return and instruct you, did he provide a new channel that contradicted the old,or is it most likely you simply drifted from an original "true" teaching of Jehovah Witnesses into apostasy?

Point me to any evidence that Christendom is "Christian" in its teachings or in its conduct.

I'd be here all night, into the next day, and up to my last breath, and I still wouldn't cover a thimble. Besides, this thread is about whether Jesus is true man and true God, not on Christianity's conduct.

If Christ is simply true man, then you shouldn't be worshiping him, if he is "a god" then you should repent and give worship to Yahweh, and if he is God then you should stick with the original worship plan you had when Jesus actually inspected you in 1919 rather than allowing heretics who were not around at the time to lead your organization into apostasy.

Face it Deeje. You had a true teaching in 1919. Jesus himself came down from heaven, inspected your organization, and approved it. You were worshiping Jesus and even celebrating Christmas at the time:

Then right after he left you started fiddling around... allowing uninspired men to examine things and make changes to your prior approved, Jesus sanctioned teachings. It's exactly what Jesus said would happen after he left, and if that's not apostasy, I don't know what is.

What other verse can Christians think of then 2 Cor 11: 13-14?

13For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. 14No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.​

I think it only fair for Christians to wonder if Satan calls this light of his "new".

 

[Oeste]

The flesh and blood body dies but the spirit did not die. Jesus was a human body ( which died ) and the spirit of God ( which did not die ). So Jesus was indeed human and God. The human part died and the God part did not die.How could Jesus be the son of God and not be God? Can the son of a human not be human?

Couldn't agree with you more lostwanderingsoul.

If Jesus was human he would be "Son of Man", if God, then "Son of God", and if "a god", as the Witnesses believe, then "Son of a god".

 

[godnotgod]

The thing is, Jesus was not a human in his previous existence, therefore he was a spirit being like all other beings who inhabit the spirit realm. In order to pay the ransom (a debt incurred by our forefather Adam) Jesus volunteered to become human so that he could offer his life in exchange for the one Adam forfeited.....resulting in a legacy of sin and death for all his children. Jesus redeemed us by dying instead of us, guaranteeing that our lives will not be forever lost, even if we die.

Jesus had to be 100% human to offer that sacrifice but he could not have been God because immortal beings cannot die. Jesus really died and was laid in a tomb for three days.....then true to his word, God resurrected him from the dead on the third day.

The son of God was raised as a spirit in order to return to his Father in the same capacity as he was before....at his Father's right hand. (1 Peter 3:18; Psalm 110:1)

Superstitious nonsense. Blood sacrifice is never, ever part of the authentic spiritual experience. The fact is that the scriptures are corrupted, and any real student of theology knows this. The authentic teachings of Yeshua were essentially overwritten with the pagan teachings of Mithra, which included blood sacrifice, a virgin birth, and a bodily resurrection, none of which were part of Yeshua's doctrines, as Yeshua's doctrines come from the East, where the life-force is the breath, and not the blood. So why did Paul and Rome do this? Simple. To convert tens of thousands of pagans into Paul's new religion, and for Constantine to have an easy means of political control over the masses. Yeshua's practices were too difficult for the ordinary man to follow. Simply kneeling and accepting Jesus as one's Lord and Savior was a no-brainer. One did not need to do anything rigorous nor know anything, and so had mass appeal.

 

[Deeje]

@Oeste we will find out the answer to all questions soon enough. Though you did answer one question quite truthfully yourself it seems....

Point me to any evidence that Christendom is "Christian" in its teachings or in its conduct.

To which you replied....
"I'd be here all night, into the next day, and up to my last breath, and I still wouldn't cover a thimble." I agree.
There is not enough evidence of Christ's teachings in Christendom to cover a thimble.

I came out of Christendom so I have had my views modified through both lenses. Who would have the more balanced view do you think? You choose your lens and I have chosen mine, but way more objectively IMO.

The light on the path gets brighter as day dawns (Proverbs 4:18)....the "Son" is about to come up.....ready or not.

All the best to you.

 

[Oeste]

To which you replied....
"I'd be here all night, into the next day, and up to my last breath, and I still wouldn't cover a thimble." I agree.
There is not enough evidence of Christ's teachings in Christendom to cover a thimble.

Incorrect...I stated I wouldn't be able to cover a thimble, not that Christianity wouldn't be able to cover a thimble.

The light on the path gets brighter as day dawns (Proverbs 4:18)....the "Son" is about to come up.....ready or not.

All the best to you.

You are right there, lol! The Son has risen, the sun will rise, and it's 2:09 am and my daughter will expect me to get up in the morning and make her some breakfast. I'm tired and I've been way too long on the forum.

All the best to you as well Deeje. We can only try our best, and it was good to talk with you.

 

[psychoslice]

Jesus is as true as you want him to be, its your mind.

 

[Deeje]

Superstitious nonsense. Blood sacrifice is never, ever part of the authentic spiritual experience. The fact is that the scriptures are corrupted, and any real student of theology knows this.

It was the fulfillment of Jehovah's justice.....in the Law it was stated that if an innocent life was taken, "....then you shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." (Exodus 21:23-24)

God's law was not about superstition but it demanded equivalency to serve God's perfect justice.

Adam lost his own life for the theft of something so serious, that it carried the death penalty. That one act of disobedience would also ultimately take the life of all his children. But there was no one to atone for them. This would mean an endless cycle of sin and death if no one volunteered to balance the scales of justice and offer their perfect "life for a life". No human on earth could even offer because no human life was now without defect.....sin infected every one of them. A volunteer came from outside the human race and unselfishly offered to pay the debt. There is nothing superstitious about any of it. It was an act of genuine love. (John 15:13)

The authentic teachings of Yeshua were essentially overwritten with the pagan teachings of Mithra, which included blood sacrifice, a virgin birth, and a bodily resurrection, none of which were part of Yeshua's doctrines, as Yeshua's doctrines come from the East, where the life-force is the breath, and not the blood.

I agree to a point, The adoption of Mythraic rites, Roman sun worship, and a bodily resurrection were never part of the Holy Scriptures.....but the virgin birth was prophesied in the Hebrew scriptures (Isa 7:14) and the blood of atonement was part of the Law that Jesus himself scrupulously kept all his earthly life.

So why did Paul and Rome do this? Simple. To convert tens of thousands of pagans into Paul's new religion, and for Constantine to have an easy means of political control over the masses. Yeshua's practices were too difficult for the ordinary man to follow. Simply kneeling and accepting Jesus as one's Lord and Savior was a no-brainer. One did not need to do anything rigorous nor know anything, and so had mass appeal.

I agree again, up to a point. Paul gets a bad wrap from a lot of people, yet I see nothing in the Greek scriptures to warrant the criticism he receives. He was not one of the 12, but he was appointed as an apostle nonetheless. I have no doubts about his choosing by Jesus personally because there was much about him that Jesus could use to take the Christian message to people of the nations. His education, his former station, his Roman citizenship to name a few. Paul was not educated about Christianity by the other apostles, but like them, he was educated by Jesus personally, post resurrection.

His ministry speaks for itself. He suffered greatly for his 360 degree turnaround. There was nothing in it for him personally and the mistreatment he suffered would hardly be something he would choose when he was a very zealous Pharisee who could have gone far in his former course.

On his way to persecute more Christians, he had an encounter with Jesus Christ that changed his life forever. He was also accepted as an apostle by the 12. Not forgetting that God's spirit was very active on the chosen ones, we never heard them utter a word against him or his ministry. Paul even corrected Peter on one occasion. (Galatians 2:11-14)

"The Church" apostatized shortly after the death of the apostles, as it was foretold....the climate was then ripe for the take-over of Roman Catholicism a couple of centuries later.

Its been a downhill run ever since.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

I appreciate this is the Same Faiths Debate section but could I possibly interject with a question I have on the subject?

For those Christian denominations which believe humankind as inherently sinful & God as inherently perfect and also believe that Jesus was both man & God.

My question is this: how could Jesus have been both man & God given that this would entail being both sinful & perfect at the same time?

 

[Windwalker]

My question is this: how could Jesus have been both man & God given that this would entail being both sinful & perfect at the same time?

Put another way, being both finite and infinite and the same time. It's a paradoxical reality.

 

[kaoticprofit]

The person that studied it independently is most likely looking at it from a biased perspective.

I would say it's the other way around. I know several people who have degrees and their beliefs directly reflect the schools they've come out of. In fact, indoctrination was one VERY BIG reason why I dropped out of becoming a full time minister.

 

[kaoticprofit]

He is prophet sent to the lost sheeps of Israel and he is a servant of Allah(acts 3:13)

"The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go."
Notice he didn't put Ishmael in the mix. Thank God Almighty for that. The false god Allah is found in the bible but under the name Baal or Lucifer.

 

[godnotgod]

For those Christian denominations which believe humankind as inherently sinful & God as inherently perfect and also believe that Jesus was both man & God.

My question is this: how could Jesus have been both man & God given that this would entail being both sinful & perfect at the same time?

The answer lies in the fact that Jesus (Yeshua) was not a man, but the essence of man. Alan Watts explains:


"The dogma of the Incarnation insists that in Christ, God became man, not a man. That is to say, in Christ, there are two natures, but only one person. The person is divine - God the Son - but it is in hypostatic union with a complete human nature, though not with a human person. Thus the humanity of Christ is representative of all humanity, and by this means the gifts of the Incarnation are bestowed upon the whole race and not upon the historic Jesus alone*."

Behold the Spirit: A Study in the Necessity of Mystical Religion, by Alan Watts, p. 131

*Compare with Buddhism, in which the Buddha declares that all sentient beings possess Buddha nature. In addition, if this is the case, then no blood sacrifice is required of the deity in order to 'save' man, as man is already divine. What is necessary to 'save' man from suffering due to his delusion, is simply for man to realize his own enlightenment and divinity.

 

[godnotgod]

Put another way, being both finite and infinite and the same time. It's a paradoxical reality.

Yes, but only to the rational mind.

 

[Deeje]

Put another way, being both finite and infinite and the same time. It's a paradoxical reality.

Not paradoxical reality at all. Its an absolute absurdity. One cannot be finite and infinite at the same time.
I am yet to see anyone provide scripture indicating that the Messiah had to be God incarnate to save mankind.

For The Almighty to come to the earth, undergo human birth, and finally at the age of 30 to present himself to the Jewish people as their Messiah, only to be murdered by them three and a half years later, is rather ridiculous when one considers what the ransom price was, that the life of Jesus came to pay.

"The Hebrew noun koʹpher comes from the verb ka·pharʹ, meaning, basically, “cover,” as in Noah’s covering the ark with tar. (Ge 6:14) Ka·pharʹ, however, is used almost entirely to describe the satisfying of justice through the covering of or atoning for sins. The noun koʹpher refers to the thing given to accomplish this, the ransom price. (Ps 65:3; 78:38; 79:8, 9) A covering corresponds to the thing it covers, either in its form (as in a material lid, such as the “cover [kap·poʹreth]” of the ark of the covenant; Ex 25:17-22), or in its value (as in a payment to cover the damages caused by an injury).

As a means for balancing justice and setting matters straight with his people Israel, Jehovah, in the Law covenant, designated various sacrifices and offerings to atone for, or cover, sins, including those of the priests and the Levites (Ex 29:33-37; Le 16:6, 11), of other individuals, or of the nation as a whole (Le 1:4; 4:20, 26, 31, 35), as well as to purify the altar and tabernacle, making atonement because of the sins of the people surrounding these. (Le 16:16-20) In effect, the life of the animal sacrificed went in place of the life of the sinner, its blood making atonement on God’s altar, that is, to the extent that it could. (Le 17:11; compare Heb 9:13, 14; 10:1-4.) The “day of atonement [yohm hak·kip·pu·rimʹ]” could just as properly be referred to as the “day of the ransoms.” (Le 23:26-28) These sacrifices were required if the nation and its worship were to have and maintain the acceptance and approval of the righteous God." (Insight Volume 2 WTBTS)


If God himself had come to earth, it would have been a massive overpayment for starters, like giving a kidnapper 6 trillion dollars when he only asked for $6,000. All Jesus had to be was a perfect human to pay the equivalent of the perfect human life that Adam lost for his children. God never came to the earth because he didn't have to....he sent the most trusted "servant" he had. (Acts 4:30)...unless you think God can be his own servant?

It would also have been impossible for him to die....immortals cannot be put to death, so if Jesus didn't really die, then the ransom is not paid and we are still doomed. Making Jesus into God was the silliest thing Christendom could have done....it just complicated a very simple aspect of God's law.

 

[godnotgod]

Not paradoxical reality at all. Its an absolute absurdity. One cannot be finite and infinite at the same time.

It is The Infinite manifesting Itself as the finite.

"God became man, that man might become God"
St. Atanasius

 

[Windwalker]

Not paradoxical reality at all. Its an absolute absurdity. One cannot be finite and infinite at the same time.

God, by very definition is paradoxical. To try to squeeze God into the box your mind can comprehend is what is an absolute absurdity. Your mind can contain the depth and breadth of God, no problem! Quite laughable. Good one. What's the next joke?

 

[Riders]

Hmmmmm.....I believe that the Pharisees thought that of Jesus. So who were the biased ones?
Heretics accusing the God's son of heresy. The Church did the same thing...accusing the ones who dared to speak the truth as criminals. Who were the real criminals?

A degree in theology is a degree in Churchianity.....not Christianity. I can't remember Jesus or his apostles ever flashing their credentials....do you? Probably because they avoided those schools of higher learning like the plague. No truth was to be found there.

Yet all you guys proclaiming Jesus fully God and man are in these churches your Christainity in my mind is what your church aught you,not what you realized on your own. Its churchianity.

 

[Neo Deist]

A degree in theology is a degree in Churchianity.....not Christianity.

Negative Ghost Rider. Divinity is "churchianity" as you put. Theology is the academic degree that deals with religion, history, language, hermeneutics and apologetics.

My degree is something none of your NWT authors ever achieved. As a matter of fact, none of the NWT authors were even fluent with Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek. They were all laymen.

Thanks for playing!

 

[Riders]

The flesh and blood body dies but the spirit did not die. Jesus was a human body ( which died ) and the spirit of God ( which did not die ). So Jesus was indeed human and God. The human part died and the God part did not die.How could Jesus be the son of God and not be God? Can the son of a human not be human?

If his spirit was God, that means we are all God, my spirit is also incarnated with the Gods spirit. It was the flesh that died. But the flesh cant be raised up to life and keep the wounds and holes in it unless he is bleeding all over the place, if God drained his blood out, he's a dead zombie the living dead a monster.