Did Jesus believe He was serving a greater Being (His Father) than Himself? I see conflicting messages in the Bible.

[FaithofAbraham]

what does your interpretation have to do with the fact that Jesus is present among any group of people, at the same time, on the planet? Do you call it omnipotence or not? if not, what do you call a man who can be whenever He wants wherever He wants at the same time?

I calling it a man getting a heck of a lot of power from God to do that.

if He’s not born with that power, what does it mean the world was created by Him?

Hebrews 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he (FATHER GOD) made the worlds;

It means that God made everything with the idea of Jesus as His human king in mind, the shadow of which was Adam. God created by to, according to, with the purpose of, Jesus

It doesn’t mean Jesus created the universe.

The point being made is how can someone judge the soul of all humans if He has not the divine Wisdom , the Omnipotence and omnipresence of God in order to know every single detail of every human at all times and so to judge rightfuly?

Because he was born a man who gets that power from God, how many times would you like me to state my position?

Jesus as the eternal Word is eternal, but He took His human attributes at a specific time in history. One does not deny the other.

Backwards, Jesus was born a man who was dwelled in by God at his baptism, THEN he began his ministry preaching God’s word.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

If your only reply is that God gave a human all that power, it means that God made another Omnipotent God, no more a human…in other words, polytheism.

No it doesn’t, since Jesus acts only according to what God allows. Jesus can’t get drunk with power or overthrow God as another god or anything. Jesus is always servant to God.

I mean is this really that hard to understand? “I can do nothing without God” seems pretty clear to me.

John 5:30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.

What you suggest is polytheism, a God Jesus who can do nothing without a bigger God.

 

[inJESUS]

I calling it a man getting a heck of a lot of power from God to do that.

Because he was born a man who gets that power from God, how many times would you like me to state my position?

 

[inJESUS]

No it doesn’t, since Jesus acts only according to what God allows. Jesus can’t get drunk with power or overthrow God as another god or anything. Jesus is always servant to God.

I mean is this really that hard to understand? “I can do nothing without God” seems pretty clear to me.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

I have read that article and seen that it rebuts your allegations. That article never states that Jesus’ divine personality was lost because of His incarnation. Although I am not Roman Catholic, I know that they never believe Jesus to possess or gain human personality.

Of course they do, that’s why they always say he is fully God AND fully human, but humbled himself to be obedient to the Father. The article says “Christ retained in Him also the weaknesses of the soul.” Does God have a weak soul? Of course not.

I have stated in none of my posts that Jesus left His divinity! Could you please stop putting into my mouth sentences that do not belong to me? When I talk of Jesus’ exaltation by the Father, that exaltation does not entail the loss of His divine personality. What the Father exalted was only Jesus’ human nature. Paul points out Jesus’ will to assume human nature when he uses the sentence “He emptied Himself”, not the replacement of His divine personality with a new human personality.

By necessity the divine nature would need to be restrained in order to Christ to experience weakness of the soul. Stop and think it through before you answer.

We never say that Jesus needed to do anything! He did because He wanted to.

Do you know what MUST means?

John 9:4 I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.

Continuity of your false analogy. You can never prove that Jesus was made a god to Israel as Moses was made to Pharaoh. There is no data in the NT to help you make that false analogy.

There’s lots.

John 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

Here Jesus says he speaks not his own words but words of the Father God, yet you say Jesus himself is God’s Word! So you contradict Jesus. If Jesus was God’s Word eternally then he would speak his own words since they would also be God’s. Mind boggling but true.

God also dwelled in Moses so he would be like God to the people speaking God’s Word too:

Exodus 4:15 And thou shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth: and I will be with thy (MOSES) mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do.

Exodus 4:16 And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people: and he shall be, even he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou (MOSES) shalt be to him instead of God.

So Moses made like a God to the prophet Aaron speaking God’s Word, thus Moses was as God and God’s Word to the people, speaking not his own words but God’s. Just like Jesus said he did.

Now blaming Christians for people’s failure to grasp the supposed truth? Try something better next time. Muslims and Jews reject the NT because they know well that the Trinitarian tenet is based on the Scripture, not on people’s wishful thinking and their repetitive misinterpretation. If you disagree with me, please guide your Jewish and Muslim friends to Unitarians and Jehovah’s witnesses.

Christians are always to blame if they run out trying to teach the Bible without being fully versed in it. As I just proved to you with John 14:10.

They need to take their role as teachers more seriously and study up since they may be pushing a lot of potential believers away with their errors.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

there is no problem in God giving power to a man. But you are NOT discussing WHAT the power is. I gave many examples of these powers : omnipotence, omnipresence, possession of God’s mind, granting peace and Wisdom.

Do you call a human who possesses all these powers, a human? do you call an omnipotent human, a human?

Jesus is not omnipotent since he can do nothing of himself, he gets all his power from God, as I posted many times now.

i’ll wait for your answer regarding Colossians 1:15-18 .

Gave it, Father God created everything not Jesus, created with the vision of Jesus in mind.

Hebrews 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he (FATHER GOD) made the worlds;

John states Jesus is The Word who exists at the begining with God, who is God, who creates everything, without Him nothing exists, and LATER ON he talks about the Word taking a human flesh. If am stating it backwards, is John as well?

John isn’t talking about Jesus in John 1:1, but God’s words, what God says and commands.

In John 1:14 God dwells with Jesus and God’s Word becomes flesh in Jesus as a prophet, like it did with Moses. You already know my position on that, why do you keep quizzing me about it. My answer isn’t going to magically change.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

what is clear to me is that you are NOT answering this explanation of your quote:

John 5:19-“Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless He sees the Father doing; for whatever [the Father] does, these things the Son also does in like manner.”

whatever God can do, a human can do. Do you not call this a power of omnipotence?

No.

Without God Jesus does nothing, so Jesus is not omnipotent, God is, and God gives Jesus the power to be as God.

 

[inJESUS]

Of course they do, that’s why they always say he is fully God AND fully human, but humbled himself to be obedient to the Father. The article says “Christ retained in Him also the weaknesses of the soul.” Does God have a weak soul? Of course not.

a human does…so again, you are not distinguishing the 2 natures of Jesus. Does God eat? no. Does Jesus eat? yes so Jesus is not God! that’s how you make it seem when we are clearly saying He is both, not one without the other…He was not a human in appearance.

By necessity the divine nature would need to be restrained in order to Christ to experience weakness of the soul. Stop and think it through before you answer.

 

[inJESUS]

Jesus is not omnipotent since he can do nothing of himself, he gets all his power from God, as I posted many times now.

fine…and when the Father gives Him the absolute power of doing whatever the Father does, and giving Jesus whatever the Father has, is this a power of omnipotence or not?

Gave it, Father God created everything not Jesus

 

[inJESUS]

No.

Without God Jesus does nothing, so Jesus is not omnipotent, God is, and God gives Jesus the power to be as God.

let me add a word to your sentence:

Without God Jesus does nothing, so Jesus is not omnipotent, God is, and God gives Jesus the power to be **omnipotent **as God.

In this case is Jesus omnipotent or not? you cannot tell me that God can take this power from Him because He already gave Him that power…and we’ll be simply discussing like kids…give me back what i gave you! so pray tell, when God makes Jesus omnipotent, isn’t then Jesus omnipotent (regardless whether He took it or was born with it)?

He (Holy Spirit) will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.

Everything that the Father has is mine; for this reason I told you that he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.

The Holy Spirit taking from Jesus or the Father is the same because whatever the Father has/knows, Jesus has/knows. In other words, Jesus is making Himself equal to the Father in absolutely everything : authority, power, mind.

Are these the inspired words of Jewish authors claiming that Jesus is only mere man? a mere man having everything God has and doing everything God can do is a mere man?they must have had a problem deferentiating between God with capital G and a man.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

fine…and when the Father gives Him the absolute power of doing whatever the Father does, and giving Jesus whatever the Father has, is this a power of omnipotence or not?

No, since Jesus still has to receive it from God. If Jesus had all that power on his own, then you would have a point. You aren’t all-powerful if you need someone to give you that power, you are powerful to the extent they give it to you. You are not omnipotent as long as you rely on someone else for power, understand?

please explain your interpretation in terms of :

Colossians 1:15-18 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him (JESUS) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he (JESUS) is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

If you create something by the light of the silvery moon, does that mean the moon creates it? No. When it says God created everything by Jesus, it means God created according to the end plan of Jesus being Messiah in the Kingdom of Heaven.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2
**He **was in the beginning with God.

Why He and not “it” or “they”

And the **Word became flesh **9 and made his dwelling among us, and we saw his glory, the glory as of the Father’s only Son, full of grace and truth.

God’s “words” as you say, is written Word, not words, and this Word ( the “He”), who is with God since the beginning, and who IS God, took a human flesh. One Word, One flesh, One Jesus.

God’s Word in John 1:1 is LET THERE BE LIGHT same as in Genesis.

When God’s Spirit dwells in a man, and that man speaks God’s Word as a prophet, then that man becomes God’s Word to the people. When he is given power to rule like God, he is God to the people.

As I said, like Moses was. So let’s call everything God says and commands THE WORD OF GOD. And let’s call the man who speaks THE WORD OF GOD a title, let’s call him God’s Word.

If a man speaks THE WORD OF GOD as a prophet, he is God’s Word to the people, and THE WORD OF GOD is made flesh in the prophet speaking it. It doesn’t mean he is God, or God Junior existing for all eternity, it means he is a human prophet.

I can’t make it any clearer.

 

[MH84]

John 17: 3 **Now this is eternal life: That they may know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. **

I wrote:

Jesus overtly states that belief in God AND in Him gives eternal life. The phrase “the only God” used by Jesus refers to the unity in the Trinity, not to the unity of God as a person.

MH84 responded:

But Jesus says “That they may know thee, the only true God…”. Jesus does not say “us”, or even just “That they may know the only true God”

I respond:

Jesus does not say “us” because He is addressing the Father personally in His prayer. Likewise, Jesus does not “that they may know thee, the only true God, and ME. It is not a coincidence that here Jesus does not refer to Himself with a personal pronoun. Yet it is clear from the sentence that it is absolutely necessary for one to believe in Jesus in the same way as in God the Father to gain eternal life.

**
Ive looked at your response more carefully and I still can’t see what you see. I’ll break it down to explain what I mean:

Jesus does not say “us” because He is addressing the Father personally in His prayer.

Why does this exclude Jesus from saying “us”. I could speak intimately to you or in some other heartfelt way, for example, and still say “us” and “we”. Furthermore, surely this would have helped the apostles to understand that Jesus was in control of everthing and that He truly was divine, not “just” the Messiah.

Likewise, Jesus does not “that they may know thee, the only true God, and ME.

Could you explain what you mean by this. I have read others saying this, but I don’t get its significance. Because:

a) Jesus often spoke about Himself in the third person eg. Matthew 16:13

b) I don’t know why Jesus saying “…Jesus Christ” or “…Me” makes any difference.

c) I can’t get around the fact that Jesus says: "That they may know thee, the only true God. Jesus is saying that His Father is the true God, and that He is the Christ. Jesus is saying that “God”, NOT “God the Father” is the true God.

Unless someone could explain this, the only way I see around this is by examing what Jesus meant by the term “God”. Maybe the Christians felt that calling the Father “God” did not exclude that the Son was divine too, but just under of “Son” instead of God. Because otherwise, there is no doubt about it, St. Paul and St. Peter refer to Jesus’ Father as “God” frequently, but not Jesus or the Holy Spirit. The Father was considered to be “the God and Father” of the Lord Jesus (Ephesians 1:3; 2 Corinthians 11:31).

I don’t know , this is confusing and unclear for me.

Yet it is clear from the sentence that it is absolutely necessary for one to believe in Jesus in the same way as in God the Father to gain eternal life.

This does not mean one has to believe that Jesus is co-eternal and co-equal to His Father, does it? A follower should believe that Jesus is the Christ and that His death and resurrection brought salvation to the world.

Furthermore, Jesus doesnt say to believe in the Holy Spirit in this passage. Jesus starts this sentence by saying something very sublime: “Now this is eternal life:”…, but then does not include the Holy Spirit in this pronouncement. Therefore, Jesus does not say that it is most important that believing in the Blessed Trinity is the way to eternal life.**

 

[Angelos]

Of course they do, that’s why they always say he is fully God AND fully human, but humbled himself to be obedient to the Father. The article says “Christ retained in Him also the weaknesses of the soul.” Does God have a weak soul? Of course not.

I am reiterating once more that the Church never believes Jesus to have two personalities, hoping that your English is not limited. The article you rely on to support your arguments by no means teaches that Jesus’ full humanity denoted His having/possessing/adopting a human personality in exchange for His divine personality due to humiliation through incarnation. The traditional Churches of Christ always teach that human Jesus was the same person as the eternal Word; the Word’s incarnation never gained Him an extra human personality. This is why human Jesus is always referred to as the Son. There was and is but one personality in Jesus: DIVINE.

Your view repeats the Nestorian heresy, which was condemned at the Council of Ephesus in 431A.D.

By necessity the divine nature would need to be restrained in order to Christ to experience weakness of the soul. Stop and think it through before you answer.

Now you are suddenly revising your views on this issue. Restriction does not mean LOSS. Since Jesus always had the divine personality even when in the flesh, it is incorrect to assert that Jesus lost divinity due to incarnation.

Do you know what MUST means?

John 9:4 I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.

I also know that the word MUST means different things in different contexts. The verse you quoted pertains to Jesus’ obedience to His Father. However, He **chooses to obey **His Father since no one can force Him.

There’s lots.

John 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

Here Jesus says he speaks not his own words but words of the Father God, yet you say Jesus himself is God’s Word! So you contradict Jesus. If Jesus was God’s Word eternally then he would speak his own words since they would also be God’s. Mind boggling but true.

The words Jesus speaks is not the same as the WORD in John’s prologue! “The Word (singular) becomes flesh and dwells among us” is what the Gospel teaches. This makes it clear that the Word is the same person as Jesus. There is no duality in incarnation as you suggest, but unity.Jesus is the perfect and ultimate revelation of the Father as the only begotten. Therefore, Jesus refers to the human means of expression when He says He speaks the words of the Father. Those words are the natural utterances of the human Jesus, who naturally speaks as a man to teach the divine truth.

God also dwelled in Moses so he would be like God to the people speaking God’s Word too:

Exodus 4:15 And thou shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth: and I will be with thy (MOSES) mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do.

Exodus 4:16 And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people: and he shall be, even he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou (MOSES) shalt be to him instead of God.

So Moses made like a God to the prophet Aaron speaking God’s Word, thus Moses was as God and God’s Word to the people, speaking not his own words but God’s. Just like Jesus said he did.

Yet Moses was never called the Christ, the Word of God! Moses was not born miraculously! Moses was only a human means of God’s communicating the Law to the Israelites, but Jesus IS the truth and the grace (John 1.18)

More, nowhere in the Gospel is Jesus stated to be godlike or a false god. Moses was called a god only figuratively since Pharaoh and his folk were polytheists and believed in many deities. Moses was made a god to those people since Egyptian mythology allowed such an analogy. The Jews never call Moses a god though! Your analogy has no basis.

Christians are always to blame if they run out trying to teach the Bible without being fully versed in it. As I just proved to you with John 14:10.

They need to take their role as teachers more seriously and study up since they may be pushing a lot of potential believers away with their errors.

IMPO, the only ones to blame are those false teachers who deliberately misinterpret the Holy Scripture and believe in Jesus as they wish instead of believing as God asks. No matter how those false teachers struggle, the truth will prevail.

Peace to all,
Angelos N.B.

 

[Angelos]

No.

Without God Jesus does nothing, so Jesus is not omnipotent, God is, and God gives Jesus the power to be as God.

No. Jesus is omnipotent indeed! The verses you pick up at random actually mean that the Father is the source of the divinity and Jesus is begotten of the Father. It is clear that Jesus talks about the relation of one person to another in the Godhead because He always compares the Son to the Father, not God to Jesus! Being dependent on the Father does not make Jesus inferior to Him, but only shows that the Father and the Son are distinct yet equal persons.

There is clear evidence in John’s Gospel that Jesus’ recurrent references to His Father in order to reveal His true identity were understood by the Jews and the Evangelist as Jesus’ claim to divinity, which was condemned by Jews as a blasphemy.

John 5:16-18 Now because Jesus was doing these things on the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders began persecuting him. So he told them, “My Father is working until now, and I too am working." For this reason the Jewish leaders were trying even harder to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was also calling God his own Father, thus making himself equal with God.

Here Jesus makes Himself equal to God because He makes a comparison between the Father and the Son in terms of working on the Sabbath. Although Jesus says that He works because He follows and imitates the Father - resorting to a comparison again -, He definitely reveals His divinity. Neither the Jews nor the Evangelist questions or denies Jesus’ omnipotence here just because Jesus says He does what the Father does!

Peace to all,
Angelos N.B.

 

[MH84]

It is clear that Jesus talks about the relation of one person to another in the Godhead because He always compares the Son to the Father, not God to Jesus!

Before I comment on this snippet of your post, I just want to quickly thank you for your composure here on this thread. I don’t wanna flatter you or anything, but just to say that it can be a rare quality in this forum.

Anyway, in regards to the above quote, you are mistaken (unless I misunderstand your words). Jesus does indeed refer to His Father as “God”. Not only the NT authors, but Jesus Christ Himself. For example in Mark 15:34, John 3:16, John 17:3.

I just want to add something which is slightly off track:
Something that Ive thought about is that it is possible that Jesus could have called God “Father”, not in regards to Him being eternally begotten of the Father, but perhaps in a similar way that He wanted us to call God, “Father” i.e. Matthew 6:9. Obviously, others have thought about this, and (Im presuming) Unitarians believe in this still. To an extent Catholics do, but obviously we don’t call God the Father “Father” to the extent that Jesus called His Father “my (Father)”.

There is clear evidence in John’s Gospel that Jesus’ recurrent references to His Father in order to reveal His true identity were understood by the Jews and the Evangelist as Jesus’ claim to divinity, which was condemned by Jews as a blasphemy.

I want to comment that the Catholic Church considers that blasphemy can be commited against others besides God, such as Mary and the saints, even the church.

Maybe they thought that Jesus claiming to be the Messiah was blasphemy. Im not sure here, but I find it hard to believe at this stage that they actually believed that Jesus was claiming to be Almighty God, and moreover (and obviously) their Creator. Surely they wouldnt have actually thought that this “rabbi” could sanely claimed to have been God, at least without seeking clarification from Him further. However, there was probably no doubt at all that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah (for example when he rode into Jerusalem as the prophecy predicted).

Finally, how do we know that if Jesus was accused by the Jewish leaders for committing blaphemy against God, that it wasn’t for acting like God, not actually claiming to be God? Such as when Jesus forgave a man’s sin, the Jews could have thought that Jesus had the authority to forgive sins on behalf of God, without thinking that He was claiming to be God.

 

[inJESUS]

No, since Jesus still has to receive it from God. If Jesus had all that power on his own, then you would have a point. You aren’t all-powerful if you need someone to give you that power, you are powerful to the extent they give it to you. You are not omnipotent as long as you rely on someone else for power, understand?

i do understand you and i wrote your understanding into parentheses in my reply, but you do not understand my point. My point is that Jesus is *already *given the power of doing anything as God. and possessses absolutely everything the Father has…it is no more an abstract power that might be given, but a power Jesus already has. You are not omnipotent as long as you rely on someone else for power, but you are omnipotent once you get the power of omnipotence, even if you took it from someone else.

God giving a prophet some power in order to prove his mission is biblical… But God giving everything He has to a human, including His mind and power and even His own titles is no longer a comparison between 2 prophets but between God and a human. In other words, Jesus is said to be:

omnipresent
omnipotent
The Creator
The Judge of souls
The knower of hearts and mind
The giver of divine peace
The giver of words and wisdom
The sender of the Holy Spirit

In addition to God’s titles:

Alpha and Omega
Life and resurrection
Never changing

In addition to being portrayed as literaly the Wisdom of God.

All these are written by first century Jews, and you want to convince us that they had in a mind a mere human so the Allah of the Quran had to send someone like Muhammad to tell us Jesus is not God since He used to eat food? the God of the Quran refutes that Jesus is God by an erroneous, irrelevant and shallow refutation yet it is the same God who inspired the Jewish authors to say that He was made literally like God with a capital G ? were they inspired to write as such about a human by making Him a God-replica in characterestics, attributes and deeds, in addition to saying He is the literal wisdom of God and yet God expected humans to believe He is a mere man? why didn’t God inspire the OT authors to write the same about any other prophet, or even a fraction of what is written about Jesus so that people like you may have a point? no one ever questioned if any Biblical prophet is divine, and everything is written by inspiration, but when it comes to Jesus, the inspiration takes a totally drastic direction that leads to an erroneous belief in Jesus because of God’s inspiration? couldn’t He have inspired the NT authors to write just as He inspired the OT authors so that no one makes such a “blasphemous mistake”? yet you want us to believe that God inspired the Jewish writers ,of the same people, in totally different terms and had to “correct” it later by sending Muhammad who gave very shallow theological refutations as if his Allah did not know what he inspired previous NT authors? you might have a point if the Bible was written by a 21st century American mindset, like yours, but your arguments hold no water in 1st century Jewish mindset, because God making a God out of a human is polytheism…yet the Jews did not call Jesus’ teachings polytheism, because they understood correctly that He was not saying God made me a God in power with capital G , or that God is “dwelling in me”, but that He was making Himself God. …and you cannot say they misundrstood “God dwells in me” for " I am God" because it shows that Jesus’ words did not mean what you are implying, and He is a rabbi and knew what words make Him God in Jewish context, and what words make him a human with God “dwelling in him”.

cont…

 

[inJESUS]

cont…

If you create something by the light of the silvery moon, does that mean the moon creates it? No. When it says God created everything by Jesus, it means God created according to the end plan of Jesus being Messiah in the Kingdom of Heaven.

if the NT authors are saying that Christ merely existed in God’s mind or that God had foreordained for him the glory which he was going to receive then there was a way for Jesus and the NT writers to indicate this. They could have communicated this point by using the very words foreknew or foreknowledge used in:

God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. Don’t you know what the Scripture says…

who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood: Grace and peace be yours in abundance." 1 Peter 1:2

The inspired authors could have also used the following language if all they wanted to say is that God had foreordained Jesus for His mission long before he was created in his mother’s womb:

“The word of the LORD came to me, saying, ‘Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.’” Jeremiah 1:4-5

But when God, who set me apart from birth and called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not consult any man," Galatians 1:11-16

Yet the NT does not use what they already used elsewhere but wrote:

"In the beginning was the Word,

and the Word was with God

and the Word **was **God.

The Word, Jesus, is not said to be in the mind of God, but is said to BE God…a language so different from the quotes i provided.

He was in the beginning with God

all things were made through him,

Him = The Word who IS God, not an abstract idea in the mind of God.

and without him was not **anything **made that was made.

**And **the Word ( Who IS GOD) became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen HIS GLORY, glory as of the **only **Son **FROM THE FATHER **, full of grace and truth."

The Word, John says, was there even before the beginning of creation with God and as God, not as an idea in God’s mind, but AS God.

God’s Word in John 1:1 is LET THERE BE LIGHT same as in Genesis.

where does John say Let there be light?

When God’s Spirit dwells in a man, and that man speaks God’s Word as a prophet, then that man becomes God’s Word to the people. When he is given power to rule like God, he is God to the people.

fine, yet he is not called the Word who IS God.

As I said, like Moses was. So let’s call everything God says and commands THE WORD OF GOD. And let’s call the man who speaks THE WORD OF GOD a title, let’s call him God’s Word.

this is what Muhammad said. What the inspired John says is that the Word IS God.

I

and THE WORD OF GOD is made flesh in the prophet speaking it. It doesn’t mean he is God,

yet John says it means He IS God…sorry but i’d take John’s word .

I can’t make it any clearer

yuo can by explainig what does " the Word IS God means" and then the Word who is God took a human flesh.

 

[MH84]

if the NT authors are saying that Christ merely existed in God’s mind or that God had foreordained for him the glory which he was going to receive then there was a way for Jesus and the NT writers to indicate this. They could have communicated this point by using the very words foreknew or foreknowledge used in:

God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. Don’t you know what the Scripture says…

who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood: Grace and peace be yours in abundance." 1 Peter 1:2

The inspired authors could have also used the following language if all they wanted to say is that God had foreordained Jesus for His mission long before he was created in his mother’s womb:

“The word of the LORD came to me, saying, ‘Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.’” Jeremiah 1:4-5

But when God, who set me apart from birth and called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not consult any man," Galatians 1:11-16

Since you are using this type of thinking, what about Psalm 2?:

7 I will proclaim the decree of the LORD :
He said to me, "You are my Son [d] ;
today I have become your Father.

8 Ask of me,
and I will make the nations your inheritance,
the ends of the earth your possession.

9 You will rule them with an iron scepter ;

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%202;&version=31;

 

[Angelos]

**
Ive looked at your response more carefully and I still can’t see what you see. I’ll break it down to explain what I mean:

Why does this exclude Jesus from saying “us”. I could speak intimately to you or in some other heartfelt way, for example, and still say “us” and “we”. Furthermore, surely this would have helped the apostles to understand that Jesus was in control of everthing and that He truly was divine, not “just” the Messiah.**

First, this verse by no means prevented the apostles from grasping the fact that Jesus was divine. Jesus addressed the Father in His prayer and focused on the first person of the Trinity since the Father is the source of divinity, of whom the Son is begotten and from whom the Spirit proceeds. Likewise, the prayer Jesus taught His disciples focuses on the Father as the source of divinity and the first person of Godhead. However, Jesus’ calling Father the only true God does not exclude the Son and the Spirit from the Trinity. It is also worth consideration that Jesus talks of Himself as the Messiah in that sentence, which is compatible with the fact that Jesus is the Messiah sent by God:

Acts 4: 25-26 ‘Why do the nations rage, and the peoples plot foolish things?The kings of the earth stood together, and the rulers assembled together, against **the Lord **and against his Christ.’

Thus, that sentence has no theological implications about the Triune God - either for or against it.

However, the phrase “the only true God” does not necessarily mean that Jesus is not divine or is only a false god! The letter of Jude presents Jesus as the only Master and Lord:

Jude 1:4 For certain men have secretly slipped in among you – men who long ago were marked out for the condemnation I am about to describe – ungodly men who have turned the grace of our God into a license for evil and who deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.

More, the apostles state that Jesus is the only savior, but this does not deprive the Father from being the Savior.

Acts 4:11-12 This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, that has become the cornerstone. And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among people by which we must be saved.”

**
Could you explain what you mean by this. I have read others saying this, but I don’t get its significance. Because:

a) Jesus often spoke about Himself in the third person eg. Matthew 16:13

b) I don’t know why Jesus saying “…Jesus Christ” or “…Me” makes any difference.

c) I can’t get around the fact that Jesus says: "That they may know thee**

, the only true God. Jesus is saying that His Father is the true God, and that He is the Christ. Jesus is saying that “God”, NOT “God the Father” is the true God.

a) Jesus refers to Himself in the third person when He identifies Himself as the Son of Man because that title is an apocalyptic one related to Jesus’ second coming.

b) Jesus does not say ME in that verse while addressing the Father in a prayer because He formulates the Christian tenet in its simplest form: God sent Jesus, who is the Messiah.

c) There is nothing wrong with that statement. Jesus only accentuates the fact that He is the Messiah sent by the Father, who is the only true God. In the same prayer Jesus later says:

John 17: 20-23 “I am not praying only on their behalf, but also on behalf of those who believe in me through their testimony, that they will all be one, just as you, Father, are in me and I am in you. I pray that they will be in us, so that the world will believe that you sent me.

John 17: 25-26 Righteous Father, even if the world does not know you, I know you, and these men know that you sent me.** I made known your name to them**, and I will continue to make it known, so that the love you have loved me with may be in them, and I may be in them.”

**

This does not mean one has to believe that Jesus is co-eternal and co-equal to His Father, does it? A follower should believe that Jesus is the Christ and that His death and resurrection brought salvation to the world.**

It definitely does! If you believe that Jesus is the Savior, you also believe that He is God because there is no Savior but God.

**
Furthermore, Jesus doesnt say to believe in the Holy Spirit in this passage. Jesus starts this sentence by saying something very sublime: "Now this is eternal life**

:"…, but then does not include the Holy Spirit in this pronouncement. Therefore, Jesus does not say that it is most important that believing in the Blessed Trinity is the way to eternal life.

It is rather natural for Jesus to do so because He does not give people a theological lecture on the Trinity while praying! However, Jesus later tells His followers that the Father and the Son are united and equally God.
(Read John 16: 12-15 to see how Jesus makes the Spirit equal to Himself and the Father)

John 14:23 Jesus replied, “If anyone loves me, he will obey my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and take up residence with him.

Peace to all,
Angelos N.B.

 

[inJESUS]

MH84, i do not see a link between my idea and your quote. Can you explain your question pls?