-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
The Nature of Jesus
- Thread starter Jim an Apostle
- Start date
I haven't kept up with everything in this thread, but Jesus routinely accepts worship, which seems to be a clear mark of His deity.
I think the Master was the Word who became flesh. At that moment, a new thing existed because the Word that was with God and was God in the beginning had never before had the ability to be tempted by sin, among other things. To say He was co-equal with God in the beginning is a statement that probably never means quite what we think it means, because it rests in the nature of the Creator, whose fullness can not be known by we who are small and corrupt. My personal take on it is that it is His very nature to submit to the Father which was perfectly not-displayable while He was with God in Heaven. In heaven He had no semblance or hint of imperfection or weakness and from the viewpoint of mere men, any distinguishing between Him and the Father would be entirely academic. On earth, in the flesh, He had his own human desires, temptations, and will, and for the first time could learn obedience through suffering. This aspect of He whom we call Jesus in English was not pre-existent as we might reckon it. Then again our thinking is mostly limited to cause and effect concerns revolving around time, which don't apply to God as rigorously as they apply to His creation. The spiritual is the domain of ideas and intent, which we tend to regard as less real than the physical. But to the Creator that forms everything we understand reality by speaking it, they are more real than the reality that He expresses it through; for Heaven and Earth will pass away but His word will never pass away. Causality is the intended lens of the tiny, blind ones who do not yet know fully. We who are caught in the grip of time must view God from the specific moment in time, before, during, and after His works that we are placed in. From His location, has He ever changed at all?
This is beyond bizarre. I just looked up the divinity of Christ and found a little sub-thread entitled the pre-existence of Christ. It starts in Micah 5:2 "But thou, Beth-lehem Ephratah, though thou be little among thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from old, from everlasting."
That seemed fairly pre-existent to me. Being Old Testament it certainly predates the Virgin Birth. I'm easily led though so I kept reading. John 17:5 said "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was."
Before the world was Jim. I'm having a hard time ignoring the pre-existence here. Should we go on? We could. There are many more but I believe we should just skip straight to Colossians 1:13-19 "Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the Kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him 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 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 preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell"
If that's not a pre-existent divine nature Jim then I don't know what one is. The question of your apostleship was just settled for me. You are ignoring clear and plain scripture to chase pretty little metaphysical fantasies in your head.
This is the great danger in allowing what we feel a spirit prompting us to trump what scripture says. Allow a younger brother to step outside his bounds and tell you that you are teaching a falsehood and are leading people astray.
Colossians 2:8-10 could have been talking about you, "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power."
I didn't scratch the surface of the clear and direct scriptures detailing Christ's pre-existence and His divinity. You had to willfully skip over them to get to where you wanted to go. We are told to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ to be saved. Your misleading teaching on who Christ is could be keeping the lost from salvation. I would not want to face a righteous God with that charge leveled at me. May I suggest you rethink this? Or at least stop teaching it? It does not square with scripture.
That seemed fairly pre-existent to me. Being Old Testament it certainly predates the Virgin Birth. I'm easily led though so I kept reading. John 17:5 said "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was."
Before the world was Jim. I'm having a hard time ignoring the pre-existence here. Should we go on? We could. There are many more but I believe we should just skip straight to Colossians 1:13-19 "Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the Kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him 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 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 preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell"
If that's not a pre-existent divine nature Jim then I don't know what one is. The question of your apostleship was just settled for me. You are ignoring clear and plain scripture to chase pretty little metaphysical fantasies in your head.
This is the great danger in allowing what we feel a spirit prompting us to trump what scripture says. Allow a younger brother to step outside his bounds and tell you that you are teaching a falsehood and are leading people astray.
Colossians 2:8-10 could have been talking about you, "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power."
I didn't scratch the surface of the clear and direct scriptures detailing Christ's pre-existence and His divinity. You had to willfully skip over them to get to where you wanted to go. We are told to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ to be saved. Your misleading teaching on who Christ is could be keeping the lost from salvation. I would not want to face a righteous God with that charge leveled at me. May I suggest you rethink this? Or at least stop teaching it? It does not square with scripture.
Last edited:
WHAT NEW DOCTRINE IS THIS? j/k
Yikes, I really needed a comma there!
Wow Zek, I've avoided the sequel ... now you may make me see it... aaaaah
I think I have explained Jesus the bestest so far! 
John Chapter 1: the same (Word) was in the beginning with God....the Word became flesh...
John Chapter 8: 58Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abrahamwas, I am.
59Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, andwent out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.
I am open to much when it comes to scripture, but this topic is not one of them.
John Chapter 8: 58Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abrahamwas, I am.
59Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, andwent out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.
I am open to much when it comes to scripture, but this topic is not one of them.
This is a little off-the-wall, but hey, it's me, right? Anybody ever heard of the book Flatland?
It's an allegory of a 2-dimensional world in which everyone is a line or a polygon. At a particular point in time, the Lord Sphere, a (gasp!) 3-dimensional being, actually intrudes into Flatland, but a 3-dimensional being doesn't 'fit' in a 2-dimensional space, so the 2-dimensional manifestation of the Lord Sphere is . . . wait for it . . . a circle! Hence, everybody in Flatland who 'believes in' the Lord Sphere aspires to be more circle-like as much as they can, so the more highly ascended are the 20-sided polygons or 40-sided polygons, etc.
I don't have to explain this, do I? But I will.
If you buy that as a mildly interesting parable, then Jesus is all of God that can be physically manifested in our 4-dimensional (L, W, H, T) universe. So there's a sense in which Jesus has always existed, and a sense in which he made his first appearance as a young whippersnapper in the home of Joseph and Mary.
For those so inclined, there are some mathematicians and physicists out there theorizing about God's existence in 11 or 19 or something dimensions (I honestly can't remember). Interesting stuff, but I only got 24 hours in a day....
It's an allegory of a 2-dimensional world in which everyone is a line or a polygon. At a particular point in time, the Lord Sphere, a (gasp!) 3-dimensional being, actually intrudes into Flatland, but a 3-dimensional being doesn't 'fit' in a 2-dimensional space, so the 2-dimensional manifestation of the Lord Sphere is . . . wait for it . . . a circle! Hence, everybody in Flatland who 'believes in' the Lord Sphere aspires to be more circle-like as much as they can, so the more highly ascended are the 20-sided polygons or 40-sided polygons, etc.
I don't have to explain this, do I? But I will.
If you buy that as a mildly interesting parable, then Jesus is all of God that can be physically manifested in our 4-dimensional (L, W, H, T) universe. So there's a sense in which Jesus has always existed, and a sense in which he made his first appearance as a young whippersnapper in the home of Joseph and Mary.
For those so inclined, there are some mathematicians and physicists out there theorizing about God's existence in 11 or 19 or something dimensions (I honestly can't remember). Interesting stuff, but I only got 24 hours in a day....
Ive not had time to be on recently, so just getting caught up. I had to do more than like this post, Zec. IMO the content, reasoning, approach and demeanor of this post makes this one of your best.
Have heard of both (Flatland and the physicists) but had forgotten about both. Thanks for the reminder. We nerds just always refer to ourselves as "squares" no matter how high we ascend. It's just what we relate toThis is a little off-the-wall, but hey, it's me, right? Anybody ever heard of the book Flatland?
It's an allegory of a 2-dimensional world in which everyone is a line or a polygon. At a particular point in time, the Lord Sphere, a (gasp!) 3-dimensional being, actually intrudes into Flatland, but a 3-dimensional being doesn't 'fit' in a 2-dimensional space, so the 2-dimensional manifestation of the Lord Sphere is . . . wait for it . . . a circle! Hence, everybody in Flatland who 'believes in' the Lord Sphere aspires to be more circle-like as much as they can, so the more highly ascended are the 20-sided polygons or 40-sided polygons, etc.
I don't have to explain this, do I? But I will.
If you buy that as a mildly interesting parable, then Jesus is all of God that can be physically manifested in our 4-dimensional (L, W, H, T) universe. So there's a sense in which Jesus has always existed, and a sense in which he made his first appearance as a young whippersnapper in the home of Joseph and Mary.
For those so inclined, there are some mathematicians and physicists out there theorizing about God's existence in 11 or 19 or something dimensions (I honestly can't remember). Interesting stuff, but I only got 24 hours in a day....
.
Yeah, I minored in Math and Physics, so I've definitely read Flatland at some point, though it's been a while. Nice analogy. FWIW, I don't recall what the dimensionality is of the latest string theories either.
This is a little off-the-wall, but hey, it's me, right? Anybody ever heard of the book Flatland?
It's an allegory of a 2-dimensional world in which everyone is a line or a polygon. At a particular point in time, the Lord Sphere, a (gasp!) 3-dimensional being, actually intrudes into Flatland, but a 3-dimensional being doesn't 'fit' in a 2-dimensional space, so the 2-dimensional manifestation of the Lord Sphere is . . . wait for it . . . a circle! Hence, everybody in Flatland who 'believes in' the Lord Sphere aspires to be more circle-like as much as they can, so the more highly ascended are the 20-sided polygons or 40-sided polygons, etc.
I don't have to explain this, do I? But I will.
If you buy that as a mildly interesting parable, then Jesus is all of God that can be physically manifested in our 4-dimensional (L, W, H, T) universe. So there's a sense in which Jesus has always existed, and a sense in which he made his first appearance as a young whippersnapper in the home of Joseph and Mary.
For those so inclined, there are some mathematicians and physicists out there theorizing about God's existence in 11 or 19 or something dimensions (I honestly can't remember). Interesting stuff, but I only got 24 hours in a day....
I think I wrote something similar to this but I'm unsure if it was here or another forum.This is a little off-the-wall, but hey, it's me, right? Anybody ever heard of the book Flatland?
It's an allegory of a 2-dimensional world in which everyone is a line or a polygon. At a particular point in time, the Lord Sphere, a (gasp!) 3-dimensional being, actually intrudes into Flatland, but a 3-dimensional being doesn't 'fit' in a 2-dimensional space, so the 2-dimensional manifestation of the Lord Sphere is . . . wait for it . . . a circle! Hence, everybody in Flatland who 'believes in' the Lord Sphere aspires to be more circle-like as much as they can, so the more highly ascended are the 20-sided polygons or 40-sided polygons, etc.
I don't have to explain this, do I? But I will.
If you buy that as a mildly interesting parable, then Jesus is all of God that can be physically manifested in our 4-dimensional (L, W, H, T) universe. So there's a sense in which Jesus has always existed, and a sense in which he made his first appearance as a young whippersnapper in the home of Joseph and Mary.
For those so inclined, there are some mathematicians and physicists out there theorizing about God's existence in 11 or 19 or something dimensions (I honestly can't remember). Interesting stuff, but I only got 24 hours in a day....
Haven't read flat land but this is similar to an essay I wrote a couple decades ago explaining how the devil could conceive of rebellion against G-d most high. It was a perspective thing or lack of perspective; nice summary!
This also explains nicely how the "angel of the L-rd", represented in the Aramaic targums as Hashem visiting us, is like the Yeshua intersection you mentioned. Fits nicely
Mojo, I'm in a cafe and all the strongs references are making me flop around on the floor...
I didn't think about this till now but the verse also has bearing on the nature of Jesus thread also: from the beginning . . .there am I, and now the Lord God and his spirit hath sent me (the Redeemer). Isaiah 48:16
2 Cor. 3:18
But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.
metamorphoo, Greek 3339, Strong’s
metamorphoo,
Metamorphoo was a known Greek work at the time. Paul used it here. Why is this word never used to describe Jesus’ transformation from God to man? Wouldn’t that have cleared the water a bit?
This word is also used:
Matthew 17:2
And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
Mark 9:2
And after six days Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James, and John, and leadeth them up into an high mountain apart by themselves: and he was transfigured before them.
Romans 12:2
And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
Was the transfiguration experience for the disciples, or for Jesus? He could have appeared to them in Glory after the resurrection. Why were only three allowed to see this? Answer is, it was not really for them! It was for Jesus! It was the taste of what was to come. It was part of the joy set before Him, so that He would endure the cross.
Who did Jesus pray to?
Why did He pray at all?
Why did He ask if there was a way around the cross?
Why, even after the resurrection, was He still was called the Holy Child!
Acts 4:27
For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,
Acts 4:30
By stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus.
Can people be saved by accepting God alone, and yet reject Jesus?
If They are one, what difference does it make?
Christ/Messiah means anointed one.
Why was Christ anointed?
Can God be anointed?
Can you dip oil out of a barrel of oil and pour it back in, and somehow make it more oily?
Luke 4:18
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
Can you give something you do not have?
How could God give the creation the power of procreation, and Himself not be able to procreate?
Why did Jesus say, He could of His own self do nothing?
John 5:19
Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.
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.
Is the whole Father/Son routine just a play-act, a sham, a lie?
If they were both God in the beginning, wouldn’t Jesus now be the superior one because He now has experience, and insight, and understanding that God the Father does not have?
Why does He then give the Kingdom Back to His Father?
1 Cor. 1;16-17
16 For by him 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:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
It is for His (Jesus’) sake that all was created. He was before all things; because in the mind of God, He was the first thought... the cause of the creation. The beginning started with the pronouncement of God that He would have a Son! John 1:1
Zec, I overlooked nothing. I was you 45 years ago. I was taught pre-existence and could defend it very well... I thought at the time. There were always questions that could not be answered, though. Gor the last 40 years or so, I have read and studied the Scripture looking for any and all weaknesses in this concept, and still continue to do so, seaching for any errors in my own understanding. Studying theologians, the trail always led to the mystery... that which could not be understood by common example. Do you believe:
Romans 1:20
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Where is the common example of nature/creation that shows the nature of the Godhead and Jesus as you would explain it? The example of Father and Son is everywhere! The child can watch a caterpillar turn into a beautiful butterfly. (Glorification) Where are the examples of the butterfly becoming a caterpillar, and then becoming a butterfly again?
The sun and the moon show the relationship of the Father and the Son... the greater light and the lesser light. The moon reflects the light of the sun. Ah! We have sunlight at night, don’t we. We call it moonlight, but the moon has no light of its own. Where does it get its light? ...from the sun.
John 5:26
For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;
Where did Jesus get His life from? His Father!
I could go over each scripture that is used to teach pre-existence; and, point by point, show how each one is misunderstood (as I did in my own study)... just as we do with PM.
The starting point is understanding the primary purpose of the creation, and understanding Who is the creator.
Why was the baby bed made (earth) and for whom? ...the Baby and the Parent! What determined the design of the baby bed? The needs of the baby were always in mind.
What irrigates the garden? ...the water, or the pipe that carries the water?
God was the creator, and the creation was guided by the desire of God to have a Son!
Jesus is the reason for all things being created. In that sense, Jesus was the pipe, the guiding factor, that caused the form of the creation to be as it is. Jesus was not the Creator! God did not Need anything! He was not incomplete. God chose to act upon a desire! God is not some ego-maniac that needed to create beings just to worship Him! We “need” to worship Him so that we always remember Who He is.
Rev. 19:10
And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.
Luke 1:69-70
And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; [70] As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began:
Does Jesus have “Deity” now! Yes! My argument is not with the Deity of Jesus, but rather conscious-pre-existence. Do you have the faith to believe we shall be like Him! We will always be less than Him, but we shall have a domain. His domain is over all.
1 Peter 2:21
For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
How can you follow in His Steps, if He was Pre-existent? The pre-existence of Christ is paralleled for us in this verse:
Hebrews 7:9
And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham.
Do you ascribe conscious pre-existence to Levi?
Yes, we must beware the spirits that would try to influence us! We must try the spirit to see whether it be of God. However, without a relationship with the Spirit of God, the scripture alone does not guarantee light!
2 Peter 3:16
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
Even Jesus visibly talking to you, does not guarantee understanding. Jesus walked with Peter, yet it took the Holy Spirit to make the truth a revelation and give understanding.
Matthew 16:17
And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
May all be blessed in their pursuit of truth! Tradition is a hard thing to overcome. Just try convincing a church of the truth of PM!!
A couple of thoughts here: Paul says if we confess Jesus as Lord and believe God raised Him from the dead we shall be saved. The only two criteria there are "Living" and "Lord" ("Living Lord" in contrast to the "Dead Savior" of late 20th century churchianity). Belief in the resurrection, and acknowledgment of His lordship in our lives.
And then there's the stuff Jesus says about the humble service we do and the love that is evident in us and through us being the things that identify us as His followers....
Nothing I can find about any particular dogmatic theories about the 'nature' of Jesus, including especially his 'nature' before creation....
Meanwhile, I find that Jim makes some good points that should not be brushed aside, and we shouldn't be afraid to consider his reasoning. I find further that new "worldviews" and "systematic theologies" are sort of like a new pair of glasses. They might be disorienting at first and appear to be distorting things at first. The question is whether as you try them on for a few days you get used to the new prescription and find that in fact you can now see things more clearly.
I have had several opportunities in my life (not just plural marriage) to 'get a new prescription', and I'm not afraid to try on a new pair of glasses. If it's been too long between upgrades (see what I did there?), I expect the new prescription to be a little blurry at first. The real test is whether overall, given some time, one prescription makes things more clear than the other.
And then there's the stuff Jesus says about the humble service we do and the love that is evident in us and through us being the things that identify us as His followers....
Nothing I can find about any particular dogmatic theories about the 'nature' of Jesus, including especially his 'nature' before creation....
Meanwhile, I find that Jim makes some good points that should not be brushed aside, and we shouldn't be afraid to consider his reasoning. I find further that new "worldviews" and "systematic theologies" are sort of like a new pair of glasses. They might be disorienting at first and appear to be distorting things at first. The question is whether as you try them on for a few days you get used to the new prescription and find that in fact you can now see things more clearly.
I have had several opportunities in my life (not just plural marriage) to 'get a new prescription', and I'm not afraid to try on a new pair of glasses. If it's been too long between upgrades (see what I did there?), I expect the new prescription to be a little blurry at first. The real test is whether overall, given some time, one prescription makes things more clear than the other.
In principle, I agree with you Andrew. In exploring scripture, theology, philosophy, etc. we need to learn how to lay aside our preconceptions and dogmas aside if we want to know Him more.
I've opened my mind to binitarianism, Monophysitism, Unitarianism, all of it! Heck, I considered myself to be agnostic, almost atheistic at points in my life. I'm not afraid to go other places. I am on a plural family site for goodness sakes.
There is truth to the lack of specificity in this area in scripture regarding obtaining salvation. Believe on Jesus Messiah and you will be saved. Jesus died, was buried, rose from the dead, fellowshipped after death, all according to the scriptures. He is referred to as the man, Christ Jesus. I, nor anyone else, don't need to understand who he is to accept what he did...thus obtaining salvation.
All that being said, there are enough verses that @Jim an Apostle is not addressing that would satisfy the issue for the rest of us in his favor.
In the end, I think both sides would accuse the other side of eisigesis.
Once again, I wish peace to you my brothers, but I'm not gonna go there with you on this one.
I've opened my mind to binitarianism, Monophysitism, Unitarianism, all of it! Heck, I considered myself to be agnostic, almost atheistic at points in my life. I'm not afraid to go other places. I am on a plural family site for goodness sakes.
There is truth to the lack of specificity in this area in scripture regarding obtaining salvation. Believe on Jesus Messiah and you will be saved. Jesus died, was buried, rose from the dead, fellowshipped after death, all according to the scriptures. He is referred to as the man, Christ Jesus. I, nor anyone else, don't need to understand who he is to accept what he did...thus obtaining salvation.
All that being said, there are enough verses that @Jim an Apostle is not addressing that would satisfy the issue for the rest of us in his favor.
In the end, I think both sides would accuse the other side of eisigesis.
Once again, I wish peace to you my brothers, but I'm not gonna go there with you on this one.