What does it mean that Jesus Christ is the Son of God?

[bluto]

Then you reject the testimony of Jesus Christ, which I also provided--->>>>>John 14:28 "Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I."

He who denies the words of the Son also denies the Father.

1 John 2:23
Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

John 5:23
That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

No isit, I do not reject the testimony of Jesus and what He said at John 14:28. The fact is that you do not understand in what respect God the Father is greater than the Son. The Son according to Philippians 2:5-9 (Who although existed as God) lowered Himself by taking on human flesh. Remember, the Son has two natures, one of human from His mothers side and one of Deity on His Fathers side. When the Son became a man naturally He was subservient to His Father and did everything to please the Father just like we are suppose to do because Jesus Christ is our example.

Furthermore, Jesus Christ was accused of blasphemy for claiming to be equal to God His Father. John 5:18, John 8:58, John 10:30, John 19:7 and at the trial of Jesus at Matthew 26:59-66. Since the Son lowered Himself (who again always existed as God) does not deny His deity as God.

At this point I want to change gears so to speak and deal with what you keep doing in your post. That is you saying "The Son = the Word of God." It's pretty obvious to me that you are saying the Son is the spoken word of God. This is "NOT" what John 1:1 is teaching. Please note that this says "the" (definite article) Word (singular) existed. It does not say God's word or words, it says "The Word existed. And "The Word existed "how?" The Word existed with the God. The Word and The God are distinct, there is a subject/object distinction between the two.

So whatevedr God is, The Word is, and vice versa. So if "The Word" is impersonal, God is impersonal. And if "The Word" is just a thought or a plan of God (which the oneness Pentecostals teach) then "The God" is just a thought or a plan. That said, "word" which in the Greek here is "Logos," is in Aramaic "Memra." In the Jewish Targums, "The Memra of God" was used in place of "God" in many places, where "God" is used two times in the same passage such as "the Lord rained fire and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah from the Lord out of Heaven, "the former would be "the Memra. Sometimes for the Angel of God.

In the Targum the Memra figures constantly as the manifestatioin of the divinepower, or as God's messenger in place of God Himself. In other words, the point of this little exercise is to inform you the at John 1:1 the "Word/Logos/Memra" is a person and not spoken words or a thought or plan of God as you and others seem to think.

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

Originally Posted by bluto

No isit, I do not reject the testimony of Jesus and what He said at John 14:28.

Yes you did, right here---->>>>

Originally Posted by bluto

Not exactly right isit! The Father is not greater....
bluto

 

[FreeNChrist]

Yes you did, right here---->>>>"Not exactly right isit! The Father is not greater...."
bluto

Jesus is God. Is God greater than Himself??

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

Furthermore, Jesus Christ was accused of blasphemy for claiming to be equal to God His Father. John 5:18, John 19:7 and at the trial of Jesus at Matthew 26:59-66

Let's see what Jesus actually said in His own words in John 5:18....

John 5:17-18

[SUP]17 [/SUP]But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.

[SUP]18 [/SUP]Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God."

Here is another of your quotes above....


John 19:7[SUP] "[/SUP]The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God."

And here is another you quoted....


Matthew 26:59-66

[SUP]59 [/SUP]Now the chief priests, and elders, and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death;
[SUP]60 [/SUP]But found none: yea, though many false witnesses came, yet found they none. At the last came two false witnesses,
[SUP]61 [/SUP]And said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.
[SUP]62 [/SUP]And the high priest arose, and said unto him, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee?
[SUP]63 [/SUP]But Jesus held his peace, And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.

[SUP]64 [/SUP]Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

[SUP]65 [/SUP]Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy.
[SUP]66 [/SUP]What think ye? They answered and said, He is guilty of death."

So what is your point? Jesus plainly said God was His Father, and that He was the Son of God. I agree.

 

[notbythesword]

Jesus is God. Is God greater than Himself??

So are you saying that you reject John 14:28?

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

Jesus is God. Is God greater than Himself??

The Father is greater than His Son--->>>>

1 Corinthians 11:3.....the head of Christ is God.

 

[FreeNChrist]

The Father is greater than His Son--->>>>

1 Corinthians 11:3.....the head of Christ is God.

In function, not in essence. Is God divided?

 

[FreeNChrist]

So are you saying that you reject John 14:28?

I'm saying folks need to study out the unique dual nature of Jesus Christ. Fully God AND fully man.

 

[notbythesword]

I'm saying folks need to study out the unique dual nature of Jesus Christ. Fully God AND fully man.

So, after Jesus was no longer just a man (since He had already died and risen from the dead), why did He make it a point to say what He did in John 20:17? Do you also believe this verse to be “Jesus the man” talking?

 

[FreeNChrist]

So, after Jesus was no longer just a man (since He had already died and risen from the dead), why did He make it a point to say what He did in John 20:17? Do you also believe this verse to be “Jesus the man” talking?

Jesus, as a man. And He was never "just a man", as He was never less than fully God.

 

[notbythesword]

Jesus, as a man. And He was never "just a man", as He was never less than fully God.

I agree that Jesus was never just a man. This is why I find it so ironic that so many would choose to essentially nullify many things that Jesus said and taught, simply by saying that it was just Jesus the man speaking. I don’t need to make excuses of why Jesus didn’t mean what He actually said.

 

[FreeNChrist]

I agree that Jesus was never just a man. This is why I find it so ironic that so many would choose to essentially nullify many things that Jesus said and taught, simply by saying that it was just Jesus the man speaking. I don’t need to make excuses of why Jesus didn’t mean what He actually said.

No, you don't need to make excuses, but you do need understand that in order for Jesus to be a man, a real true man, and not just God in an earthsuit pretending to be a man, He had to Self-limit Himself to functioning as a man. With all of the limitations inherent in that. Its why Jesus as a man could say the Father was greater than He. As the Father is greater than all men. Its why as a man He could say He was going to His God, or "my God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

And that's why taking those things He said and trying to make them mean that Jesus is not God has always been considered heresy by Christianity.

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

Is God divided?

Don't be silly---->>>>
Mark 3:24-25

[SUP]24 [/SUP]And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.
[SUP]25 [/SUP]And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.

 

[FreeNChrist]

Don't be silly---->>>>
Mark 3:24-25

[SUP]24 [/SUP]And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.
[SUP]25 [/SUP]And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.

It was a rhetorical question.....

 

[bluto]

So, after Jesus was no longer just a man (since He had already died and risen from the dead), why did He make it a point to say what He did in John 20:17? Do you also believe this verse to be “Jesus the man” talking?

Because He had not ascended yet, that's why and then AFTER He ascended what does Thomas say at vs28? "My Lord and my God." Of course you don't believe it cause you never bother reading the context. Any more questions sword? Go ahead, ask me anything?

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[Yahshua]

I think you understood what I meant,but I digress.

If we are justified before GOD,are we then sanctified before GOD also?

My Answer: No, sir. Not until we do what you've provided below.

What would you call what Apostle Paul said Inspired by the HOLY SPIRIT In
Romans 12:1-2
King James version(KJV)

1.)I beseech {"implore; earnestly ask"...why would Paul need to earnestly ask if it was already a reality?} you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present {VERB = action the brethren is to perform..} your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is *your* reasonable service {i.e. our work to serve for God}.

2.)And be not conformed {VERB = action the brethren is NOT to perform} to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind {VERB = action the brethren is to perform}, that ye may prove {why must the brethren PROVE it if it's already a reality?} what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

...I'd call it instructions to follow in order to sanctify ourselves.

 

[Yahshua]

When we receive Christ we are washed from all sin, are sanctified ( set apart ) and we are declared righteous ( justified ) - all because we are in Christ.

1 Corinthians 6:11 (NASB)
[SUP]11 [/SUP] Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

But who was Paul talking to? Was he talking to those at Corinth or is he talking to we the reader? What I'm getting at is, if they at Corinth - because of prior guidance from Paul in the process of repentance - were previously "set apart" or "separated" from the world unto God, but then started to backslide, then it's reasonable for Paul to tell them how God saved them from their unrighteous life, hence the previous verses 1 Corinthians 6:9-10...


9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.


and THEN comes verse 11...


11 as such were some of you: BUT YOU are washed, BUT YOU are sanctified, BUT YOU are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.


Paul is simply noting what life these people came from, by stating the three things they went through to leave those lives behind, so that later in the letter he can warn them not to return to unrighteous living. But this doesn't make these three elements positions. There's only one that's a position: Justification. We can even replace sanctification with the phrase "separated" to show it's not a position but a past action (let's also replace "justified" and "washed" just to emphasize how each of these things are different).


11 as such were some of you: BUT YOU are "cleaned from sin", BUT YOU are "separated from the world", BUT YOU are "Reckoned as innocent" in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.


Sanctified isn't a position like "justified" because we aren't automatically reckoned as separated from the world. We are in the world but are commanded not to be of it. We have to "be ye separate". It's a process; an action on our part as Paul's 2nd letter says.

2 Corinthians 6:17
Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,

Sanctification = coming out from the world to become holy to God; separating ourselves from it.

 

[seed_time_harvest]

My Answer: No, sir. Not until we do what you've provided below.



...I'd call it instructions to follow in order to sanctify ourselves.

So you believe the termonology "positional sanctification" Is error? You believe there Is only "progressive sanctification"?

We are justified/saved then we are In the process of sanctification?

 

[Yahshua]

Here is what I believe scripture says about the gospel of the grace of our Lord Jesus has to say about "sanctification"..the word itself means = "to be set apart".

I believe there are 2 aspects to it.

We are perfectly sanctified in Christ now....very true....we as an identity the new creation in Christ will never be more holy than we are now because we are in Christ - joined as one spirit with Him in our inner man.

However there is a "sanctifying" of our behavior that is on-going that reflects our true nature in Christ...so in essence...we are becoming outwardly who we really are in our inner man which is in Christ.

God sets apart ( sanctifies ) our attitudes and actions outwardly but you are 100% set apart ( sanctified ) as a person....the real you in your inner man....the new creation in Christ.

Hebrews 10:14 (NASB)
[SUP]14 [/SUP] For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.

( who are sanctified this is present passive.....passive is that something is being done to you ...the Spirit of the Lord in us changing us. )

Here is what Jesus told Paul on the road to Damascus....having been sanctified ( perfect passive ).

Acts 26:17 (NASB)

[SUP]18 [/SUP] to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those whohave been sanctified by faith in Me.' (perfect passive )

Perfect tense =The perfect tense in Greek is used to describe a completed past action which produced results which are still in effect all the way up to the present. This is continuously happening in the present in a completed state.

Passive means something is being done to you - you are not doing it.

It is obvious from scripture that we are to walk out the holiness that is in us.

There is a difference between us as a person being "set apart" ( sanctified in our spirit ) and "setting apart " ( sanctifying ) our behavior.

1 Peter 1:15-16 (NASB)
[SUP]15 [/SUP] but like the Holy One who called you, be holy yourselves also in all your behavior;

[SUP]16 [/SUP] because it is written, "YOU SHALL BE HOLY, FOR I AM HOLY."

Hebrews 10:14 is a good passage, but the Greek says ἁγιαζομένους. or hagiazomenous (from the root verb hagiazó; meaning "to sanctify; set apart as holy") = "being sanctified".

The word translated as "has perfected" is also interesting. It's τετελείωκεν or "teteleiōken" (from the root verb teleioó, meaning "to bring to an end; to complete") = "should be brought to full development".

So the passage reads...


Hebrews 10:14
14 For by one offering He shall bring to full development for all time those being sanctified.


It's future tense with future perfect tense, giving a significantly different message than what our English translations provide. And notice how this version perfectly marries another well-known passage; Philippians 1:6: "he who began a good work in you will complete it unto the day of Christ".

 

[Yahshua]

So you believe the termonology "positional sanctification" Is error? You believe there Is only "progressive sanctification"?

We are justified/saved then we are In the process of sanctification?

Yes, I believe the word is an error. Even the word "progressive sanctification" is redundant because "sanctification" is progressive. It's a process.

No we don't need the term "positionally sanctified" because we're simply defining "justification" with another term. To be justified is to be seen as holy & righteous in God's eyes, through no work of our own. Then sanctification is us walking out that holiness to "prove the good acceptable will of God" in our lives.