So is he vegetarian or what? By the way you spelled "diet" wrong, there's no "y."
Jesus Christ was God manifest in the Flesh
- Thread starter Red33
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
So is he vegetarian or what? By the way you spelled "diet" wrong, there's no "y."
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
OK
BTW
When I am having three or four conversations at once it is not possible to always reply to or notice every post
Now obviously there will be some fanatical churches who will not stand on scripture for salvation
Concerning the above church. Do they preach from the pulpit that if as person believes Christ is the son of God but not God Himself they can have no eternal life?
Christ has the nature of his Father. If you had read all of my posts on this subject you would know I believe that, and the fulness of the Godhead bodily dwells in Christ
Now, so far I have put no scripture to you
The one reocccuring theme I have found when discussing with those who say you must believe Christ is God himself to have eternal life(totally unbiblical) is that they ask many questions but rarely answer your questions you put to them.
So now I expect anyone I debate with to answer question for question
So I will now quote some bible verses to you and when you FULLY respond to them without deviation I will answer more of your questions
Then the end will come when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power
For he must REIGN UNTIL he has put all his enemies under his feet
The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For he has put everything under his feet
Now when it says that everything has been put under him IT IS CLEAR THAT THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE GOD HIMSELF WHO PUT EVERYTHING UNDER CHRIST
When he has done this then the son himself will be made SUBJECT to him who put everything under him so that God may be all in all
1 Cor 15:24-28
Can you FULLY explain those verses to me, especially the words on capitals
Also
In what way WILL Christ become subject to the Father when all dominion, authority and power has been defeated
You cannot believe it will be the econiomical sense as you believe that Christ is now and always has been subject to the Father in this regard. You cannot believe it is in the ontological sense as you believe this would be impossible
So in what way WILL Christ become subject to the Father in the future when all dominion,. authority and power has been defeated?
When you answer fully these questions I will answer more of yours, but I will not accept evasion
Last edited:
Red, these statements are becoming more erratic all of the timE
You and I never debate this subject because you never answer any questions I put to you on it. We both know you would answer the questions if you were able, so I am begining to wonder if you are now questioining your preconceived ideas and this is causing you to react as you are
But on the other hand that would be difficult. There are some wonderful people who frequent these websites, but there are also many who simply come because they believe they have superior head knowledge where Christianity is concerned. They have been given far more knowledge than most and they are on cc to proclaim it to others.
Some of them have striven to learn by pouring over scholars/theologians and the Greek texts of the Bible, not content with the English, ever striving to have an almost perfect theology.
Others just believe God has raised them up to be teachers/preachers of the word. They are beacon lights to others and if only people would follow what they say they would know profund truth from scriptrure.
Now knowledge in its correct place is a wonderful and blessed thing to have, but there is another knowledge that simply leaves the individual puffed up, so how can we tell what knowledge is Holy Spirt led?
Well firstly, the Holy Spirit could not contradict plain scripture. Yes, we all have some disagreements over what is written, that is par for the course, but where something is clearly and continuously written no-one being spirit led could fail to accept it.
Christ clearly and continuously stated that if a person believed him to be the son of God they would have eternal life on that basis
He did not go into his nature, substance, whether the Father preexisted him or anythiing else, he was steadfast and plain
Believe I am the son of God for salvation
But many will not accept that. Therefore it is UTTERLY IMPOSSIBLE for them to be being led of the Holy Spirit for the Holy Spirit would not/could not contradict the plain words of Christ and that is basic Christianity.
So, anyone who will not accept it is being led of themselves, they are speaking on their own not by the spirit
He who speaks on his own dies so to gain honour for himself, but he who wotks for the honour of the one who sent him is a man of truth, there is nothing false about him
John 7:18
And of course the person seeking honour for themselves is filled with and led by pride.
Therefore when they cannot answer the scripture put to them their pride is hurt, they lash out, they try and malign others, they are untruthful as to what a person is supposed to have said and believed.
All of these are classic signs of the pride of man that leads to anger
The surest way to know a true Christian is when you meet someone who you know in their heart only seeks glory for God. And they will not display the above
Last edited:
YES, IN EVERY CASE
Something you would like to say to me on this or do you also have this screwed up as well? I'm not surprised, because of what is in your heart.
In (2Tim 2:15) we are commanded through a mandate to 'study', spoudazo (aorist, active, imperative). The imperative mood is one of command or mandate. We are to initiate this action not when we feel like it but at all times we are ... to hasten and exert oneself and give diligence when it is convenient and when it is not convenient.
Those who have laboured in the word and doctrine and have used others sources in their diligent study are to be commended for their labour of love for God and His word. They should be esteem highly in love for their work's sake (1Thes 5:12,13). Those that are critical of the work of theologians and scholars who contribute much to the knowledge and understanding of God's word, are of little understanding as to the effort and labour that goes into studying and rightly dividing the word of truth.
They fail to see that the Holy Spirit is very much active in this mandated endeavor and has gifted those that are involved in it to edify and build up the church. Those that reject the contributions of these theologians and scholars that God has given to the church reject Christ, who gave them. They fail to see because of the blindness in their heart that these also are members of the body of Christ who have a supply from the Spirit to contribute to the body (Phil 1:19, Eph 4:16-18).
A
AnandaHya
Guest
why does it matter if God is the Angel of the Lord or not? If you believe that God was Jesus and being born a man from a virgin did not make Him any less divine why would the form of the angel make it any more so? It would only matter if you think Jesus was a created being and NOT GOD would the issue even arise.
This conversation has become pointless. No one is going to change their minds or even listen to each other. The only one who is going to make a difference is if God comes and smack a few heads around and I have a feeling that even that might not be enough for some to change their minds.
this is the third or fourth thread that I've read that has gone past 600 post on the issue of whether or not Jesus is God, the Trinity, etc.
Same opinions, same people just a few different words. Anyone want to know the definition of insanity?
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein
Read more: Insanity: doing the same thing... at BrainyQuote
This conversation has become pointless. No one is going to change their minds or even listen to each other. The only one who is going to make a difference is if God comes and smack a few heads around and I have a feeling that even that might not be enough for some to change their minds.
this is the third or fourth thread that I've read that has gone past 600 post on the issue of whether or not Jesus is God, the Trinity, etc.
Same opinions, same people just a few different words. Anyone want to know the definition of insanity?
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein
Read more: Insanity: doing the same thing... at BrainyQuote
U
unclefester
Guest
Well said Ananda. My only contribution to this discussion below.
Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.
There is no one in all parts equal to God but God Himself.
Well I am going to take Amanda's good advice and bow out of what has become a pointless discussion with everything that can be said has been said. But I will firstly pass some HONEST observations
Your first paragraph shows your utter dishonesty as to the reasons you have answered none of my questions.
The excuses varied and I am not going to go over all of them now but as soon as you THINK(no more) that you can answer a question you are like a dog to a bone. So you have made an error I am afraid, and proved what I suspect all knew
Ex 23:20-22
Ex 24:9-11
1 Cor 10-4
Shows that Christ was the angel of the Lord, but I will leave you to finally I guess give an opionion on something I have written, having previously having had two or three weeks to do so and remained silent
But I find all of this rather strange. I have a simple faith, I am certainly no scholar or theologian and have never read the Greek Bible, nor do I believe I have been raised up as a teacher/preacher of the word, but in all of this discussion none of you have been able to answer or repudiate the plain scripture put to you, and I am refering to those who have non Biblical beliefs as to what is the required belief for salvation
You have not, nor cannot provide one verse of scripture where Christ commanded anyone to believe he was the one true God Himself
You have not nor cannot provide one verse of scritpure that states that unless a person believes Christ is God Himself they can have no eternal life, but you continuously demand this is believed and say it is the basiss for the Christian faith
So according to you (and others) the basis of the Christian faith and what eternal life hinges on is not written in the Bible. Well it most certainly is not in plain words, only by yours and others inferences from scripture you infer means what you want it to mean
So we have the Holy Spirit breathed Bible according to you and others that does not make plain or acttually say what you believe is essential to have eternal life.
Wow! The fact this would discredit the Bible does not concern you. You and others are only concerned with being seen as having great knlowledge and understanding and impressing others on cc.
For I will finally repeat
If anyone on this websitte believes the Holy Spirit would contradict the plain and continuous words of Christ concerning what a person must believe concerning him to have eternal life, they do not understand anything about Christianity. And you and others most certainly have added to the requirement Christ set down and have therefore contradicted the requirement Christ set
Therefore NONE OF YOU who believe as you do CAN POSSIBLY be being led of the Holy Spirit therefore you speak for yourselves, doubtless some weak in the faith will be taken in by you, but no-one else will be
He who speaks on his own does so to gain honour for himself, but he who works for the honour of the one who sent him is a masn of truth and there is nothnig false about him
John 7:18
monogenhV qeoV Ò wn ton kolpon tou patroV ekeinoV exhghsato
MONOGENÊS THEOS hO ÔN TON KOLPON TOU PATROS EKEINOS EXÊGÊSATO
[The} one and only God who is in the bosom of the father, [he] has explained [Him].
~
John 1:18
No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.
John 1:18 presents some interesting challenges for the translator and exegete. The issues surround the phrase rendered in the NIV as "God the One and Only." Other versions read as follows:
< go to link to see comparisons, including NWT>
http://www.forananswer.org/John/Jn1_18.htm
The theological stakes are high. Does this verse call Jesus the "only Son" or the "only God?" Is the Son an "only-begotten god" - a created secondary god alongside the "unbegotten" Father? Or is He the "only begotten Son" in a literal sense - begotten by a union of the Father and Mary?
The exegetical issues may be categorized as those dealing with whether Jesus is called "Son or God" (a textual issue) and how this title is modified or amplified (an issue of translation).
1. ho monogenês (The Only One)
2. ho monogenês huios (the only Son)
3. monogenês theos (only God)
4. ho monogenês theos (the only God)
~
.....On the whole, I find the evidence presented by these scholars convincing. I would render monogenês theos as "the only Son, God." However, an adjectival reading for monogenês is also possible, yielding a translation similar to the ESV or ISV, "the one and only God."....
~
Sola Scriptura - Scripture Alone
Solus Christus - Christ Alone
Sola Gratia - Grace Alone
Sola Fide - Faith Alone
Soli Deo Gloria - The Glory of God Alone
z
MONOGENÊS THEOS hO ÔN TON KOLPON TOU PATROS EKEINOS EXÊGÊSATO
[The} one and only God who is in the bosom of the father, [he] has explained [Him].
~
John 1:18
No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.
John 1:18 presents some interesting challenges for the translator and exegete. The issues surround the phrase rendered in the NIV as "God the One and Only." Other versions read as follows:
< go to link to see comparisons, including NWT>
http://www.forananswer.org/John/Jn1_18.htm
The theological stakes are high. Does this verse call Jesus the "only Son" or the "only God?" Is the Son an "only-begotten god" - a created secondary god alongside the "unbegotten" Father? Or is He the "only begotten Son" in a literal sense - begotten by a union of the Father and Mary?
The exegetical issues may be categorized as those dealing with whether Jesus is called "Son or God" (a textual issue) and how this title is modified or amplified (an issue of translation).
Only Son or Only God?
The initial problem is a textual one. Of the thousands of early Greek New Testament manuscripts, there are four principal textual variants of this phrase. We first need to establish which variant we believe represents the original text, then move from there into possible translations of that text. The four variants (in transliterated Greek) are:
1. ho monogenês (The Only One)
2. ho monogenês huios (the only Son)
3. monogenês theos (only God)
4. ho monogenês theos (the only God)
~
.....On the whole, I find the evidence presented by these scholars convincing. I would render monogenês theos as "the only Son, God." However, an adjectival reading for monogenês is also possible, yielding a translation similar to the ESV or ISV, "the one and only God."....
~
Sola Scriptura - Scripture Alone
Solus Christus - Christ Alone
Sola Gratia - Grace Alone
Sola Fide - Faith Alone
Soli Deo Gloria - The Glory of God Alone
z
monogenhV qeoV Ò wn ton kolpon tou patroV ekeinoV exhghsato
MONOGENÊS THEOS hO ÔN TON KOLPON TOU PATROS EKEINOS EXÊGÊSATO
[The} one and only God who is in the bosom of the father, [he] has explained [Him].
~
John 1:18
No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.
John 1:18 presents some interesting challenges for the translator and exegete. The issues surround the phrase rendered in the NIV as "God the One and Only." Other versions read as follows:
< go to link to see comparisons, including NWT>
http://www.forananswer.org/John/Jn1_18.htm
The theological stakes are high. Does this verse call Jesus the "only Son" or the "only God?" Is the Son an "only-begotten god" - a created secondary god alongside the "unbegotten" Father? Or is He the "only begotten Son" in a literal sense - begotten by a union of the Father and Mary?
The exegetical issues may be categorized as those dealing with whether Jesus is called "Son or God" (a textual issue) and how this title is modified or amplified (an issue of translation).
Only Son or Only God?
The initial problem is a textual one. Of the thousands of early Greek New Testament manuscripts, there are four principal textual variants of this phrase. We first need to establish which variant we believe represents the original text, then move from there into possible translations of that text. The four variants (in transliterated Greek) are:
1. ho monogenês (The Only One)
2. ho monogenês huios (the only Son)
3. monogenês theos (only God)
4. ho monogenês theos (the only God)
~
.....On the whole, I find the evidence presented by these scholars convincing. I would render monogenês theos as "the only Son, God." However, an adjectival reading for monogenês is also possible, yielding a translation similar to the ESV or ISV, "the one and only God."....
~
Sola Scriptura - Scripture Alone
Solus Christus - Christ Alone
Sola Gratia - Grace Alone
Sola Fide - Faith Alone
Soli Deo Gloria - The Glory of God Alone
z
If you take (Jn 1:18), that has three commas in it, and you take out one segment between the commas and read the rest of the verse, no matter which segment you take out you get the same understanding.
Christ, but God the one and only ... who He is
Christ, who is at the Father's side ... where He is
Christ, has made Him known ... what He did
Isn't it possible that Emanuel, the Son of God was created by God for the sole purpose of redemption & salvation for all mankind. God, Elohim, Yahweh, being all powerful, could bestow all his power & Glory upon the Son, making him Deity over our heavens & Earth until all things have been put under him. Death being the last, before handing the Kingdom back over to the Father ......
then what happens?
does the temporary demi-god you call emmanuel have his temporary divinity taken away?
how does that work exactly? are there other lesser gods also? (like the mormons claim - their jesus and satan are little god brothers).
[SIZE=+1]Lie #1. "Jehovah's Witnesses" (JW's) claim that Jehovah created Jesus.[/SIZE]
In their book entitled Knowledge That Leads to Everlasting Life (which is also a lie) on page 62 they write,
As we have previously learned in this book, Jesus had a prehuman existence. He is called God's "only-begotten Son" because Jehovah created him directly.
On the JW's official web site in the article Is God Always Superior to Jesus? they write,
God is always the superior, Jesus the lesser one who was created by God. (www.watchtower.org/library/ti/article_06.htm, see also footnote 1 below)
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
How can this be Possible? The one we call Jesus was the Angel (messenger) of God (The Father). He was not created when he was born. As He told the jews. Before Abraham was. I Am. He did not say he was. Or existed. He said I AM. This is an eternal answer. He always was. And always will be. Like Melchizedek, He had no father or no mother, no beginning or end. He is eternal.
A
aworldexport67
Guest
LGB your question 1Cor 15:24-28 ive taken the time to exam the scripture coupled with your interpretation of whats going on lets take a look because i see how you could confuse some things..lets look...
the word end in verse 24 refers to the end of the mediatorial kingdom of the Redeemer.. the consummation of his special reign and work resulting in the surrender of the kingdom to the Father... that of surrendering... giving back.. delivering up... rendering up that which had been received...
implying that an important trust had been received which was now to be rendered back. ..that the Lord Jesus had received or been entrusted with an important power or office as Mediator.. that he had executed the purpose implied in that trust or commission and that He was now rendering back to God that office or authority which He had received at his hands....
the work had been accomplished which had been contemplated in His design.... as there would be no further necessity for mediation when redemption should have been made and his church recovered from sin and brought to glory..
there would be no further need of that special arrangement which had been implied in the work of redemption and of course all the entrustment of power involved in that would be again restored to the hands of God...
the idea is that he would deliver up the kingdom as when governors of provinces render again or deliver up their commission and authority to the Caesars who appointed them....
for "if" the world was to be redeemed it was necessary that the Redeemer should be entrusted with power sufficient for his work... when that work was done and there was no further need of that special exercise of power then it would be proper that it should be restored or that the government of God should be administered as it was before the work of redemption was undertaken that the Divinity or the Godhead as such, should preside over the destinies of the universe. ..
it will not follow that the second Pprson of the Trinity will surrender "all" power or "cease" to exercise government. ..It will be that power "only" which He had as Mediator and whatever part in the administration of the government of the universe He shared as divine before the incarnation... He will still share with the additional "glory" and "honor" of having redeemed a world by his death...
His enemies shall have been subdued... His power shall have been asserted... the authority of God shall have been established and the kingdom or the dominion shall be in the hands of God himself and He shall reign not in the special form which existed in the work of mediation.. but absolutely as He did before the incarnation...
the Mediator shall have given up the special power and rule as Mediator and it shall be exercised by God as God...
not to say that the second person of the Trinity is to surrender all power into the hands of the first or that he is to cease to exercise dominion and control...but that the power is to be yielded into the hands of God as God that is as the universal Father... as the Divinity without being exercised in any special and special manner by the different persons of the Godhead as had been done in the work of redemption...
Your assuming that Jesus being less than the Father will now be under or subjected under the Father..not true..
at the close of the work of redemption this "peculiar" arrangement would cease and God as the universal Ruler of all would exercise the government of the world...
Jesus redemptive work done... power reverts back to the Godhead as it was before the incarnation where all Father Son Holy Spirit,being the One true God,reigned..Just because the Son in His redemptive power and postion is subject to the Father does not take away from who He is..Jesus never stopped being God the Son..He chose to do this..and now that the redemptive plan is complete all dominion and power reverts back to how it was before the incarnation...God the Father..God the Son.. God the Holy Spirit..all One...
I hope this makes sense and i hope it met your expectaions of an honest direct reponse to your questions..
the word end in verse 24 refers to the end of the mediatorial kingdom of the Redeemer.. the consummation of his special reign and work resulting in the surrender of the kingdom to the Father... that of surrendering... giving back.. delivering up... rendering up that which had been received...
implying that an important trust had been received which was now to be rendered back. ..that the Lord Jesus had received or been entrusted with an important power or office as Mediator.. that he had executed the purpose implied in that trust or commission and that He was now rendering back to God that office or authority which He had received at his hands....
the work had been accomplished which had been contemplated in His design.... as there would be no further necessity for mediation when redemption should have been made and his church recovered from sin and brought to glory..
there would be no further need of that special arrangement which had been implied in the work of redemption and of course all the entrustment of power involved in that would be again restored to the hands of God...
the idea is that he would deliver up the kingdom as when governors of provinces render again or deliver up their commission and authority to the Caesars who appointed them....
for "if" the world was to be redeemed it was necessary that the Redeemer should be entrusted with power sufficient for his work... when that work was done and there was no further need of that special exercise of power then it would be proper that it should be restored or that the government of God should be administered as it was before the work of redemption was undertaken that the Divinity or the Godhead as such, should preside over the destinies of the universe. ..
it will not follow that the second Pprson of the Trinity will surrender "all" power or "cease" to exercise government. ..It will be that power "only" which He had as Mediator and whatever part in the administration of the government of the universe He shared as divine before the incarnation... He will still share with the additional "glory" and "honor" of having redeemed a world by his death...
His enemies shall have been subdued... His power shall have been asserted... the authority of God shall have been established and the kingdom or the dominion shall be in the hands of God himself and He shall reign not in the special form which existed in the work of mediation.. but absolutely as He did before the incarnation...
the Mediator shall have given up the special power and rule as Mediator and it shall be exercised by God as God...
not to say that the second person of the Trinity is to surrender all power into the hands of the first or that he is to cease to exercise dominion and control...but that the power is to be yielded into the hands of God as God that is as the universal Father... as the Divinity without being exercised in any special and special manner by the different persons of the Godhead as had been done in the work of redemption...
Your assuming that Jesus being less than the Father will now be under or subjected under the Father..not true..
at the close of the work of redemption this "peculiar" arrangement would cease and God as the universal Ruler of all would exercise the government of the world...
Jesus redemptive work done... power reverts back to the Godhead as it was before the incarnation where all Father Son Holy Spirit,being the One true God,reigned..Just because the Son in His redemptive power and postion is subject to the Father does not take away from who He is..Jesus never stopped being God the Son..He chose to do this..and now that the redemptive plan is complete all dominion and power reverts back to how it was before the incarnation...God the Father..God the Son.. God the Holy Spirit..all One...
I hope this makes sense and i hope it met your expectaions of an honest direct reponse to your questions..
A
aworldexport67
Guest
Tigger that would mean there are Two Deities..Polytheism..there is Only One True God Period...this is the Mormon position that Jesus is a god along with us who are progressing to become a god..nah totally unscriptual...
A
aworldexport67
Guest
typical it seems of these boards..spend the time answering folks..they dont read what you answer they just pose more questions..extend courtesy but none is returned..
awe67:
you likely won't hear back because this is sound doctrine, and explains clearly God's Purpose and Plan in redemptive history (for us, to His Glory).
it confirms the Triune GodHead, and Christ as Son of God and Son of Man, and as Theos Logos Arche.
thank you.
zone
With God all things are possible. Before he was manifest in the flesh he was Spirit. Then the Holy Spirit planted the seed of God into Mary & he became a man & you shall call him Emanuel, The Son of God. No matter what he was before, at this point he was a man. God's second chance for the salvation of mankind.