H
Hello hopesprings,
Thanks for the response.
I don't think you have an answer that can be tested. And that's my point.
This is how objection was expressed in Bible times. It's like when Jesus asks Mary, literally, "What is there in common between me and you?" (John 2:4) It's a rhetorical question; he's objecting to something she said.
If Jesus was truly asking the man, and not making a rhetorical question in order to correct him, you'd think he'd wait for the man to answer his question. He doesn't.
Wouldn't this be a super great time then for Jesus to tell the man exactly that, that in order to receive everlasting life like he wants, he must believe that Jesus is God himself? Why does Jesus disregard completely what is to you an appalling lack of faith here?
You keep saying things like this, that you feel like I didn't answer you, when I absolutely did! I said exactly why Jesus objected in this one instance to an adjective that is commonly accepted elsewhere. Did you miss that?
Why did you disregard the text I showed where Barnabas is called "good"? Is that also proof that Barnabas is God, hopesprings? If not, how is it different? Please don't ignore things like this and say that you don't feel like I answered you. Please tell me why you don't think that applies.
Well, we were already discussing Philippians 2 and how the word in verse 6, as well as the preceding comparison, support that the pre-existent Jesus didn't try to seize equality with God. Now I've been trying to get anyone here to discuss Proverbs 8:22-31 with me and its application to the Messiah. There it explains the very same scenario I've explained at places like Colossians 1 and Revelation 3, i.e. that the Son was the very first creature, and that God then proceeded to create everything through him. Thoughts?
Thanks for the response.
I don't think you have an answer that can be tested. And that's my point.
This is how objection was expressed in Bible times. It's like when Jesus asks Mary, literally, "What is there in common between me and you?" (John 2:4) It's a rhetorical question; he's objecting to something she said.
If Jesus was truly asking the man, and not making a rhetorical question in order to correct him, you'd think he'd wait for the man to answer his question. He doesn't.
Wouldn't this be a super great time then for Jesus to tell the man exactly that, that in order to receive everlasting life like he wants, he must believe that Jesus is God himself? Why does Jesus disregard completely what is to you an appalling lack of faith here?
You keep saying things like this, that you feel like I didn't answer you, when I absolutely did! I said exactly why Jesus objected in this one instance to an adjective that is commonly accepted elsewhere. Did you miss that?
Why did you disregard the text I showed where Barnabas is called "good"? Is that also proof that Barnabas is God, hopesprings? If not, how is it different? Please don't ignore things like this and say that you don't feel like I answered you. Please tell me why you don't think that applies.
Well, we were already discussing Philippians 2 and how the word in verse 6, as well as the preceding comparison, support that the pre-existent Jesus didn't try to seize equality with God. Now I've been trying to get anyone here to discuss Proverbs 8:22-31 with me and its application to the Messiah. There it explains the very same scenario I've explained at places like Colossians 1 and Revelation 3, i.e. that the Son was the very first creature, and that God then proceeded to create everything through him. Thoughts?
I said that I do have an answer to your question, but that I do not consider it a real answer.
The list I have would contradict much of what Jesus did in his earthly ministry.
You asked: if Jesus was God then why didn’t he give the young man a chance to respond to his question? My answer is because Jesus already knew the answer to the man’s question, because he already knew the condition of the man’s heart. We know that sometimes Jesus would ask a question without waiting for an answer (like in Matt. 8:26-27); we also know that sometimes Jesus would ask a question that he already knew the answer to (like in John 21:15-17); and we also know that Jesus was able to perceive things about people without being told (like in John 4) – so it is possible that Jesus already knew the answer, just like he already knew the one thing the young man was holding back from God. You also asked why Jesus didn’t tell the young man that he was God, and my answer to that is – read John 14:21-23. Jesus instructed many who knew him not to tell anyone who he really was (like in Mark 1:34, 3:11-12, 5:42-43, 8:29-30). Believing that Jesus is God doesn’t automatically buy you eternal life; eternal life is defined as ‘knowing God’…but yet the young man counted his wealth on equal ground as eternal life, that is a condition of the heart; Jesus reveals the fact that the man’s heart is in the wrong place by showing him how much he values his wealth.
The fact that the young man dropped the ‘good’ the second time shows that he really didn’t believe Jesus to be God. It was all a lack of faith on the man’s part…the young man shows this by walking away grieved at having been told to give up his earthly possessions.
I would like to ask you to forgive me for calling your explanation of John 10, a dance. It was unfair of me to withhold a better explanation as to WHY I think that this is what you were doing. I’m sorry for doing that and will refrain from doing it in the future.
I find your response to Jesus calling himself ‘good’, insufficient. Here is why I think that: If Barnabas had said ‘don’t call anyone good because only God is good’, and then proceeded to call HIMSELF good – then the example would be comparable. As it stands, someone else called Barnabas good on the basis of God’s work in his life. That is different from the situation with Jesus, because Jesus is the one who said ‘don’t call anyone good because only God is good’, and then he says ‘I am the good shepherd’. There is a contradiction there. In order for Jesus to call himself good (since only God is good) he would have to have the authority to do that, but how can he call himself good if only God is good? And, how can he rebuke someone for calling him good when he calls himself good? Barnabas wasn’t called good based on his own merit, but on the Holy Spirit working in him as evidenced through his ministry. And, Barnabas didn’t say ‘I am a good man’…how could he ever say that about himself if only God is good? If he were to say such a thing he would be taking some of the glory that belongs to God. Jesus, on the other hand, says of himself…I am the Good Shepherd. That has huge implications. I think that Jesus claiming no one is good except God, and then later calling himself good deserves more consideration then what you are giving it. This conclusion is especially true if you continue to read on in John 10; that is why I find your answer insufficient.
I feel that your explanation of Phil. 2 is lacking as well, because it does not take into account the first half of the verse (v.6). I would like to hear why it is that you believe Jesus can be pre-existent in the form of God, yet not be equal to God. I am going to go back and look at your previous posts on Prov. 8, and I will get back to you on that.
‘till later…
hopesprings