Jesus Christ Truly God Truly man (human)

Jesus is Truly God and Truly man (human)

  • Yes

    Votes: 43 93.5%
  • No

    Votes: 3 6.5%

  • Total voters
    46
Status
Not open for further replies.

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,169
16,009
Flyoverland
✟1,224,061.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Only Jesus is perfect.
That belief in Mary being sinless is a only doctrine taught by RCC or Eastern Orthodox.
Are you still saying Adam and Eve were sinners before the fall and not impeccable at that time?

Everything we have been discussing here about christology so far in this thread is 'a only doctrine taught by RCC or Eastern Orthodox' and yet some of you don't reject it reflexively.

You asked me where it was in the Bible only to blow that off entirely. Maybe you can get back to the discussion the rest of us are having now.
 
Upvote 0

MournfulWatcher

In the beginning was the Word.
Feb 15, 2016
392
444
United States
✟110,673.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Hi there redleghunter,

The Trinity is always an fun topic to dig into - especially when people are actually willing to engage honestly. I was raised a Trinitarian, but have devoted quite a bit of time to studying this issue (originally to defend it) and can no longer seriously entertain it.

There are a number of ways to approach this, but I think it best to start with the primary argument put forth by your average Christian in favor for the Trinity: the scriptures address him as God. While Jesus never addresses himself as such, there are definitely scriptures that do.

Of course, we must ask what it means for Jesus to be called God? This was a big debate item in the early church, with a myriad of propositions from the Church Fathers. Some posited that he was a second, lesser god. Others that he was God - despite being begotten - by virtue of the fact that he was begotten of the same substance as God (and we, too, shared in this divinity via the HS). Others still maintained that the Son was merely one side or mode of God that he would take on - but that there was no real difference between the Father and Son. Others still who considered it blasphemy to say that the Father died for our sins. etc.

I think we've made a mess of a rather simple issue by not paying attention to the scriptural usage of the term "God," by ignoring the precedents established in scripture. In fact, many have been addressed as God (and even Yahweh) who were not literally God. Angels have been addressed as God, Moses is said to be God to Pharaoh, and the Jewish people (and subsequently Christians) are said to be gods.

For one of several examples of angels being treated as God, consider the story of Jacob wrestling with God - and subsequently being renamed Israel. In Genesis this figure that Jacob wrestles with is treated as if God himself.

Genesis 32:26-30 Then the man said, “Let me go, for it is daybreak.” But Jacob replied, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.” 27 The man asked him, “What is your name?” “Jacob,” he answered. 28 Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel,f]">[f] because you have struggled with God and with humans and have overcome.” 29 Jacob said, “Please tell me your name.” But he replied, “Why do you ask my name?” Then he blessed him there. 30 So Jacob called the place Peniel,g]">[g] saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.

However, scripture later clarifies that this was, in fact, an angel:
Hosea 12:2-4 The Lord has a charge to bring against Judah; he will punish Jacobb]">[b] according to his ways and repay him according to his deeds. 3 In the womb he grasped his brother’s heel; as a man he struggled with God. 4 He struggled with the angel and overcame him; he wept and begged for his favor.

As a second example of an angel being addressed as God - and even Yahweh - look at the angel in the burning bush in Exodus 3.
Exodus 3:1-6;13-14 Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian, and he led the flock to the far side of the wilderness and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. 2 There the angel of the Lord appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up. 3 So Moses thought, “I will go over and see this strange sight—why the bush does not burn up.”4 When the Lord saw that he had gone over to look, God called to him from within the bush, “Moses! Moses!” And Moses said, “Here I am.” 5 “Do not come any closer,” God said. “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy ground.” 6 Then he said, “I am the God of your father,a]">[a] the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” At this, Moses hid his face, because he was afraid to look at God....

13 Moses said to God, “Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ Then what shall I tell them?” 14 God said to Moses, “I am who I am.c]">[c] This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am has sent me to you.’”


Was it God himself in the bush? No - we are told from the start that this is an Angel of the Lord. Yet he speaks as though God - and it is he, speaking as God, who told Moses God's name: Yahweh.

In a very similar manner, God tells Moses the following:
Exodus 7:1-2 Then the Lord said to Moses, “See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet. 2 You are to say everything I command you, and your brother Aaron is to tell Pharaoh to let the Israelites go out of his country.

And Jesus further goes on to interpret the scriptures as asserting that the Jewish people are gods:
John 10:34-35 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’d]">[d]? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside—

So then, Jesus is indeed addressed as God in certain scriptures - but there is plenty of precedent for those who are not literally God being addressed as if as though God himself because 1. they are acting as his intermediaries, and 2. they are his children. As the sole mediator between God and men under the New Covenant, and as the only begotten son of God, the application of the term to Jesus makes perfect sense and is in perfect harmony with the usage of term to others who are not literally God himself. The proof of burden then falls on the Trinitarian to explain and justify why when Jesus is called God we are to take the term literally rather than in the sense commonly used throughout scripture.

Additionally, there are plenty of scriptures which very clearly differentiate Jesus from God (not just "the Father" - though they are in fact one in the same). There are really too many examples in the New Testament to list, but I'll start off with a particularly good one:

1 Cor 15:24-28 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For he “has put everything under his feet.”c]">[c] 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. 28 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.

Paul here makes it quite explicit that Christ, the Son, is distinct and subordinate to "God himself". I have yet to see an honest and rational response to this passage by a Trinitarian.

This post is getting a bit long so I will cut myself off here :)
Your use of this evidence is flawed.

Most would say the Angel of YHWH was actually pre-incarnate Christ, and the fact that the Angel is addressed as God Himself while still somehow considered distinct, actually provides evidence for the Trinity.

Here's a video examining the evidence for the Trinity in the Old Testament.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0

iam1me

Member
Aug 19, 2018
17
7
35
Santa Clara
✟7,500.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
There is only One First and last.

Isaiah 44: NASB
6Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts:
‘I am the first and I am the last,
And there is no God besides Me.



And Jesus makes the same claim in Revelation chapter 1:

Revelation 1: NASB


17When I saw Him, I fell at His feet like a dead man. And He placed His right hand on me, saying, “Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, 18and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades.

Unless there are a lot of angels running around claiming to be God, the above is crystal clear.

Yahweh claims to be the first and last in Isaiah 44. Jesus Christ makes the same claim in Revelation 1.

There is only one true God - I fully agree. However, as I have presented in my post, there is plenty of precedent within the scriptures for applying the term "God," "Yahweh", etc. to those who are not God himself - including angels and men.

Attempting to point to Jesus sharing similar titles to God is an insufficient argument against what I have presented in my post. You would need to argue from the context that when Jesus is called God or something similar that the it should be interpreted literally vs. when angels, Moses, and those who have received the Word of God are called God and gods respectively. And, as part of this, you must address the plethora of scripture that so clearly differentiate Jesus from God Almighty.

The only way your view could be argued is if one subscribes to tritheism.

This is simply false. Under my view there is absolutely no reason to think that Jesus is literally God (nor again is the HS God). Rather, I follow the precedent established by the scriptures in interpreting in what manner Jesus is said to be God - such as when Moses and angels are called such. Jesus is called God because he is the mediator between God and men, he is acting on God's behalf - having been uniquely sent by God. This is why he says things like:

John 9:5-14 Thomas said to him, “Lord, we don’t know where you are going, so how can we know the way?” 6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7 If you really know me, you will knowb]">[b] my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”8 Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.” 9 Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. 11 Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the works themselves. 12 Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. 13 And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.​

We both agree that Jesus is not the Father, yet here he states that if you have seen him that you have seen the Father. And he says this because he is serving as the Father's intermediary: his words and deeds are not his own, but he is doing as the Father instructs.
 
Upvote 0

His student

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2019
1,235
555
78
Northwest
✟48,602.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think if we ask the question of how Jesus Christ is the mediator between God and mankind helps understand Colossians 2:9.
"for in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily" Colossians 2:9

I agree completely. Which is why some of us take exception to the idea that only an alleged pre-existent "God the Son" person was incarnate in the person of Jesus Christ.
 
Upvote 0

iam1me

Member
Aug 19, 2018
17
7
35
Santa Clara
✟7,500.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
This is the difference between the relationship of Father and Son. Which does not mean God the Son is any less than God from God.

Context redleghunter, context. Paul is distinguishing Christ, the Son, from "God himself" - not "the Father." Don't go inserting things into scripture.

If you want to argue that when Paul simply uses the term "God" by itself he means the same thing as "the Father" then I would agree with you - because there is no distinction between the two in scripture. The idea that the Father is any less than the one true God is a completely unscriptural notion - yet the Trinity denies this by treating the Father as only a part of the one true God.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

charsan

Charismatic Episcopal Church
Jul 12, 2019
2,297
2,115
52
South California
✟62,421.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
It’s always in posts like this that you see so many heretical beliefs come up. Jesus is fully human and God, anyone who says otherwise would contradict the historical Christian faith and the apostolic faith of the Fathers and Church. Most people who hold otherwise in this thread seem to hold ideas that resemble historical heresies.

Exactly. It is amazing that the heresies are still around.
 
Upvote 0

iam1me

Member
Aug 19, 2018
17
7
35
Santa Clara
✟7,500.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Your use of this evidence is flawed.

Most would say the Angel of YHWH was actually pre-incarnate Christ, and the fact that the Angel is addressed as God Himself while still somehow considered distinct, actually provides evidence for the Trinity.

Here's a video examining the evidence for the Trinity in the Old Testament.

There is some historical precedence for the argument that Jesus was the Angel of the Lord who appeared to men throughout the OT, I will give you that. However, it is simply not inline with the New Testament. The opening chapter of Hebrews, in particular, denounces this entire idea:

Hebrews 1:1-14 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. 3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. 4 So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs.

5 For to which of the angels did God ever say,

“You are my Son;
today I have become your Father”a]">[a]?

Or again,

“I will be his Father,
and he will be my Son”b]">[b]?


6 And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says,

“Let all God’s angels worship him.”c]">[c]


7 In speaking of the angels he says,

“He makes his angels spirits,
and his servants flames of fire.”d]">[d]


8 But about the Son he says,

“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever;
a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.
9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy.”e]">[e]


10 He also says,

“In the beginning, Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
11 They will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
12 You will roll them up like a robe;
like a garment they will be changed.
But you remain the same,
and your years will never end.”f]">[f]


13 To which of the angels did God ever say,

“Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet”g]">[g]?


14 Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?
 
Upvote 0

His student

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2019
1,235
555
78
Northwest
✟48,602.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
One can be saved without vast knowledge but not without accepting what little we do know.
What we do know is that Jesus Christ was fully God and fully man.

What we know for sure is that God became flesh and dwelt among us - emptying Himself of the divine which was fully part of His incarnate nature, and functioning and overcoming sin totally as a human being.

What we know is that - in that totally human capacity - He spoke of the God He worshiped and depended on as His Father - just as we His other children do.

What we know is that God said of Jesus when was incarnate - "“You are my Son, today I have begotten you”. Whereas one of the major creeds calls Him eternally begotten of the Father.

We know that the "Word" of God existed in the form of God before that Word was incarnate.

What we do not know is that that same person existed as the Son of God before the incarnation and that that alleged Son of God person was incarnate separate from a God the Father person and a God the Holy Spirit person which constitute together the one true God.

It is completely possible to affirm the deity of Jesus Christ and indeed the deity of God as the Son, as the Father of the Son, and as the Spirit of both - without resorting to redefining the very meaning of monotheism as many would say that Trinitarians have done - quite unnecessarily.

Is an eternal Trinity construct compatible with the scriptures? With a special redefining of monotheism - certainly. It is not therefore heretical to believe in an eternal Trinity.

Is a One God construct compatible with the scriptures? Absolutely - and interestingly - it avoids the necessity of redefining the meaning of "One" which so offends both Jews and Muslims.

While there are explanations concerning the nature of God that are heretical - such as Arienism and some forms of modalism - there is no need to throw out the baby with the bath water and blindly adopt a Trinitarian construct to find an adequate answer to the problems presented in the scriptures.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

iam1me

Member
Aug 19, 2018
17
7
35
Santa Clara
✟7,500.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
It's not so much that you need to positively assent to each and every creed, but that you may not dissent from them knowingly and willingly. We do not need to comprehend everything (we can't) but we should not deny anything in the creeds either. One can be saved without vast knowledge but not without accepting what little we do know.

That maybe the Catholic position, but it is in complete disagreement with the scriptures - which never teach that accepting or not rejecting doctrine is what we are judged by. In fact, doctrine isn't even mentioned when defining the kind of religion that is acceptable to God:

James 1:26-27 Those who consider themselves religious and yet do not keep a tight rein on their tongues deceive themselves, and their religion is worthless. 27 Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

What God cares about above all else is how we live our lives and treat others, especially those in need. He is looking for love through our deeds.

Romans 2:6-11 God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”a]">[a] 7 To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8 But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9 There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10 but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11 For God does not show favoritism.

It is absolutely vital that doctrine not serve as a factor in the Judgement, as faith is a gift coming from outside ourselves (no one comes unless called) and not all people are blessed with growing and living under conditions that would expose them to the truth. It would be completely unjust to judge people before and after Christ, for instance, on their doctrine - or those who lived and died in places like China where religions are extremely oppressed and controlled by the state.

No - love is what we are judged by. Love is common to all people. Even one who doesn't believe in God or Christ may yet know and be known by God.


1 Cor 8:3 But whoever loves God is known by God.

Romans 2:14-15 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.)

Matthew 25:37-40 "Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ 40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,169
16,009
Flyoverland
✟1,224,061.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
That maybe the Catholic position, but it is in complete disagreement with the scriptures
You believe what you think you are called to believe. Every man for himself, I guess. I will accept these three creeds, the Apostles Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian Creed because the Catholic Church asks me to. Complain all you want. Funny thing though is that you are saying we are judged by works. You can argue with your co-religionists about that.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Athanasius377
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,169
16,009
Flyoverland
✟1,224,061.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
What we do know is that Jesus Christ was fully God and fully man.

What we know for sure is that God became flesh and dwelt among us - emptying Himself of the divine which was fully part of His incarnate nature, and functioning and overcoming sin totally as a human being.

What we know is that - in that totally human capacity - He spoke of the God He worshiped and depended on as His Father - just as we His other children do.

What we know is that God said of Jesus when was incarnate - "“You are my Son, today I have begotten you”. Whereas one of the major creeds calls Him eternally begotten of the Father.

We know that the "Word" of God existed in the form of God before that Word was incarnate.

What we do not know is that that same person existed as the Son of God before the incarnation and that that alleged Son of God person was incarnate separate from a God the Father person and a God the Holy Spirit person which constitute together the one true God.

It is completely possible to affirm the deity of Jesus Christ and indeed the deity of God as the Son, as the Father of the Son, and as the Spirit of both - without resorting to redefining the very meaning of monotheism as many would say that Trinitarians have done - quite unnecessarily.

Is an eternal Trinity construct compatible with the scriptures? With a special redefining of monotheism - certainly. It is not therefore heretical to believe in an eternal Trinity.

Is a One God construct compatible with the scriptures? Absolutely - and interestingly - it avoids the necessity of redefining the meaning of "One" which so offends both Jews and Muslims.

While there are explanations concerning the nature of God that are heretical - such as Arienism and some forms of modalism - there is no need to throw out the baby with the bath water and blindly adopt a Trinitarian construct to find an adequate answer to the problems presented in the scriptures.
These issues were all solved well over a thousand years ago. No need to reinvent them.
 
Upvote 0

charsan

Charismatic Episcopal Church
Jul 12, 2019
2,297
2,115
52
South California
✟62,421.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Also I must say accepting the Creeds is not just a Catholic position, you will find the acceptance of the Creeds in Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran and other Churches which are Traditional like mine. It's the new religion that won't accept the Creeds and think the Bible is everything
 
Upvote 0

iam1me

Member
Aug 19, 2018
17
7
35
Santa Clara
✟7,500.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
You believe what you think you are called to believe. Every man for himself, I guess. I will accept these three creeds, the Apostles Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian Creed because the Catholic Church asks me to. Complain all you want. Funny thing though is that you are saying we are judged by works. You can argue with your co-religionists about that.

With regards doctrine, the most important thing is that you are truly seeking the truth (love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind). As long as you are doing that then you are on the right path even if your current understanding of things isn't perfect. Everyone comes from different backgrounds, thinks differently, and has put in differing amounts of effort - it would be unreasonable to demand that everyone have the exact same understanding. Trust the Lord when he says that those who seek shall find.
 
Upvote 0

iam1me

Member
Aug 19, 2018
17
7
35
Santa Clara
✟7,500.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Also I must say accepting the Creeds is not just a Catholic position, you will find the acceptance of the Creeds in Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran and other Churches which are Traditional like mine. It's the new religion that won't accept the Creeds and think the Bible is everything

Just for the record, I'm not sola scriptura. I've read through the Ante-Nicene Fathers Series, for instance, and highly enjoyed studying the works of the Church Fathers. In fact, I began studying them specifically to get answers concerning Christology and the Trinity - to learn the views of the earliest Christians following the NT itself.

Nor do I necessarily have a problem with creeds in and of themselves. I believe there is a lot of value in tradition as a starting place. However, we must always remember that the traditions established and handed down by fallible men are fallible, and we should not be afraid to question these traditions.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

iam1me

Member
Aug 19, 2018
17
7
35
Santa Clara
✟7,500.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
They were handed down by the Church which is the pillar and foundation of faith

Sure - and its a great place to start from. That doesn't mean it's infallible. We must test all things and refine our understanding. That is what it means to love God with all your mind, to put in your own effort to understand things as best you can - not to blindly assent to doctrines handed down by others who were willing to put in the effort.
 
Upvote 0

charsan

Charismatic Episcopal Church
Jul 12, 2019
2,297
2,115
52
South California
✟62,421.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Sure - and its a great place to start from. That doesn't mean it's infallible. We must test all things and refine our understanding. That is what it means to love God with all your mind, to put in your own effort to understand things as best you can - not to blindly assent to doctrines handed down by others who were willing to put in the effort.

We will have to disagree, I do not believe in the religion of the individual. I do believe God put the Church in charge not the individual person.
 
Upvote 0

iam1me

Member
Aug 19, 2018
17
7
35
Santa Clara
✟7,500.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
We will have to disagree, I do not believe in the religion of the individual. I do believe God put the Church in charge not the individual person.

The true Church are the individuals that do God's will. Diversity is a good thing that strengthens, rather than weakens the body.

1 Corinthians 12:12-31 Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ. 13 For we were all baptized byc]">[c] one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. 14 Even so the body is not made up of one part but of many.

15 Now if the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” it would not for that reason stop being part of the body. 16 And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” it would not for that reason stop being part of the body. 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If the whole body were an ear, where would the sense of smell be? 18 But in fact God has placed the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. 19 If they were all one part, where would the body be? 20 As it is, there are many parts, but one body.


21 The eye cannot say to the hand, “I don’t need you!” And the head cannot say to the feet, “I don’t need you!” 22 On the contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, 23 and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. And the parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty, 24 while our presentable parts need no special treatment. But God has put the body together, giving greater honor to the parts that lacked it, 25 so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. 26 If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it.


27 Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. 28 And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tonguesd]">[d]? Do all interpret? 31 Now eagerly desire the greater gifts
.​
 
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Status
Not open for further replies.