ItIsFinished!
Jesus Christ is our only hope.
- Sep 1, 2018
- 1,678
- 1,134
- 51
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
Upvote
0
That’s pretty awesome!You're the greatest, no, you're the greatest.
No, you're the greatest ...
Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves. (Philippians 2:3)
The will of the Word of God is the same as the will of the Father, because The Word (Logos) is the reasoning faculty of the Father. Those references that you provided above are in regards to the human will of God the Word, Who became flesh and therefor had a human will in addition to His Divine will. There is no separation of wills between the Divine Persons of the Holy Trinity. The Church fathers who defended the truth against the various Theological and Christological heresies which arose and threatened the truth in the early Christian centuries have thoroughly addressed these questions in their treatises.Actually if we let Jesus speak for himself, it's clear that he speaks of himself in a subordinate role in reference to the Father.
John 14:28 "You heard me say, ‘I am going away and I am coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I."
John 6:38 "For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me."
Luke 22:42 "Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done."
John 17:2 "you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him."
The answer to the threads question is.......
NO.
Jesus Christ IS God.
Jesus did not say "No one is good except the father". He said "No one is good but God". He only questioned the young rich man in this way because of the young man's spiritually flawed way of looking at things. He called Jesus "good master" because he equated being good with being socially "affluent", which he perceived Jesus to be. Jesus teaches us by his reaction to being called good that social affluence does not make one good: good comes only from God doing good works in and through a person. Jesus is indeed "good", because Jesus is indeed God in the flesh.Was Jesus praying to himself? When Jesus said, “why do you call me good? No one is good except the father” was he talking about himself?
They are ONE and the same. And we will never understand how that works. This is no mystery to a Holy Spirit filled believer. That body knows what Body it is in.Since at least the time of Arius, heretics have arisen within the church saying that the Bible teaches that the Son is somehow less than the Father. Many of them have appealed to John's gospel in order to try to establish this teaching. One such text is John 5:19-20 which says:
19 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise.
The Arians taught that this verse meant that Jesus was less than the Father since he was dependent upon the Father. Jesus could only imitate the Father and could do nothing on his own.
But Augustine, Hilary, Athanasius, Cyril, and others taught that this verse meant something very different. It's not that the Son depends on the Father in a subservient and powerless sense. But it is that the Son is perfectly united to the Father. The Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father. In this sense, the Son does nothing alone because everything the Son does, the Father does. And everything the Father does, the Son does.
Yeah I get it but there still is a lot of send interpretation in your reasoning which I understand is necessary but it’s still possible you could be wrong. Can we at least agree that it’s possible? Scripture does not say all that you just said. You read between the lines and made context out of it. Your opinion. And that’s cool. We all do it.Jesus did not say "No one is good except the father". He said "No one is good but God". He only questioned the young rich man in this way because of the young man's spiritually flawed way of looking at things. He called Jesus "good master" because he equated being good with being socially "affluent", which he perceived Jesus to be. Jesus teaches us by his reaction to being called good that social affluence does not make one good: good comes only from God doing good works in and through a person. Jesus is indeed "good", because Jesus is indeed God in the flesh.
Like I stated earlier with simplicity, Jesus Christ is God.If Jesus Christ is God. No tribute, can be given to the king of kings.
Give tribute to Jesus Christ.
Repent to The Father.
Well put.Greater in what sense? Greater in power? No. Greater in authority? No. Greater in knowledge? No. The Father is greater than Jesus in the sense of Jesus' human nature, but not according to his divine nature.
To say that the Father has more authority than the Son is to imply that the Son is less God than the Father.
For or as an example, Jesus certainly wasn't omnipresent while in the flesh, for that is impossible, but He is now, or was or could be afterwards, ect... And there may have been other things like this as well... But He was fully God as the God/Man...As a man, maybe He was in some aspects, while encased in this flesh, but not afterwards, and most certainly not now...
The flesh is limited, but the Spirit and being in Spirit is not...
God Bless!
Then who is he talking too? I’ve understood that everyone is trying to look at Jesus words in context. The only problem with context is your forced to add in our own thoughts and opinions on the matter.... I do like to understand correctly, so my question is can you or anybody else show me where Jesus made it clear that he didn’t mean what he said when he said the father is greater than he is? I’m not asking to try and prove anybody wrong, I’m asking so that I could get away from all our opinions on the matter and to the truthLike I stated earlier with simplicity, Jesus Christ is God.
No need for any mumbo jumbo.
Seriously, no need.
He walked on water.
He created all .
Is there anywhere where this is made certain in scripture? Because if it’s certain and there is scripture to back up what your saying then we shouldn’t even be debating on this thread. When something is known for certain how can there be a conflict?For or as an example, Jesus certainly wasn't omnipresent while in the flesh, for that is impossible, but He is now, or was or could be afterwards, ect... And there may have been other things like this as well... But He was fully God as the God/Man...
God Bless!
Certain that He was not omnipresent while in the flesh you mean, or what...?Is there anywhere where this is made certain in scripture? Because if it’s certain and there is scripture to back up what your saying then we shouldn’t even be debating on this thread. When something is known for certain how can there be a conflict?
And just who in the whatever are you to tell me what threads I should or shouldn't be on or be debating on anyway...?Is there anywhere where this is made certain in scripture? Because if it’s certain and there is scripture to back up what your saying then we shouldn’t even be debating on this thread. When something is known for certain how can there be a conflict?
Unless you want to tell us how Jesus was omnipresent while in the flesh...?Is there anywhere where this is made certain in scripture? Because if it’s certain and there is scripture to back up what your saying then we shouldn’t even be debating on this thread. When something is known for certain how can there be a conflict?
Oh I’m really sorry I offended you. It was not my intentions at all. I was referring to certainty about if he was equal to the father or not.... and all I meant by saying there is no need to debate was that when there is certainty debating is unnecessary. Either way the fact that I offended you is what I’m focused on and I just wanted to say sorry. I’m going to move on from this thread now.Unless you want to tell us how Jesus was omnipresent while in the flesh...?
God Bless!
It, my dear friend, is not really my opinion, or my interpretation that I shared here. It has been the interpretation that is the consensus of the Church, which is nearly two-thousand years old now, that this, among other truths, is what is being conveyed by this passage in Scripture. I'm just repeating what I've heard and read in many places before.Yeah I get it but there still is a lot of send interpretation in your reasoning which I understand is necessary but it’s still possible you could be wrong. Can we at least agree that it’s possible? Scripture does not say all that you just said. You read between the lines and made context out of it. Your opinion. And that’s cool. We all do it.