If Jesus was God, why …?

[tonychanyt]

E.g., 1 Peter 3:

21The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: 22 Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.

If Jesus was God, wouldn't the angels be subject unto him already? Why make them subject unto him all over again?

If Jesus was the creator, how could he die in his own creation?

If Christ existed with God before time, should it not be Spirit? How can It die?

If Jesus is God why didn’t Jesus know the hour?

There exists an infinite number of questions of this form: If Jesus was God, why/how …?

All of them could be answered by saying that in addition to Jesus was God, he was also a human when he was born from Mary.

Philippians 2:

5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

Conversely, if Jesus was a man, how/why …?

Now, we need to remind ourselves that he was God too.

 

[AlexB23]

E.g., 1 Peter 3:


If Jesus was God, wouldn't the angels be subject unto him already? Why make them subject unto him all over again?

If Jesus was the creator, how could he die in his own creation?

If Christ existed with God before time, should it not be Spirit? How can It die?

If Jesus is God why didn’t Jesus know the hour?

There exists an infinite number of questions of this form: If Jesus was God, why/how …?

All of them could be answered by saying that in addition to Jesus was God, he was also a human when he was born from Mary.

Philippians 2:

Sometimes it is not necessary to try and pick apart God, and determine why He does things the way He does. God will answer this stuff when we reach heaven. We can not place God in a box, we must have faith.

This is stated in Ephesians 3:17-21 (ESV):
"So that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith—that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may have strength to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God. Now to him who is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think, according to the power at work within us, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, forever and ever. Amen"

 

[sparow]

E.g., 1 Peter 3:


If Jesus was God, wouldn't the angels be subject unto him already? Why make them subject unto him all over again?

If Jesus was the creator, how could he die in his own creation?

If Christ existed with God before time, should it not be Spirit? How can It die?

If Jesus is God why didn’t Jesus know the hour?

There exists an infinite number of questions of this form: If Jesus was God, why/how …?

All of them could be answered by saying that in addition to Jesus was God, he was also a human when he was born from Mary.

Philippians 2:

What exactly does God mean to a Christian? The word's origin itself is common, is the equivalent to King, Lord, Jesuit General, Pope; in the mind of man (Perception), something extra is added, but not, it would seem, defined.


I think the question is wrong and should be “if Jesus was the Word of the God of Israel”, distinct from the “God of Rome” and distinct from “Allah, the moon god”.


I believe Jesus, from the word of God, passed through the gauntlet of humanity, and has emerged on the other side in a new form, requiring a new name. I believe that the Word of God is the father, and is the authority, OT.


Regarding that which he created as the Word of God, all authority has been given to Him over it.


I do not use Paul, but I am interested in other scriptures that disagree with me.

 

[tonychanyt]

The word's origin itself is common, is the equivalent to King, Lord, Jesuit General, Pope

Are you saying that some people think the Pope is God?

 

[sparow]

Are you saying that some people think the Pope is God?

That wasn't what I was saying. I was referring to the word "god" as tool or instrument use to communicate, it's origin, and words it is compatible with, like king. And of course, the strange spiritualistic component that is added.

Your question is interesting; I believe many think the Pope is in place of God, has the authority of God, (all authority has been given to him) or that the Pope is a god; even when they deny it they merely use words differently.

 

[sparow]

Are you saying that some people think the Pope is God?

Pope means Father, if you were speaking Italian you could call God Pope.

 

[Gary2]

If Jesus was God, wouldn't the angels be subject unto him already? Why make them subject unto him all over again?

In order to come to Earth as a man and die, Jesus "emptied Himself" (Php 2:6-8). He couldn't come to earth in His glory as no sinful being could stand before that & live. So, He "made Himself a little lower than the angels" (Heb 2:7-9) for the task He needed to fulfil. Now that the job is done, He is exaulted above everyone else (Php 2:9) - back to His rightful place as God (Jon 1:1).

 

[Gary2]

What exactly does God mean to a Christian?

Concepts of God I like include:
- The Creator of the universe, as there is only one.
- Our Saviour, again, there is only one. God says this of Himself in both the OT (Isa 45:21 "There is no other God but Me, a righteous God and Savior; there is none but Me." and NT "And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world” (1 John 4:14).

 

[sparow]

Concepts of God I like include:
- The Creator of the universe, as there is only one.
- Our Saviour, again, there is only one. God says this of Himself in both the OT (Isa 45:21 "There is no other God but Me, a righteous God and Savior; there is none but Me." and NT "And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world” (1 John 4:14).

I fear that many Christians when considering God, wonder in the direction of spiritualism or magic and bypass the only one; they have an imaginary covenant that has nothing to do with the creator.

"The Creator of the universe, as there is only one". This is a true statement but it doesn't identify which one. God acknowledges the existence of other Gods in the commandments.

What is in 1 john 4:14, is witness to the old covenant being confirmed and prophesy fulfilled, more than a statement to be believed.

 

[tonychanyt]

God acknowledges the existence of other Gods in the commandments.

Define Gods.

 

[sparow]

Define Gods.

In the context of Deut 5:7 and Ex 20:3, the Hebrew is Elohim which is the plural of Eloha; I believe these (from Jewish sources) are general purpose words that could be used when referring to Pagan/gentile gods. It is interesting that it was Elohim who created the heavens and the earth, not Eloha. In one Talmud Moses is referred to as Elohim Moses.

 

[tonychanyt]

the Hebrew is Elohim

What Bible versions translate elohim as Gods?

 

[sparow]

What Bible versions translate elohim as Gods?

The KJV renders God, Gods and God's for Elohim, at differing times (Strong's 430), it also renders God, Gods and God's for a few other Hebrew words; this can be seen from Strong's concordance.

 

[tonychanyt]

The KJV renders God, Gods and God's for Elohim, at differing times

reference?

 

[sparow]

reference?

God:
Strong 430, Dan 1:2, 9:3
Joel 1:13, 3:17
God's:
Strong 430, Num 22:22, Deut 1:17

Gods:
Strong 430, Gen 3:5, 31:30
Deut 29:26, 30:17

 

[tonychanyt]

God:
Strong 430, Dan 1:2, 9:3
Joel 1:13, 3:17
God's:
Strong 430, Num 22:22, Deut 1:17

Gods:
Strong 430, Gen 3:5, 31:30
Deut 29:26, 30:17

Thanks for the links. This is how to do referencing in a scholarly manner:

1. Display and indent the quoted text.
2. Selectively bold the relevant keywords that are important to the point that you are making. No need to bold the entire sentence. Have a laser-sharp focus.
3. Be concise and precise to the point. No need to quote the whole chapter.

This is what I do for others who read my posts. It is a standard high-school scholarship. If you practice this, I guarantee you it will improve your analytical thinking. In any case, no one is required to do it.

 

[sparow]

Thanks for the links. This is how to do referencing in a scholarly manner:

1. Display and indent the quoted text.
2. Selectively bold the relevant keywords that are important to the point that you are making. No need to bold the entire sentence. Have a laser-sharp focus.
3. Be concise and precise to the point. No need to quote the whole chapter.

This is what I do for others who read my posts. It is a standard high-school scholarship. If you practice this, I guarantee you it will improve your analytical thinking. In any case, no one is required to do it.

Even if I improved, we would still be playing in different ball parks.