toldailytopic: The Holy Trinity.

[godrulz]

Christ is not God, so he is necessarily inferior to him. Also, he is subject to God BECAUSE HE IS NOT GOD. "The Father is greater than I."

Using your logic, Jesus is inferior to the angels He created. Actually, he became lower than them, not inferior to them, as a man.

Greater is a comparison of position; better (different Gk. word) is a comparison of nature (see Jn. 14:28; Heb. 1-2). Jesus is equal with the Father by nature, but positionally lower during the incarnation than even angels (yet he is and always was superior to angels by nature).\

Jn. 8:58 and Ex. 3:14 (and other places in LXX with YHWH) is the same root word indicating Jehovahistic identity. ego eimi=present indicative...conveys self-existence and pre-existence; 'I was' would be imperfect tense and only convey preexistence; you are literally changing the objective Greek grammar to twist the text to your own view and destruction. You would make a good JW if you are willing to die over their blood transfusion issue.

 

[csuguy]

Using your logic, Jesus is inferior to the angels He created. Actually, he became lower than them, not inferior to them, as a man.

Greater is a comparison of position; better (different Gk. word) is a comparison of nature (see Jn. 14:28; Heb. 1-2). Jesus is equal with the Father by nature, but positionally lower during the incarnation than even angels (yet he is and always was superior to angels by nature).\

Jn. 8:58 and Ex. 3:14 (and other places in LXX with YHWH) is the same root word indicating Jehovahistic identity. ego eimi=present indicative...conveys self-existence and pre-existence; 'I was' would be imperfect tense and only convey preexistence; you are literally changing the objective Greek grammar to twist the text to your own view and destruction. You would make a good JW if you are willing to die over their blood transfusion issue.

God cannot be positionally lower than God. Jesus was lower than God, hence he's not God.

 

[godrulz]

God cannot be positionally lower than God. Jesus was lower than God, hence he's not God.

In the incarnation, He was also fully man, the God-Man. Philippians 2:5-11 shows that He is God and that adding humanity did not negate His Deity, one person with two natures. If Jesus did not incarnate, but remained in His preexistent state, then you might have a point. Jn. 1:1 is not divorced from Jn. 1:14.


Your rejection of God' triune nature, Deity of Christ, and incarnation (God becomes man) leads to your dismissal of biblical truth. One domino falls, they all fall.

 

[Aaron the Tall]

Originally Posted by csuguy
God cannot be positionally lower than God. Jesus was lower than God, hence he's not God.

Man cannot be positionally lower than man. I am lower in position than the president, hence I am not a man.

Phew... I'm glad I got that one figured out.

 

[godrulz]

Man cannot be positionally lower than man. I am lower in position than the president, hence I am not a man.

Phew... I'm glad I got that one figured out.

The President is greater than us because of position and authority. He is not better than us, but equal to us, by our common human nature.

Jesus is lower that angels and God positionally during the incarnation, but still superior to angels and equal to God by nature.

 

[csuguy]

In the incarnation, He was also fully man, the God-Man. Philippians 2:5-11 shows that He is God and that adding humanity did not negate His Deity, one person with two natures. If Jesus did not incarnate, but remained in His preexistent state, then you might have a point. Jn. 1:1 is not divorced from Jn. 1:14.


Your rejection of God' triune nature, Deity of Christ, and incarnation (God becomes man) leads to your dismissal of biblical truth. One domino falls, they all fall.

He's supposedly fully God - thus his man nature cannot be used to override his full God nature. Thus your problem remains that God cannot be less than God

 

[csuguy]

Man cannot be positionally lower than man. I am lower in position than the president, hence I am not a man.

Phew... I'm glad I got that one figured out.

There is more than one man, there is only one God. If the president were the only man - you'd be correct.

 

[godrulz]

He's supposedly fully God - thus his man nature cannot be used to override his full God nature. Thus your problem remains that God cannot be less than God

Col. 2:9 Jesus is the God-Man, one person with two natures. Adding humanity to deity does bring about unique limitations. The exact relation of his two natures is not understood, but clearly Jesus was hungry, died, thirsty, learned, walked, etc., none of which was true in His preexistence. What do you believe about His preexistence? Who or what was He (or do you deny this truth that even JWs do not deny). Even if you deny He was God, you also recognize genuine humanity and its limitations.

 

[csuguy]

Col. 2:9 Jesus is the God-Man, one person with two natures. Adding humanity to deity does bring about unique limitations. The exact relation of his two natures is not understood, but clearly Jesus was hungry, died, thirsty, learned, walked, etc., none of which was true in His preexistence. What do you believe about His preexistence? Who or what was He (or do you deny this truth that even JWs do not deny). Even if you deny He was God, you also recognize genuine humanity and its limitations.

Col 2:9 For in Him all the (A)fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form

Col isn't saying that he is God, it is saying that God dwelt in him. God also left him - "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

Of his pre-existance - he is the Wisdom of God (Proverbs 8). He is the light of the world (Genesis 1:3). He is the firstborn of creation (Colossians 1:15)

 

[godrulz]

Col 2:9 For in Him all the (A)fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form

Col isn't saying that he is God, it is saying that God dwelt in him. God also left him - "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

Of his pre-existance - he is the Wisdom of God (Proverbs 8). He is the light of the world (Genesis 1:3). He is the firstborn of creation (Colossians 1:15)

It is an incarnational heresy to say that God only indwells a human Jesus. Col. 2:9 resonates with Jn. 1:14 and Phil. 2: The eternal Word/God BECAME flesh, not just indwelt by God like Christians are.

God forsook Him relationally for a moment. He did not abandon Christ's body. Jesus was the God-Man, even on the cross and after His resurrection.

Firstborn means preeminent, not first created (different Gk. words).

Proverbs 8 is a personification of wisdom (she vs male Jesus) vs folly, not a Christological passage.

Is it too late to get your money back from the college you are going to?

 

[csuguy]

It is an incarnational heresy to say that God only indwells a human Jesus. Col. 2:9 resonates with Jn. 1:14 and Phil. 2: The eternal Word/God BECAME flesh, not just indwelt by God like Christians are.

God forsook Him relationally for a moment. He did not abandon Christ's body. Jesus was the God-Man, even on the cross and after His resurrection.

Firstborn means preeminent, not first created (different Gk. words).

Proverbs 8 is a personification of wisdom (she vs male Jesus) vs folly, not a Christological passage.

Is it too late to get your money back from the college you are going to?

Oh please. A "heresy" is simply a view which opposes the "orthodox" view point - all Protestants are "heretics" hypocrite.

Christ is the Son of God, not God. The only true God is the Father, and Jesus is not the Father. The logical conclusion is thus that Jesus is not God.

And what the heck does "he forsook him relationally" mean? How does one "relationally" forsake ones self?

Christ is the wisdom of God. 1 Corinthians 1:24

 

[godrulz]

You are taking two unrelated contexts to support your view. Christ is the wisdom of God, but not every mention of the word refers to Christ. The context of Prov. 8 is a personification of wisdom (she) vs folly, not a Christological statement (despite what you Arians say). As well, God's wisdom is eternal anyway, not created.

 

[csuguy]

You are taking two unrelated contexts to support your view. Christ is the wisdom of God, but not every mention of the word refers to Christ. The context of Prov. 8 is a personification of wisdom (she) vs folly, not a Christological statement (despite what you Arians say). As well, God's wisdom is eternal anyway, not created.

There are direct correlations between what is said of Christ and Wisdom, and Christ is explicitly called the Wisdom of God. Both are said to have existed prior to the creation of the world, and everything is said to have been created through them. Early Christians recognized Christ as the Wisdom of God, even if modern Christians have lost this.

 

[godrulz]

We still recognize He is the Wisdom of God, but do not use the wrong passage to show this. Neither God's wisdom nor Christ had a beginning. The Christians who did use Prov. 8 about Christ (and some did), did not think it said that He was created, but that it was consistent with His Deity and a trinitarian understanding. You pick and choose bringing on boos.

 

[csuguy]

We still recognize He is the Wisdom of God, but do not use the wrong passage to show this. Neither God's wisdom nor Christ had a beginning. The Christians who did use Prov. 8 about Christ (and some did), did not think it said that He was created, but that it was consistent with His Deity and a trinitarian understanding. You pick and choose bringing on boos.

Wrong, they did use it and they thought he was created (though there may have been some who used it and didn't think he was created as well). The idea that Christ was created is as old as Christianity is. And God's Wisdom does have a beginning according to Proverbs.

If Christ was God - and his followers believed it, then there should have been brought up the issue of them fearing to look at his face, for fear of death. Especially when he appeared glorified in front of some of them. It's never brought up because he is the SON of God - not God.

Also, you have yet to explain what it means to be "relationially" forsaken by ones self.