The fulness of God

[placebofactor]

What do the Scriptures mean when they talk about Christ being in "fullness?" And what is better, the whole or the full? Let's begin with an examination of the Greek word for fullness, which pretty much appears to be self-explanatory. As a metaphor, the word fullness in the following verses means, in full measure, abundance, and completeness, such as leaving nothing more to be desired.

John 1:16, "Of His (Christ's) fullness have all we received, and grace for grace. For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ."

Ephesians 3:19, "To know the love of Christ, which passes knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fullness of God."

Here’s the question: “Does it prove that Jesus is not fully God, because the verse says that a Christian individual can be filled with the fullness of God?” Does this logic contain a common theological misunderstanding known as a category error or a confusion between participation and essence?

The word for "fullness" in these verses is “plērōma.” It does not mean "a part of something greater." It means the totality, the total, or the complete expression of what something is.

Ephesians 1:23, the Church is called the "fullness" of Christ, meaning it is the vessel that completes His expression on earth, not that the Church is Christ.

In Colossians 1:19 and 2:9, that in Christ, "All the fullness of God was pleased to dwell,” and in Colossians 2:9, "in Him all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form.”

So, is the logic that "If I am filled with God’s fullness, am I God?" If mortals can be filled with the fullness of God, Ephesians 3:19, then Christ cannot be unique or fully God, because we share that status is incorrect for two reasons:

Jesus Christ is the Fullness by nature. He possesses the fullness of the Father intrinsically and eternally. He is the source. But believers are filled with the fullness of God derivatively. We receive grace from Him, John 1:16: "Of His fullness have all we received.”

I think of it like this: If a lightbulb is plugged into a power station, it receives electricity. But the bulb does not become the power station. The power station is the source; the bulb is the recipient. The bulb can be "filled" with light, but it does not possess the essence of the power plant.

Similarly, believers are filled with God’s life, love, and Spirit, but we do not become, in essence, God. We are sanctified participants, not divine creators.

Ephesians 3:19 is About Love, not Divinity. "To know the love of Christ... that ye might be filled with all the fullness of God."

This "fullness" refers to being complete in character and spiritual maturity, not becoming divine beings. It means we are filled with God’s attributes, his love, joy, and peace so that we lack nothing spiritually. It is about moral and spiritual completeness, not metaphysical identity.

When Scripture says Christ is in "fullness," it means He lacks nothing divine. He is not a "partial" God or an angel. He is the complete revelation of the Father. He embodies the totality of His Father’s nature. As Colossians 2:9 states, the entirety of God’s divine nature dwells in Him. And lastly, He is the source of our fullness. John 1:16 shows that our "fullness" is derived from His. He gives; we receive.

So, the Bible doesn’t say we become God because we’re filled with His fullness. It says we’re filled with His life, love, and Spirit, but only because Christ, who is God, shares it with us.

[Mr E]

[Replying to OneJack in post #14]

The statement in bold is perfect and without error, but the succeeding one is in full error, where it says, 'Jesus was a man-- flesh.' It should read, 'The Son of God, per se, was a man - flesh.' Jesus, per se, is the name of God the Almighty; hence, Jesus is the Almighty God. Jesus was in the flesh of the Son of God during His (Jesus') incarnation.

OneJack, it doesn't matter how many times you repeat the same point, it will never be true. Jesus, was born flesh. He was a real man. If you want to insist his real name was Yeshua (Joshua) and not the Greek form-"Jesus" I could go along with that, but to insist that Jesus is the name of God (and not the man) is ridiculous and historically incorrect.

And---- God is spirit. Spirit gives birth to spirit. God's offspring are spirit.

[JehovahsWitness]

If Jesus is the God and who is the one who says: "Sit on my right hand", in Matt. 22:43-45?

... (Son, per se) is long gone. No one is in heaven but the real and forever living Christ Jesus.

So who was alive in heaven for God to command to sit at his right hand as David by spirit tells us ?

That was only a vision. ...

Who (in vision) was alive to be told by God to sit at his right hand ?

That is yet to come; the Son’s body is still alongside Moses’ in the Ark of the Covenant awaiting Judgment Day.

But when it does happen who will be on the right side of God?

[OneJack]

So who was alive in heaven for God to command to sit at his right hand as David by spirit tells us ?

That was only a vision. ...

Who (in vision) was alive to be told by God to sit at his right hand ?

That is yet to come; the Son’s body is still alongside Moses’ in the Ark of the Covenant awaiting Judgment Day.

But when it does happen who will be on the right side of God?

You don't have to ask anyone when it happens; your own eyes absolutely can see it.

[OneJack]

[Replying to OneJack in post #14]

The statement in bold is perfect and without error, but the succeeding one is in full error, where it says, 'Jesus was a man-- flesh.' It should read, 'The Son of God, per se, was a man - flesh.' Jesus, per se, is the name of God the Almighty; hence, Jesus is the Almighty God. Jesus was in the flesh of the Son of God during His (Jesus') incarnation.

OneJack, it doesn't matter how many times you repeat the same point, it will never be true. Jesus, was born flesh. He was a real man. If you want to insist his real name was Yeshua (Joshua) and not the Greek form-"Jesus" I could go along with that, but to insist that Jesus is the name of God (and not the man) is ridiculous and historically incorrect.

And---- God is spirit. Spirit gives birth to spirit. God's offspring are spirit.

Two things:

1. Have you heard from God that Jesus, as you presuppose, is not the name of God?
2. Is Immanuel or Eternal Father or Mighty God a man or flesh?

[JehovahsWitness]

QUESTION ASKED: Who is at God's right hand side?

ANSWER #1

... (Son, per se) is long gone. No one is in heaven but the real and forever living Christ Jesus.

ANSWER #2 That was only a vision. ...

Who (in vision) was alive to be told by God to sit at his right hand ?

ANSWER #3
That is yet to come; the Son’s body is still alongside Moses’ in the Ark of the Covenant awaiting Judgment Day.

But when it does happen who will be on the right side of God?

ANSWER #4
You don't have to ask anyone when it happens; your own eyes absolutely can see it.

The question asked was never answered but thank you allowing me to spend time getting four different responses from you that show your approach. I will keep this exchange in mind.


JW

[Mr E]

[Replying to OneJack in post #24]

Two things:

1. Have you heard from God that Jesus, as you presuppose, is not the name of God?
2. Is Immanuel or Eternal Father or Mighty God a man or flesh?

1. Yes
2. God is spirit

[OneJack]

[Replying to OneJack in post #24]

Two things:

1. Have you heard from God that Jesus, as you presuppose, is not the name of God?
2. Is Immanuel or Eternal Father or Mighty God a man or flesh?

1. Yes
2. God is spirit

1. How did and does God speak to you? What exactly did God tell you? How sure are you He is truly God?

2. Since you claim you’ve heard from God, why can’t you answer if Immanuel or Eternal Father, or Mighty God is a man or flesh?

[Mr E]

[Replying to OneJack in post #27]

1. How did and does God speak to you? What exactly did God tell you? How sure are you He is truly God?

2. Since you claim you’ve heard from God, why can’t you answer if Immanuel or Eternal Father, or Mighty God is a man or flesh?

Who are you to question me? But for fun-----

1. God speaks directly to me. He told me to ignore you. I recognize Him.

2. I already answered. The son of God is spirit, as the Father is spirit.

[OneJack]

[Replying to OneJack in post #27]

1. How did and does God speak to you? What exactly did God tell you? How sure are you He is truly God?

2. Since you claim you’ve heard from God, why can’t you answer if Immanuel or Eternal Father, or Mighty God is a man or flesh?

Who are you to question me? But for fun-----

1. God speaks directly to me. He told me to ignore you. I recognize Him.

2. I already answered. The son of God is spirit, as the Father is spirit.

Your narratives speak clearly for your lies and they are not God’s words; you know nothing about the Son of God, but your own fabricated notions, which are lies.

If God were speaking directly to you, you would know that the Son of God was His physical vessel in His incarnation; hence, the Son of God is flesh, a man like you and not spirit, as you falsely claim. Also, God does not speak to only one without witnesses.

[Mr E]

[Replying to OneJack in post #29]

Your narratives speak clearly for your lies and they are not God’s words; you know nothing about the Son of God, but your own fabricated notions, which are lies.

If God were speaking directly to you, you would know that the Son of God was His physical vessel in His incarnation; hence, the Son of God is flesh, a man like you and not spirit, as you falsely claim. Also, God does not speak to only one without witnesses.

May God help you escape your delusions.