If Jesus is God, why didn't he teach anyone to pray to Jesus? If he had, do you think his apostles would have been able to take him seriously?
If the notion of praying to Jesus was ridiculous in his own day, then isn't the notion that Jesus is God also ridiculous?
If Jesus is God, why didn't he teach..
Moderator: Moderators
-
Elijah John
- Savant
- Posts: 12235
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
- Location: New England
- Has thanked: 11 times
- Been thanked: 16 times
If Jesus is God, why didn't he teach..
Post #1 My theological positions:
-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.
I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.
-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.
I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.
Post #71
[Replying to shnarkle]
Jesus has to be something other than sinful human flesh in his substance, or your perfect icon is flawed. In order for him to have perfection something in his substance has to not only be perfect, but also be able to overcome the fallen nature of his human condition. The only nature that can overcome this is Gods very own nature. Making Jesus both true God and true man.
John is showing us in his "with God" they are two persons and his "was God" one substance.
Jesus has to be something other than sinful human flesh in his substance, or your perfect icon is flawed. In order for him to have perfection something in his substance has to not only be perfect, but also be able to overcome the fallen nature of his human condition. The only nature that can overcome this is Gods very own nature. Making Jesus both true God and true man.
John is showing us in his "with God" they are two persons and his "was God" one substance.
Post #72
Sure, the icon is in "the likeness of sinful flesh", this isn't what the Icon is substituted for though. The Icon doesn't have to be flawless because it isn't God. Again, you're conflating the Icon with the Idol. I'm not talking about idolatry. I'm not an idolater.Jack wrote: [Replying to shnarkle]
Jesus has to be something other than sinful human flesh in his substance, or your perfect icon is flawed.
Sure, and the same holds true for anyone who would follow Christ's example.In order for him to have perfection something in his substance has to not only be perfect, but also be able to overcome the fallen nature of his human condition.
Non sequitur. It simply doesn't follow, and scritpure is plain when it points out that God is the origin of existence, not the means. Again, you would have to take up your argument with Paul as he is clearly showing that the father is God, and God's role is "OF WHOM all things exist". That's God, and Christ doesn't have anyting to do with the origin of existence.The only nature that can overcome this is Gods very own nature. Making Jesus both true God and true man.
Except that the father isn't a person. The creed plainly states, "ONE in BEING with the father".John is showing us in his "with God" they are two persons and his "was God" one substance.
As I already pointed out, the introduction doesn't begin with "In the beginning was God". God simply doesn't exist for John or Paul apart from Christ/the word. There can't be two persons. There can only be Christ who is the image of the invisible origin of all that exists.
Again, simple logic informs us that the origin of existence can't exist. If it did, it would no longer be the origin. Eternal existence has nothing to do with God except insofar as it originated from God.
Post #74
Of course. No one is disputing the historocity of Jesus of Nazareth. Do you have a point? You seem to have either ignored most of what I've posted or you agree with it. I can only assume the latter as your follow up questions don't seem to be relavent to the discussion.
Post #75
[Replying to shnarkle]
If God the Father is not a person, then you are saying God the Father does not have intellect, a will or emotions.
If God the Father is not a person, then you are saying God the Father does not have intellect, a will or emotions.
Post #76
Paul clearly states that the father is "Of whom are all things". The father is the origin of being. John's introduction begins with "In the beginning was the word", John doesn't begin with God because only the word exists in the beginning. The origin of being cannot exist else it wouldn't be the origin. What doesn't exist can't have anything.Jack wrote: [Replying to shnarkle]
If God the Father is not a person, then you are saying God the Father does not have intellect, a will or emotions.
Here are the definitions of person. The first two definitions have nothing to do with God. The last definition doesn't agree with the biblical texts.
It's interesting to note that the creed states: "one in being with the father" while Christian hymns will say things like "God in three persons, blessed Trinity"NOUN
a human being regarded as an individual.
"the porter was the last person to see her" · [more]
synonyms: human being · individual · [more]
grammar
a category used in the classification of pronouns, possessive determiners, and verb forms, according to whether they indicate the speaker (first person), the addressee (second person), or a third party (third person).
christian theology
each of the three modes of being of God, namely the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit, who together constitute the Trinity.
-
TSGracchus
- Scholar
- Posts: 345
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 6:06 pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #77
[Replying to post 76 by shnarkle]
shnarkle: "Paul clearly states that the father is "Of whom are all things". The father is the origin of being. John's introduction begins with "In the beginning was the word", John doesn't begin with God because only the word exists in the beginning. The origin of being cannot exist else it wouldn't be the origin. What doesn't exist can't have anything."
"The Word" was God? Is it still God?
Consider: "driglort". Is it a word? It can be ink on paper, or pixels on a screen or a pattern of compressions in the air, but is it a word if it is undefined? And if it is defined as "shportenzut", which it self is defined only by reference to "driglort" does that make either a word? How can you define "God"? There is no bottom turtle. It's turtles all the way down.
The supposed "definition" bounds or limits nothing.
Biologists study living things, geologists study the Earth, astronomers study the heavens, and theologians study what other theologians say and write. The turtles are marching in a circle, and there is no first turtle.
shnarkle: "Paul clearly states that the father is "Of whom are all things". The father is the origin of being. John's introduction begins with "In the beginning was the word", John doesn't begin with God because only the word exists in the beginning. The origin of being cannot exist else it wouldn't be the origin. What doesn't exist can't have anything."
"The Word" was God? Is it still God?
Consider: "driglort". Is it a word? It can be ink on paper, or pixels on a screen or a pattern of compressions in the air, but is it a word if it is undefined? And if it is defined as "shportenzut", which it self is defined only by reference to "driglort" does that make either a word? How can you define "God"? There is no bottom turtle. It's turtles all the way down.
The supposed "definition" bounds or limits nothing.
Biologists study living things, geologists study the Earth, astronomers study the heavens, and theologians study what other theologians say and write. The turtles are marching in a circle, and there is no first turtle.
Post #79
No, I see a trinitarian aspect, but not three persons. The creed agrees with the texts when it says, "one in being with the father"; in, with and through the son by the power of his spirit.
The father is essentially transcendent, therefore God transcends anything and everything; including existence, eternity, etc.
-
Elijah John
- Savant
- Posts: 12235
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
- Location: New England
- Has thanked: 11 times
- Been thanked: 16 times
Refocus
Post #80OK, allow me to revise the OP just a bit. Even if Jesus is God, why did he direct our focus to the Father, and not to himself as the recipient of prayer?
Especially, if Jesus is mediator. Isn't this evidence that Jesus taught direct, and not mediated access to the Father?
Perhaps this would be a good topic unto itself.
Especially, if Jesus is mediator. Isn't this evidence that Jesus taught direct, and not mediated access to the Father?
Perhaps this would be a good topic unto itself.
My theological positions:
-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.
I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.
-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.
I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.
