[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / asmr / caos / had / hnt / htg / hypno / strek / sw ]

/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Email
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


Christchan is back up after maintenance! The flood errors should now be resolved. Thank you to everyone who submitted a bug report!

File: 50341a26e29cc77⋯.png (528.85 KB, 1200x1153, 1200:1153, 1516610532555-fit.png)

2cbfc8 No.593128

>"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will never pass away. No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."

>"Jesus…grew in wisdom and stature before the Lord"

One of the basic attributes of God is knowing everything and these passages clearly indicate that Jesus (and the Holy Spirit) are not

omniscient. Meaning the doctrine of the Trinity is false.

>"Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from what He suffered, and having been made perfect, He became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey Him"

If Jesus was God, he would have always been perfect, so he couldn't 'become perfect'

>"Today I have begotten thee"

This contradicts the idea that he is "eternally begotten"

9252b3 No.593135

>>593128

>Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will never pass away. No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."

I think one explanation I've heard is that the Son temporarily gave up access to His full omniscience when he incarnated in the flesh. But even in the OT there are verses that can be interpreted to make it sound like even the Father is not omniscient, i.e. http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/knows.html

I looked up the thing about Jesus being made perfect, found this:

http://www.jesus.org/death-and-resurrection/holy-week-and-passion/why-did-jesus-need-to-be-made-perfect-through-suffering.html

It says Jesus was always morally perfect but when it says He was made perfect it means it in the sense of His mission being completed. Makes sense to me.


4325aa No.593168

File: 727b40a719f191d⋯.jpg (8.39 KB, 255x255, 1:1, mfw-popping-hernia.jpg)

File: 1e02504e5a9401c⋯.jpg (4.47 KB, 225x224, 225:224, kermit-scrunched-face2.jpg)

File: 2250797cd66c031⋯.gif (2.05 MB, 500x391, 500:391, mfw-seriously-ani.gif)

File: d0f9f48a29d22af⋯.jpg (197.83 KB, 1023x768, 341:256, aipac.jpg)

File: f1e9d6678877860⋯.png (192.91 KB, 474x425, 474:425, just-no.png)

>>593128

>How do Christians deal with all the Bible passages showing Jesus is not divine?

>"all"

g'ah … too … many … applicable … mfw … to … use … meme-organ … exploding …


b43a43 No.593190

>>593128

<today i have

Psalms 2:7 KJV

>I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

It doesn't say "today" it says "this day". Huge difference as we dont know when "this day" is.

Hebrews 5:9 KJV

>And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

Jesus' physical body was created/made/born, His Spirit had always existed though. Thats how he was "made perfect" physically yet was always perfect spiritually.


f4c7f5 No.593356

>>593128

Because He was also fully man, not just God. He grew in the womb, went through childhood, had friends and family, and experienced all the pain and temptation we experience today, though He never gave into temptation.

Taking into account only those verses is an error, because there are so many other verses that describe His divinity.


3ee0cf No.593367

File: 0131ea4545f9c0b⋯.jpg (226.86 KB, 1000x959, 1000:959, AAAAA.jpg)

>>593128

"I and the father are one"

Now get out


26f0c6 No.593372

He took the form as a man and lost some knowledge, he still was 100% God. And now he knows everything again.


41d560 No.593374

File: e26adf6b8030a88⋯.jpg (74.19 KB, 737x758, 737:758, 1510207479625.jpg)

>the jews are at it again


da76a1 No.593423

Jesus was just a man further close to God.


4d8ab3 No.593443

>>593356

>Because He was also fully man, not just God.

This answer is not an orthodox response to the first verse. It's highly Nestorianistic, separating human and divine into separate persons

>>593372

This is even less orthodox. Is God not omniscient by nature? Did He stop being God by being born?


7a9878 No.593461

File: 86064bc92f2d6e2⋯.png (2.7 MB, 1914x1332, 319:222, 1516811115725.png)

>My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?

What did he mean by this? If Jesus is God, why would he be addressing himself? Isn't that a bit egotistical?


887496 No.593462

>>593461

The Father and the Son are two distinct persons with one essence. The view that they are the same person expressed in different ways (modalism) was an early heresy in the Church.


a68284 No.593472

>>593461

What? I think you got something mixed up.

It's psalm 22.


f59f4d No.593474

>>593443

>This is even less orthodox. Is God not omniscient by nature? Did He stop being God by being born?

https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_795.cfm


4d8ab3 No.593483

>>593474

>Misconception 4: Jesus Acted As Though He Did Not Possess Divine Attributes

>This position holds that Jesus still retained all of His divine attributes when He was here on earth but that He acted as though He did not possess them. While He was still all-knowing, all-powerful, and holy, His behavior did not reflect that He still possessed them.

Response

>This would mean that Jesus was deceiving the people. This is inconsistent with the pure, holy character of God. It is not possible that God can deceive people about anything.

This too is unorthodox. The simple fact is scripture shows Jesus acting as a man. That isn't "deceptive", He was truthfully expressing His true nature. If Jesus struggled to lift something heavy, He wasn't pretending, He was but a man.


c66b4a No.593502

>>593461

That's one of the best proofs of Christ divinity. Psalms 22.


c66b4a No.593503

>>593483

The whole point is to have God the Son.

In other words, for Divinity to experience directly what it's like to be a Man. If Christ had no hunger and no thirst, then the whole 40 days in desert is worth basically nothing.

If Christ routinely moved boulders just with mind or minimal effor, then his Crucifixition was just pretending for it to be painful.


8ec4d9 No.593517

>>593502

>>593472

>A song that King David wrote is proof of Jesus divinity!

Wut


284737 No.593526

Paul says that Jesus emptied himself and also don't forget that Jesus is man and God at the same time. One person, two natures and two wills.

Also you ignore the countless verses that say Jesus is God like John 10:30.

Good goy.


b7993c No.593528

>>593423

How be it that He can forgive sins? How be it that Jesus both has; and is able to discharge authority? Because He is God.


d59054 No.593530

>>593517

I think he means to say that it's one of the best proofs that Jesus claimed to be divine


48cf81 No.593534

>>593443

>This answer is not an orthodox response to the first verse. It's highly Nestorianistic, separating human and divine into separate persons

>Is not an orthodox response to the first verse

St. Ambrose De Fide Book 2

>As being man, therefore, He doubts; as man He is amazed. Neither His power nor His Godhead is amazed, but His soul; He is amazed by consequence of having taken human infirmity upon Him. Seeing, then, that He took upon Himself a soul He also took the affections of a soul, for God could not have been distressed or have died in respect of His being God. Finally, He cried: 「My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?」 As being man, therefore, He speaks, bearing with Him my terrors, for when we are in the midst of dangers we think ourself abandoned by God. As man, therefore, He is distressed, as man He weeps, as man He is crucified.

St Augustine, On the Trinity Chapter 11

> According to the form of God, all things were made by Him; according to the form of a servant, He was Himself made of a woman, made under the law. According to the form of God, He and the Father are one; according to the form of a servant, He came not to do His own will, but the will of Him that sent Him. According to the form of God, 「As the Father has life in Himself, so has He given to the Son to have life in Himself;」 according to the form of a servant, His 「soul is sorrowful even unto death;」 and, 「O my Father,」 He says, 「if it be possible, let this cup pass from me.」 According to the form of God, 「He is the True God, and eternal life;」 according to the form of a servant, 「He became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.」 — 23. According to the form of God, all things that the Father has are His, and 「All mine,」 He says, 「are Yours, and Yours are mine;」 according to the form of a servant, the doctrine is not His own, but His that sent Him.

It is not only not nestorianistic, but common use among the church fathers. Rightly so, since there still exists two natures, united in one person.


b3b4ea No.593537

>>593528

Didnt Jesus say his followers can forgive each other, confess to each other

>>593128

Ya lacking omniscience is a problem


f4c7f5 No.593538

File: 671bfe684147a16⋯.png (434.89 KB, 960x960, 1:1, 26994293_351958015283901_8….png)

>>593461

This is one of the things I hear from Atheists "if Jesus was God, why does He pray to himslef? Checkmate Christcuck!" It shows a complete lack of any understanding of the Trinity.

>>593443

>This answer is not an orthodox response to the first verse. It's highly Nestorianistic, separating human and divine into separate persons

I never implied any separation, I said He is also man and not only God because OP seems to be implying that there is theological error in Jesus having human ("non-divine" as he put it) traits. Pretty far from Nestorianism fam.

Also, why not call out the blatent Arianism/Adoptionism here >>593423


b3b4ea No.593540

Humans can't identify Christ's true nature , uts a mystery, trinity is incomprehensible, so his status can't be a criteria for salvation. But his teachings can be, obey him and you're good to go.

He never said to worship him as God but to build your foundation on his teachings


4f038c No.593550

>>593443

Take it this way. God the Word, the Christ, the Logos. Though He has all the angels and archangels, the seraphim and the cherubim, all showing His glory, our King is a humble and beautiful and compassionate King. In humility, He condescended, and took upon Himself the fullness of human nature, that our humanity would be united to Him. And He indeed is such a good and loving God, He humbled Himself so radically as to live among us and learn our trades and learn our lives and develop in the way we develop. What can we do but marvel at how good God is? He didn't merely puppet a human ragdoll. He truly became man. The orthodox position is that both the Holy Trinity and Christ's dual natures are glorious mysteries and we will not be able to codify them. Just marvel.


4d8ab3 No.593573

>>593534

Neither quote supports the idea that Jesus has a human mind (which is ignorant) and a divine mind (which is all-knowing).

Consider this anathema of Cyril at Ephesus

<If anyone shall dare say that the Word of God the Father is the God of Christ or the Lord of Christ, and shall not rather confess him as at the same time both God and Man, since according to the Scriptures, The Word was made flesh: let him be anathema.

>>593538

>I never implied any separation, I said He is also man and not only God because OP seems to be implying that there is theological error in Jesus having human ("non-divine" as he put it) traits. Pretty far from Nestorianism fam.

To explain His ignorance of the last day by a distinction of human and divine is to imply two minds (which necessitates two persons and two Sons), and that is very Nestorianistic.

>Also, why not call out the blatent Arianism/Adoptionism here >>593423

Because that is not a perspective common to Christians

>>593550

Yes, it is glorious mystery, which is why we ought not codify one thing into 'human' and another into 'divine' as if things predicated of Christ can only be said of a man or of God based on the appropriateness of the predication, rather than the man and God being one and the same thinking thing.


48cf81 No.593589

>>593573

>Neither quote supports the idea that Jesus has a human mind (which is ignorant) and a divine mind (which is all-knowing).

If Jesus has two natures then He can speak as regards both or either of them, since they are both really Him. I'll provide exact wording from St. Ambrose for you to admit it is orthodox, Book 5 of de Fide

> But if any one were to say that the Son worships God the Father, because it is written, 「You worship you know not what, we know what we worship,」 John 4:22 let him consider when it was said, and to whom, and to whose wishes it was in answer. 49. In the earlier verses of this chapter it was stated, not without reason, that Jesus, being weary with the journey, was sitting down, and that He asked a woman of Samaria to give Him drink; John 4:6-7 for He spoke as man; for as God He could neither be weary nor thirst. 50. So when this woman addressed Him as a Jew, and thought Him a prophet, He answers her, as a Jew who spiritually taught the mysteries of the Law: 「You worship you know not what, we know what we worship.」 「We,」 He says; for He joined Himself with men. But how is He joined with men, but according to the flesh? And to show that He answered as being incarnate, He added: 「for salvation is of the Jews.」 John 4:22 51. But immediately after this He put aside His human feelings, saying: 「But the hour comes, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father.」 John 4:23 He said not: 「We shall worship.」 This He would certainly have said, if He had a share in our obedience. 52. And when we read that Mary worshipped Him, Matthew 28:9 we ought to learn that it is not possible for Him under the same nature both to worship as a servant, and to be worshipped as Lord; but rather that as man He is said to worship among men, and that as Lord He is worshipped by His servants.

and further in the same book

>Lastly, to prove that He spoke as man, He says: 「The Father that sent Me, He bears witness of Me.」 John 8:18 But His testimony as God is true, as He Himself says: 「My record is true: for I know whence I come, and whither I go, but you know not whence I come, and whither I go. You judge after the flesh.」 John 8:14-15 They judge then not after the Godhead but after the manhood, who think that Christ had not the power of bearing witness.

Further From St. Augustines On the Trinity

>Or if it still seems contradictory and inconsistent to say, I will not judge, but I will judge; what shall we say of that place where He says, 「My doctrine is not mine?」 How 「mine,」 when 「not mine?」 For He did not say, This doctrine is not mine, but 「 My doctrine is not mine:」 that which He called His own, the same He called not His own. How can this be true, unless He has called it His own in one relation; not His own, in another? According to the form of God, His own; according to the form of a servant, not His own. For when He says, 「It is not mine, but His that sent me,」 He makes us recur to the Word itself. For the doctrine of the Father is the Word of the Father, which is the Only Son.

>not codify one thing into 'human' and another into 'divine' as if things predicated of Christ can only be said of a man or of God based on the appropriateness of the predication, rather than the man and God being one and the same thinking thing.

<He was truthfully expressing His true nature. If Jesus struggled to lift something heavy, He wasn't pretending, He was but a man.

If it applies to His actions, how can it not also apply to His words as according to circumstance? Again, how can it be "My commandment" and yet "not mine" except in speaking as regards His two natures?


95c17b No.593591

>>593537

They could forgive those who sinned against them but could not forgive those on behalf of god until jesus gave them that power.


d6032c No.593594

>>593591

>>593537

Faithful followers always had the ability to make intercession for people. Look how many times Moses prayed and begged God to forgive Israel. Also the story of Abraham and Sodom and Gomorrah. And Job;

7 And it was so, that after the Lord had spoken these words unto Job, the Lord said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends: for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath.

8 Therefore take unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams, and go to my servant Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt offering;

>and my servant Job shall pray for you: for him will I accept: lest I deal with you after your folly, in that ye have not spoken of me the thing which is right, like my servant Job.


4d8ab3 No.593596

>>593589

>If it applies to His actions, how can it not also apply to His words as according to circumstance?

It doesn't apply to His actions as the human doing it or the God doing it. Jesus is both man and God. It is Jesus doing it and Jesus speaking it, not a nature in either case.


b7993c No.593612

>>593594

did you skip the part where Christ breathes the Holy Spirit upon them or what


b3b4ea No.593648

Isn't omniscience a good way to test if a spirit is God? If it admits its not omniscient then the question answers itself

Sure the spirit can have divine properties but lacking omniscience puts it outside the Godhood framework.

No?


b7993c No.593653

>>593648

Only God is all-knowing. Whether angels from God are all-knowing is a real question, but the implication is that they will know by virtue of being sent from God.


a1815e No.593673

>>593648

>Isn't omniscience a good way to test if a spirit is God?

Nope, angels arent allknowing

IIRC, According to John, You can test an angel by asking if he acknowledges Jesus as fully God and fully man,


1f18fb No.593904

>>593128

Read the title. Stopped reading.


4325aa No.594120

File: fc6bc1814f022a4⋯.png (51.94 KB, 704x406, 352:203, fedoras-edgelords-we-troll….png)

>>593904

Yeah, this. Gotta be impressed tho that some people are taking this troll to task


81d3de No.594280

>>593550

>and took upon Himself the fullness of human nature

but human nature is made in the image of God already, to take on human nature is take on divinity


4d8ab3 No.594466

>>594280

Men are not gods


a1815e No.594469

>>594466

>Men are not gods

Well, to be fair, psalms and Jesus in John 10:34 says otherwise.

Not that I am agreeing with him, or something Just something to note.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / asmr / caos / had / hnt / htg / hypno / strek / sw ]