/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>612114

>But ontologically I get how he can be God too.

I don't* get

God the Son is our medium to God the Father.

And God the Holy Spirit is our medium to God the Son.

Christ is our medium to the Father because He is not the Father.

How can three persons be God when there is only one God? Well, nobody has figured out how to put this in words yet, right? But it is really God Himself Who is in us (the Holy Spirit), it is really through God Himself that we go (the Son), to really reach God Himself (the Father). If the Son is not true God of true God, He cannot really save, as only the Father can really save.

Fr John Behr's short synthesis of Trinitarian theology in Greek patristics:

https://afkimel.wordpress.com/2013/12/31/john-behr-on-the-trinity/

>>612114

>If Christ is our medium to God, our gate, path and intercessor then how can he also be God?

Augustine says (De Civ. Dei ix, 15): "Not because He is the Word, is Christ Mediator, since He Who is supremely immortal and supremely happy is far from us unhappy mortals; but He is Mediator, as man."

We may consider two things in a mediator: first, that he is a mean; secondly, that he unites others. Now it is of the nature of a mean to be distant from each extreme: while it unites by communicating to one that which belongs to the other. Now neither of these can be applied to Christ as God, but only as man. For, as God, He does not differ from the Father and the Holy Ghost in nature and power of dominion: nor have the Father and the Holy Ghost anything that the Son has not, so that He be able to communicate to others something belonging to the Father or the Holy Ghost, as though it were belonging to others than Himself. But both can be applied to Him as man. Because, as man, He is distant both from God, by nature, and from man by dignity of both grace and glory. Again, it belongs to Him, as man, to unite men to God, by communicating to men both precepts and gifts, and by offering satisfaction and prayers to God for men. And therefore He is most truly called Mediator, as man.

>>612138

not a fan of augustine but this is pretty decent tbh

>>612114

The Trinity is a heresy invented by the early church fathers under the guidance of Paul of Tarsus. Follow Jesus, not Paul.

>>612157

Jesus had free will like the rest of us, He was not bound to follow whatever God "the Father but also Himself" said and did. This is polytheistic paganism that was developed over time.

>>612154

Inshallah brother

>>612304

Muslims teach that Jesus did not die on the cross and that Muhammed came to correct His message with the Quran which is the word of God. This is also wrong and a heresy invented by Arab tribes to gain control.

>>612154

This goes against the Nicene Creed.

Mods.

>>612154

Orthodoxy ain't ortho. The books of the gospel gotta be litterd with the blood of trinitarians. Paul of tarsus aka "saul of retardsus" ain't my aposlt. he is pagan polytheist and probbaly papists as well. mathew mark and jhon not luke ignatius and tertullian ok. praise jesus

>>612321

John 1 clearly states Jesus' divinity

>>612454

Logos is used many times throughout the Bible and it doesn't necessarily refer to Jesus.

>>612466

In John 1 it does refer to Jesus Christ given the context and development of the reference.

>>612475

"The Father alone is the one true God. This keeps to the structure of the New Testament language about God"

read the context. The bible uses this language as well.

>“For us there is one God, the Father … and one Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 8:6). The proclamation of the divinity of Jesus Christ is made not so much by describing Him as “God” (theos used, in Greek, without an article is as a predicate, and so can be used of creatures; cf. John 10:34-35), but by recognizing Him as “Lord” (Kyrios). Beside being a common title (“sir”), this word had come to be used, in speech, for the unpronounceable, divine, name of God Himself, YHWH. When Paul states that God bestowed upon the crucified and risen Christ the “name above every name” (Phil 2:9), this is an affirmation that this one is all that YHWH Himself is, without being YHWH. This is again affirmed in the creeds. “And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God … true God of true God.”

>>612476

>The bible uses this language as well.

The bible never says the Father alone is the one true God (to the exclusion of the Son and the Holy Spirit). If the Son is God, then the Father cannot be alone the one true God.

>>612477

John 17:3 Jesus addresses his Father, saying, "And this is eternal life, that they know you—the only true God."

>>612479

That is to the exclusion of things which are not God, not Jesus Christ. The incarnate God-man shall naturally adress the only true God as just that. The fact the Father is the only true God does not prevent the Son from also being the only true God, because they are the same God.

>>612481

He said "And this is eternal life, that they know you—the only true God." he didn't say "…that they know us" He differentiated the only true God from himself.

>>612154

fuqlesmajeste, how did YOU get in the door?!

Back you go

>>>r/christianity

>>612488

>I'm just going to ignore your argument and restate my prooftext

>>612502

>The fact the Father is the only true God does not prevent the Son from also being the only true God

That might slide if an apostle identified the Father as "the only true God", but when Christ does it and doesn't include himself in the category, the implication is apparent.

>>612318

<Christians teach that Jesus was God and God came to correct His message with the New Testament which is the word of God. This is also wrong and a heresy invented by goyified Jews and Goy tribes to gain control

>>612505

Christ is the God-man. He is praying to the Father. What do you expect Him to say? "you, a false god"? "you, one among many true gods"?

>>612505

Also, stop denying the trinity

>>612512

>Christians teach that Jesus was God and God came to correct His message with the New Testament which is the word of God

You got an F, now back to the class.

>>612470

>given the context and development of the reference

Yeah, later Christians co-opted this verse to justify their Trinitarian reading of the text, just because it's popular now doesn't make their claims true.

>>612494

What?

>>612512

Nice try. In my opinion what matters are the words of Christ and the Truth, not the politics of early church fathers.

>>612466

Tell me more about this entirely separate logos who became flesh and dwelt among us

>>612518

>. What do you expect Him to say?

If he is going to qualify his statement about the Father so strongly with "only true" then I would expect him to say something like:

"And this is eternal life, that they know us—the only true God."

or

"And this is eternal life, that they know you, the Holy Spirit and the Son—the only true God, and we three are one."

>>612530

>John 1 doesn't count

>Paul doesn't count

>nothing I don't like counts

> In my opinion what matters are the words of Christ and the Truth, not the politics of early church fathers.

so how did you decide what Jesus actually said and what he didn't?

>the son of god, born of the virgin

>>612530

>Yeah, later Christians co-opted this verse to justify their Trinitarian reading of the text, just because it's popular now doesn't make their claims true.

"And the Word was made flesh"

But I'm sure that's an aside about some completely unrelated person who is never mentioned again

>>612540

Let's have a little math equation. Let's say, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are the same God, that each in themselves constitutes the fullness of God, and that He is the only true God. So, with this in mind, is it a correct equation, 'the Father is the only true God'? How many true Gods are there in this scenario? Is the Son another true God? Is the Father only the only true God once the Son has been superadded to Him?

Jesus' words do not constitute any statement about the relations of the Godhead whatsoever, but are a mere statement of monotheism.

just realizes OP quoted himself in the first post. abandoned the thread.

>>612558

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. 1 Timothy 2:5

"No one comes to the Father but by me."

"And this is eternal life, that they know you—the only true God."

>>612543

I think it's the same guy who always says the entire OT never happened.

>>612573

John 14:9

Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

Matthew 16:16

Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

John 10:30-33 - Jesus answered them, “I and My Father are one.” Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”

John 20:28 - And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

Two can play the Bible verse game. Jesus is no mediator. Jesus is God. The prophets were mediators. Yes, when we pray to God we have to pray to Jesus as he will take our prayers to God The Father, but Jesus' role is not as messager or mediator but as God himself.

>>612573

Also medium sounds more hindu than Christian.

>>612543

>so how did you decide what Jesus actually said and what he didn't

human reason, comparing the Gospels to Mark, reading Church history etc.

>>612535

>>612550

>Word was made flesh

The word here is God's plan and wisdom. It was made flesh through Jesus of Nazareth, this doesn't mean Jesus is necessarily God. This was written in a time where docetism was gaining popularity, so "flesh" here is saying that Jesus was a real human, not a spirit that appeared to be human like the docetists said. It also doesn't mean that He pre-existed the Universe.

>>612609

>human reason

Worldly wisdom

>The word here is God's plan and wisdom

Verse 4 says that in the Word was life. This means that the Word's nature was as life. It lived by nature. A thought in God's mind cannot be described as living. Then it says the life was the light of men. This is inconclusive, but important for what comes in verses 8 and 9. When it describes John as sent to proclaim the light but he himself was not the light, it shows that though the word light is still being used in a particular context, it is interchangeable with Christ. Next the Word is described as the true light which gives light to everyone. Some heretics have argued that the Word is the same as the one in the Old Testament, which is said to come to the prophets. This shows that in reality, this is the true Word, from whom that revelation was called word. It says that the Word came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. The pronoun cannot be rendered it here without doing injury to the plain meaning of the text. Thoughts do not have peoples. Israel was not the people of a thought. By describing Israel as the Word's people, he shows that he actually meant what he wrote earlier in the chapter, that the Word was God. When time finally comes to mention the incarnation, he claims to have seen the Word's glory, which was the glory of the only-begotten Son from the Father. It means that He was the only-begotten Son before His birth, not after, since that quality belongs to the Word.

>This was written in a time where docetism was gaining popularity, so "flesh" here is saying that Jesus was a real human, not a spirit that appeared to be human like the docetists said

The reason why they believed Jesus was a phantasm is because they believed that He was the good god and that matter is the realm of the evil god. John fails to strike down the belief that He was God.

>It also doesn't mean that He pre-existed the Universe

You're right, only that He pre-existed His birth. Verses 1-3 mean He pre-existed the universe.

>>612584

How about we believe He is a mediator and God, instead of choosing to argue with a bible verse?

>>612114

Anon's arm is not Anon's leg but both Anon's arm and Anon's leg are still Anon.

>>612609

>The word here is God's plan and wisdom.

Why is it personified then mr heretic?

>>612709

arms and legs aren't persons or aware