Does God have eyes?

[Newbirth]

I said they are not comparable in repect of their God-like attributes. I didn't say they didn't have the same identity.

Who is comparable to God?
Isaiah 46:5
To whom will ye liken me, and make me equal, and compare me, that we may be like?


Psalm 89:6
For who in the heaven can be compared unto the Lord? who among the sons of the mighty can be likened unto the Lord?

Now please answer the question: where was "the Son of man before" re John 6:62?

In heaven...but it creates a problem for your theology in which you say Jesus (the son of man) did not exist before he was born.

You're getting confused between Christ as Lord and Christ as God. Now there is one Lord and one God, but the distinction in terminology pre/post incarnation is largely down to the change in our relation to the Logos pre/post incarnation.

I am not getting confused...there is no Christ as God
Acts 2:36
Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

I suspect you don't acknowledge Christ as Lord, otherwise why are you so opposed to John 1:1c?

I suspect that you acknowledge Christ as a God since you believe the word is God.

All that the John 1:1c formula means is that Christ as the Logos ruled heaven and earth, before he became Son of Man and before he ascended to become Lord; but prior to the incarnation, the Logos acted soley under the YHWH name (of God the Father).

That makes no sense...Unless you asr saying the ruler has a ruler... You do agree that Jesus was sent by his ruler
John 5:30
I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.

God the Father is always above the Logos, wherever he is.

Therefore the Logos is not God since to us there is but one God.

To be sure Christ ascended to become ruler of heaven and earth again (as Paul says in Eph 1:20-23).

No mention of again in the passage...
20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,
21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:
22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,
23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

How is Christ the ruler of the earth when the rulers of the earth would be gathered against him?
Acts 4:26
The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ.

You don't get to become ruler of heaven and earth without being invested with all the powers of God and without being one with the Father. It's not that difficult to grasp.

The devil is the ruler of the earth...
Ephesians 2:2
Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
John 14:30
Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.

No, I have one Lord and one God (Eph 4:5,6):

You have two Gods...One is the father and one is the Logos..

the Logos was "God" because invested with all the powers of the Father, but he had done anything to be distinguished from his Father before the incarnation.

All the powers of the father cannot make the Logos God that is absurd. If you believe that then Jesus would have been God when he spoke this to his disciples...
Matthew 28:18
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Afterwards the incarnation he became Lord.

You are just full of rubbish. You are saying that Jesus got demoted... But God says he is promoted.
Eph 1
20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,
21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:
22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,

That is why Christ said "everything that belongs to the Father is mine" just before he ascended.

But they all belong to his father. I can say my fathers' house is my house when I lived in it. But it belongs to my father.

 

[cjab]

Who is comparable to God?
Isaiah 46:5
To whom will ye liken me, and make me equal, and compare me, that we may be like?

Exactly. And so Jesus wasn't "God", as I have been saying from the inception.

Psalm 89:6
For who in the heaven can be compared unto the Lord? who among the sons of the mighty can be likened unto the Lord?

In heaven...but it creates a problem for your theology in which you say Jesus (the son of man) did not exist before he was born.

I am not getting confused...there is no Christ as God
Acts 2:36
Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

I suspect that you acknowledge Christ as a God since you believe the word is God.

You suspect a lot of things that aren't true, because in your "suspecting" is the justification for your extremist unitarian creed.

However, irrespective of whether you accept Christ as Lord with God-like powers, he is such a Lord: Acts 2:36 "Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah."

Acknowledging Christ as having been made Lord in Acts 2:36 ties in with Jn 6:62 (acknowledging the Son of Man ascending to where he was before).

If you don't acknowledge Jn 6:62 and Jn 1:1c, then it's unlikely you'll acknowledge Acts 2:36, even if you pay it lip service - with the corollary that you are outside the pale of orthodoxy, even if you superficially allege Christ as Messiah. For Christ won't prove to be your Messiah in the end without an acknowledgement of Christ as Lord. Acknowledgement of Christ as having been made Lord will lead to immediate recognition of what Jn 1:1c means - the ruler over all creation, being the one through whom all things were made.

Christ isn't just some arbitrary man.

That makes no sense...Unless you asr saying the ruler has a ruler... You do agree that Jesus was sent by his ruler
John 5:30
I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.

I acknowledge God as the head of Christ 1 Cor 11:3.

Therefore the Logos is not God since to us there is but one God.

What if God works through the Logos?

No mention of again in the passage...
20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,
21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:
22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,
23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

Christ occupies the place of God. He will be your judge. And there won't be any appeal from Christ to the "Father" because he is in the Father and the Father in him.

How is Christ the ruler of the earth when the rulers of the earth would be gathered against him?
Acts 4:26
The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Chris

Christ is represented on earth by his body, the church. So it means the kings of the earth will try to destroy the church.

t.

The devil is the ruler of the earth...
Ephesians 2:2
Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
John 14:30
Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.

The devil is a rebellious prince, but Christ is a king who has the power to excise the devil and has excised the devil from the hearts and minds of believers.

You have two Gods...One is the father and one is the Logos..

You expose your obstinate refusal to understand Greek. Such sins may be overlooked in the ignorant, but for those who pretend to instruct others, such folly will hardly be forgiven. As the Logos is never given the title of God, so he is not a God/god. If it helps, he is de facto God, not de Jure God. The Logos wields the power of God, hence 1 Cor 1:24 "Christ the power and wisdom of God."

All the powers of the father cannot make the Logos God that is absurd. If you believe that then Jesus would have been God when he spoke this to his disciples...
Matthew 28:18
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

What if Jesus throws you into hell? Will you complain to the Father that he usuped the Father's authority?

You are just full of rubbish. You are saying that Jesus got demoted... But God says he is promoted.
Eph 1
20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,
21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:
22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,

But they all belong to his father. I can say my fathers' house is my house when I lived in it. But it belongs to my father.

And if a father/master owned a large estate with many servants, the son would most likely be seen as the de facto master, even though he was the son of the master, just because the son wields the power of the master without restraint.

 

[Newbirth]

Exactly. And so Jesus wasn't "God", as I have been saying from the inception.

You have been saying the Word is Jesus and The Word is God and the Word is comparable to God. From the inception, you have been saying the Word is God. You have to explain...The Word became flesh /Jesus...making Jesus your defacto God.

..


You suspect a lot of things that aren't true, because in your "suspecting" is the justification for your extremist unitarian creed.

I suspect based on what you say. Therefore what you say isn't true.

However, irrespective of whether you accept Christ as Lord with God-like powers, he is such a Lord: Acts 2:36 "Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah."

Jesus is Lord and Christ with God-given powers...
John 17:2
As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
Matthew 28:18
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Acknowledging Christ as having been made Lord in Acts 2:36 ties in with Jn 6:62 (acknowledging the Son of Man ascending to where he was before).

He ascended to Heaven, he was in heaven before. You claimed that Jesus was not in heaven but only the Word was.

If you don't acknowledge Jn 6:62 and Jn 1:1c, then it's unlikely you'll acknowledge Acts 2:36, even if you pay it lip service - with the corollary that you are outside the pale of orthodoxy, even if you superficially allege Christ as Messiah. For Christ won't prove to be your Messiah in the end without an acknowledgement of Christ as Lord. Acknowledgement of Christ as having been made Lord will lead to immediate recognition of what Jn 1:1c means - the ruler over all creation, being the one through whom all things were made.

You are being silly with semantics, the word christ means messiah...You are actually saying...even if you superficially allege Messiah as Messiah. For Messiah won't prove to be your Messiah in the end without an acknowledgement of Messiah as Lord. Acknowledgement of Messiah as having been made Lord will lead to immediate recognition of what Jn 1:1c means..the ruler over all creation, being the one through whom all things were made.
The Word became the Messiah. You allege the Word is God..in fact, you said, defacto God. That put you in a place with two Gods.

Christ isn't just some arbitrary man.

That is what the Word became...a regular man...you fail to recognize that Jesus only received supernatural powers after being baptized.

I acknowledge God as the head of Christ 1 Cor 11:3.

And God acknowledge the man as the head of the woman.

What if God works through the Logos?

That does not make the Logos God.

Christ occupies the place of God.

No, he does not...You are making Christ your God.
Romans 1:25
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

He will be your judge.

at the judgment

And there won't be any appeal from Christ to the "Father" because he is in the Father and the Father in him.

At this moment Jesus is the mediator between god and men.

Christ is represented on earth by his body, the church. So it means the kings of the earth will try to destroy the church.

That is not what it means...This rage is against the head...
Zechariah 13:7
Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the Lord of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.

The devil is a rebellious prince,

of this world...

but Christ is a king

of the church

who has the power to excise the devil and has excised the devil from the hearts and minds of believers.

Christ gives believers the power to resist the devil...
Your whole doctrine is flawed.

You expose your obstinate refusal to understand Greek.

Greek cannot save or give salvation. It does not give understanding. Your faith seems to be in greek.

Such sins may be overlooked in the ignorant, but for those who pretend to instruct others, such folly will hardly be forgiven.

As the Logos is never given the title of God, so he is not a God/god.

Yet you chastise me for saying the Word is not God... In fact, you claim that the word made flesh/Jesus is your defacto God.

If it helps, he is de facto God, not de Jure God.

In other words, you are saying that he is a false God not the true God

The Logos wields the power of God, hence 1 Cor 1:24 "Christ the power and wisdom of God."

That does not make the Logos/Christ any kind of God...

What if Jesus throws you into hell?

His judgment is Just.

Will you complain to the Father that he usuped the Father's authority?

The father gave him to judge...what is your argument. I never made objections to Jesus being my judge.

And if a father/master owned a large estate with many servants, the son would most likely be seen as the de facto master, even though he was the son of the master, just because the son wields the power of the master without restraint.

That does not make the son the master over the father.
1 Corinthians 15:28
And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Jesus is our high priest in heaven ...Not our God. Do not chastize me for saying the word is not God.
Heb 4
14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

 

[Caroljeen]

This is another misstatement of my position. I believe Jesus to have been 100% flesh. I believe that he emptied himself of his divinity during that time. I am unsure whether he possessed a dual nature such as Trinitarians espouse or if he was simply “God” by identity during his incarnation. If you aren’t willing or capable of stating my position accurately, you should refrain from mentioning it at all.

What do these things mean to you?

 

[cjab]

You have been saying the Word is Jesus and The Word is God and the Word is comparable to God. From the inception, you have been saying the Word is God. You have to explain...The Word became flesh /Jesus...making Jesus your defacto God.

Jesus underwent a kenosis (emptying) of his godlike attributes, and was no longer clothed with the fullness of the glory of God on earth (i.e. as in heaven) but which he regained on his ascension (although as a man he still exuded the glory of God in accordance with his humanity).

I suspect based on what you say. Therefore what you say isn't true.

Try understanding it more. It's not difficult except for a hardcore unitarian.

Jesus is Lord and Christ with God-given powers...
John 17:2
As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
Matthew 28:18
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

He ascended to Heaven, he was in heaven before. You claimed that Jesus was not in heaven but only the Word was.

Jesus has the same identity as the Word. To be "in heaven" is to be invested with power. Heaven is synonymous with spiritual power. This is why your assertion that the Word was not invested with God-like powers is misconceived. Even angels wield enormous powers.

You are being silly with semantics, the word christ means messiah...You are actually saying...even if you superficially allege Messiah as Messiah. For Messiah won't prove to be your Messiah in the end without an acknowledgement of Messiah as Lord. Acknowledgement of Messiah as having been made Lord will lead to immediate recognition of what Jn 1:1c means..the ruler over all creation, being the one through whom all things were made.
The Word became the Messiah. You allege the Word is God..in fact, you said, defacto God. That put you in a place with two Gods.

No (see my Father/Son example below). The ascended Jesus is akin to a regent in a human monarchy - someone who wields the power of the King (i.e. in practice indistinguishable from "God") but who does not bear the title of King ("the God").

That is what the Word became...a regular man...you fail to recognize that Jesus only received supernatural powers after being baptized.

This is adoptionist nonsense. "And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and with people." Luke 2:52. He began his ministry before his baptism. Jesus was a begotten Son, not an adopted son. Yours is an ancient heresy long condemned by the apostles as excommunicable.

And God acknowledge the man as the head of the woman.

That does not make the Logos God.

No, he does not...You are making Christ your God.
Romans 1:25
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

When you call Christ your God or your Lord is less important than whether he is such in truth. For if he isn't, he isn't your Messiah.

at the judgment

At this moment Jesus is the mediator between god and men.

He is also the head of man (1 Cor 11:3) in the heavenly hierarchy.

That is not what it means...This rage is against the head...
Zechariah 13:7
Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the Lord of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.

Such is how Jesus came to bear the sins of mankind - he was made a sacrifice of atonement.

of this world...

of the church

Christ gives believers the power to resist the devil...
Your whole doctrine is flawed.

Christ gives complete victory over the devil.

Greek cannot save or give salvation. It does not give understanding. Your faith seems to be in greek.

Understanding Greek grammar protects one from heretics denying that the Logos could be God.

Yet you chastise me for saying the Word is not God... In fact, you claim that the word made flesh/Jesus is your defacto God.

You deny scripture. Jesus is a spiritual Lord, the ascended Jesus invested with the plenary powers of God.

In other words, you are saying that he is a false God not the true God

That does not make the Logos/Christ any kind of God...

The reality is that you don't accept him as your Lord.

His judgment is Just.

The father gave him to judge...what is your argument. I never made objections to Jesus being my judge.

That does not make the son the master over the father.
1 Corinthians 15:28
And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Jesus is our high priest in heaven ...Not our God. Do not chastize me for saying the word is not God.
Heb 4
14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

Jesus is high priest with the Father, but has a throne of judgement over mankind. Look it up.

 

[Newbirth]

Jesus underwent a kenosis (emptying) of his godlike attributes, and was no longer clothed with the fullness of the glory of God on earth (i.e. as in heaven) but which he regained on his ascension (although as a man he still exuded the glory of God in accordance with his humanity).

You are talking rubbish, When did Jesus undergo that kenosis? According to your theology, there was no Jesus before he was born as a baby. In fact, you seem to be saying Jesus was a God who gave up his abilities.

Try understanding it more. It's not difficult except for a hardcore unitarian.

Trying to understand what is not true does not make it true. Your theology says Jesus did not exist in heaven so how could Jesus have godlike attributes to empty in heaven where he does not exist?

Jesus has the same identity as the Word.

You seem to be saying two different entities with the same identity. How does that make sense?

To be "in heaven" is to be invested with power.

but only god is all-powerful. No one else has power except it is given by God.

Heaven is synonymous with spiritual power.

Power comes from God.

This is why your assertion that the Word was not invested with God-like powers is misconceived.

Which comes from God

Even angels wield enormous powers.

Which comes from God

No (see my Father/Son example below). The ascended Jesus is akin to a regent in a human monarchy - someone who wields the power of the King (i.e. in practice indistinguishable from "God") but who does not bear the title of King ("the God").

You said the Word is God. Did you not? You keep trying to make a distinction between Jesus after he ascended and before he ascended as one with power and one without power. Which Jesus died to take away your sin the one with power or the one without power?

This is adoptionist nonsense. "And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and with people." Luke 2:52.

How does the passage nullify what I said? Was Jesus a regular man? Regular men grow in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and people.

He began his ministry before his baptism.

Of course, it did, ministry is service, and he explained that to his parents at 12...
Luke 2:49
And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?

Jesus was a begotten Son, not an adopted son.

I never said he was adopted...Jesus was born of the father but received the HS from the father in the same way as his followers.

Yours is an ancient heresy long condemned by the apostles as excommunicable.

What I write is in the scriptures.
John 1:33
And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.
Please show Jesus exercising supernatural powers before his baptism.

When you call Christ your God or your Lord is less important than whether he is such in truth. For if he isn't, he isn't your Messiah.

God made Jesus both Our Lord(master) and the Messiah (anointed one). Jesus is not our God or defacto God in any way shape or form.

He is also the head of man (1 Cor 11:3) in the heavenly hierarchy.

And God is the head of him...

Such is how Jesus came to bear the sins of mankind - he was made a sacrifice of atonement.

You can't even keep up in a discussion...
cjab said:
Christ is represented on earth by his body, the church. So it means the kings of the earth will try to destroy the church.
I said
That is not what it means...This rage is against the head...
Zechariah 13:7
Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the Lord of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.

Christ gives complete victory over the devil.

James 4
6 But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.
7 Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.
8 Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded.

where is your passage that says...Christ gives complete victory over the devil.

Understanding Greek grammar protects one from heretics denying that the Logos could be God.

What do you mean by could be God?... Are you not sure? Why doesn't your Greek understanding make you say The Logos is beyond the shadow of a doubt God? I am saying beyond a shadow of a doubt the Logos is NOT GOD

You deny scripture. Jesus is a spiritual Lord, the ascended Jesus invested with the plenary powers of God.

Show where the scripture says ...Jesus is a spiritual Lord, the ascended Jesus invested with the plenary powers of God.

The reality is that you don't accept him as your Lord.

How so? I have not told you any such thing. So you are making a false claim.

Jesus is high priest with the Father, but has a throne of judgement over mankind. Look it up.

You are just confirming that I posted...which does not support your nonsense...
cjab said:
And if a father/master owned a large estate with many servants, the son would most likely be seen as the de facto master, even though he was the son of the master, just because the son wields the power of the master without restraint.

The son only wields the power given to him by his father. Then submits himself to the father after doing the fathers bidding.
1 Corinthians 15:28
And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

 

[cjab]

You are talking rubbish, When did Jesus undergo that kenosis? According to your theology, there was no Jesus before he was born as a baby. In fact, you seem to be saying Jesus was a God who gave up his abilities.

That is, the one who became Jesus.

Trying to understand what is not true does not make it true. Your theology says Jesus did not exist in heaven so how could Jesus have godlike attributes to empty in heaven where he does not exist?

Sameness of identity with the Logos.

You seem to be saying two different entities with the same identity. How does that make sense?

What is in heaven and on earth are, as you say, very different entities. cf Phil 2:6,7.

but only god is all-powerful. No one else has power except it is given by God.

Just so.

Power comes from God.

Which comes from God

Which comes from God

You said the Word is God. Did you not? You keep trying to make a distinction between Jesus after he ascended and before he ascended as one with power and one without power. Which Jesus died to take away your sin the one with power or the one without power?

Jesus had the power of a human being. I'll you'll find he wasn't omniscient.

How does the passage nullify what I said? Was Jesus a regular man? Regular men grow in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and people.

Jesus talked about being in "my Father's house" long before his baptism. Luke 2:43-49

Of course, it did, ministry is service, and he explained that to his parents at 12...
Luke 2:49
And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?

I never said he was adopted...Jesus was born of the father but received the HS from the father in the same way as his followers.

What I write is in the scriptures.
John 1:33
And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.
Please show Jesus exercising supernatural powers before his baptism.

He saw God as his Father before it.

God made Jesus both Our Lord(master) and the Messiah (anointed one). Jesus is not our God or defacto God in any way shape or form.

I guess he's not your Lord either. If he is, how does he exercise his Lordship without God-like prayers. How does Jesus answer prayer without God-like powers?

And God is the head of him...

You can't even keep up in a discussion...
cjab said:
Christ is represented on earth by his body, the church. So it means the kings of the earth will try to destroy the church.
I said
That is not what it means...This rage is against the head...
Zechariah 13:7
Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the Lord of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.

James 4
6 But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.
7 Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.
8 Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded.

where is your passage that says...Christ gives complete victory over the devil.

1 Corinthians 15:57​

What do you mean by could be God?... Are you not sure? Why doesn't your Greek understanding make you say The Logos is beyond the shadow of a doubt God? I am saying beyond a shadow of a doubt the Logos is NOT GOD

The Logos is not "a God" or "The God" but is God nonetheless. Work it out using the ordinary principles of Greek grammar.

Show where the scripture says ...Jesus is a spiritual Lord, the ascended Jesus invested with the plenary powers of God.

Col 2:9

How so? I have not told you any such thing. So you are making a false claim.

You are just confirming that I posted...which does not support your nonsense...
cjab said:
And if a father/master owned a large estate with many servants, the son would most likely be seen as the de facto master, even though he was the son of the master, just because the son wields the power of the master without restraint.

The son only wields the power given to him by his father. Then submits himself to the father after doing the fathers bidding.
1 Corinthians 15:28
And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

And what was the power given to Christ? Matthew 28:18

 

[John Milton]

What do these things mean to you?

I think the emptying himself of divinity means that he wasn't able to exercise the powers of divinity through his efforts. I believe he would be capable of this either by relinquishing them altogether for the period of his incarnation or by restricting access to them during that time in a way that he was not able to access them, though technically retaining possession of them. (I'm not sure that his divine nature is something that he could empty himself of. For this reason I leave the matter open: it may or may not be included in kenosis in my conception of it.)

I don't believe a person's identity changes regardless of their form (spiritual, physical, etc). I don't believe Jesus's nature changed (in terms of disposition, values, assessment of right/wrong, ect.), but that he had to develop that nature during his incarnation just as human infants have to develop their own natures, what many call developing their own personalities. I believe that in all points pertaining to Jesus's nature, minus his mode of existence and power, he was God. I believe this warrants the title "God" either by reason of his unchanging identity or by his unchanged nature (personality). And again for clarification, I remain agnostic as to whether or not he possessed a "divine nature" in addition to what I've mentioned here in this paragraph.

I hope that covers what you asked. I'll try to clarify it if need be.

 

[John Milton]

The Logos is not "a God" or "The God" but is God nonetheless. Work it out using the ordinary principles of Greek grammar.

Again, grammar alone doesn't answer this question. You need to stop talking about things you don't understand, but I already know you won't. You much prefer to pretend to be something that you are not.

 

[cjab]

Again, grammar alone doesn't answer this question. You need to stop talking about things you don't understand, but I already know you won't. You much prefer to pretend to be something that you are not.

And who are you to tell me what I do and don't understand?

 

[John Milton]

And who are you to tell me what I do and don't understand?

If I give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are not intentionally making false statements, I can definitively state that you don't understand the "Greek grammar" based on your remarks. However, the possibility does exist that you understand the matter and are intentionally making false statements. So you tell me: are you making false statements in ignorance or are you making false statements intentionally?

Whether you admit it or not, you are making claims that aren't supported by the "Greek grammar".

 

[cjab]

If I give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are not intentionally making false statements, I can definitively state that you don't understand the "Greek grammar" based on your remarks. However, the possibility does exist that you understand the matter and are intentionally making false statements. So you tell me: are you making false statements in ignorance or are you making false statements intentionally?

Whether you admit it or not, you are making claims that aren't supported by the "Greek grammar".

You show the extent of your duplicity in claiming to agree with Caragounis, but who clearly articulates all the distinctions I have mentioned.

Go criticize the scholars who you know support me, before mouthing empty words of malicious intent.

The fact is you're so ignorant of the use of articles in Koine Greek, you are clueless and should refrain from attempting to instruct or criticize others.

 

[John Milton]

You show the extent of your duplicity in claiming to agree with Caragounis, but who clearly articulates all the distinctions I have mentioned.

He doesn't agree with you on any point of the points I've referred to, cjab. I've explained this to you in full. Your ignorance and disbelief is your own error and has nothing to do with me.

Go criticize the scholars who you know support me, before mouthing empty words of malicious intent.

There are no scholars who support you for me to criticize.

The fact is you're so ignorant of the use of articles in Koine Greek, you are clueless and should refrain from attempting to instruct or criticize others.

The fact is your reading comprehension in English(!) is so bad that you imagine people support you when they don't. I'm not instructing or criticizing others; I'm instructing and criticizing you. You are the only person in this exchange (including the scholars you imagine support you) who has made mistakes and false assertions concerning "Greek grammar".

 

[Newbirth]

That is, the one who became Jesus.

you are not addressing my post...
question When did Jesus undergo that kenosis?
According to your theology, there was no Jesus before he was born as a baby. In fact, you seem to be saying Jesus was a God who gave up his abilities.

Sameness of identity with the Logos.

That does not answer this question...Your theology says Jesus did not exist in heaven so how could Jesus have godlike attributes to empty in heaven where he does not exist?

What is in heaven and on earth are, as you say, very different entities. cf Phil 2:6,7.

You did not address the question...You seem to be saying two different entities with the same identity. How does that make sense? Do you have more than one Jesus ?

Just so.

Your answer does not address my post...

Jesus had the power of a human being. I'll you'll find he wasn't omniscient.

I never claimed otherwise... You are the one saying Jesus = The Word as God, od some defacto God.

Jesus talked about being in "my Father's house" long before his baptism. Luke 2:43-49

What does that have to do with Jesus being a regular man...? I asked you...How does the passage nullify what I said? Was Jesus a regular man? Regular men grow in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and people.

He saw God as his Father before it.

Because God is his father...but he only received the fullness of the HS at baptism...

I guess he's not your Lord either. If he is, how does he exercise his Lordship without God-like prayers. How does Jesus answer prayer without God-like powers?

Then you guessed wrong...He exercises his lordship because God made him Lord. God did not make him God. One does not need godlike powers to exercise Lordship.

1 Corinthians 15:57​

The Logos is not "a God" or "The God" but is God nonetheless. Work it out using the ordinary principles of Greek grammar.

You are saying the Logos is not God but the Logos is God.

Col 2:9


And what was the power given to Christ? Matthew 28:18

It says all power...It does not say what the power is...

 

[cjab]

He doesn't agree with you on any point of the points I've referred to, cjab. I've explained this to you in full. Your ignorance and disbelief is your own error and has nothing to do with me.

When you have proved it, I'll credit it.

There are no scholars who support you for me to criticize.

The fact is your reading comprehension in English(!) is so bad that you imagine people support you when they don't. I'm not instructing or criticizing others; I'm instructing and criticizing you. You are the only person in this exchange (including the scholars you imagine support you) who has made mistakes and false assertions concerning "Greek grammar".

You are a professional disinformation specialist. You are clueless as to the theology of Jesus, which you repudiate. You know nothing of Greek NT scholarship, in which you are unread. I know not what religion you are or why you are here. All you do is demonstrate your ignorance of every subject you touch on.

 

[cjab]

you are not addressing my post...
question When did Jesus undergo that kenosis?

In Jn 1:14.

According to your theology, there was no Jesus before he was born as a baby. In fact, you seem to be saying Jesus was a God who gave up his abilities.

The one entitled the Logos became Jesus. Jesus was given the name "Jesus" at birth. I just follow the narrative.

That does not answer this question...Your theology says Jesus did not exist in heaven so how could Jesus have godlike attributes to empty in heaven where he does not exist?

His identity existed in heaven as the one entitled Logos.

You did not address the question...You seem to be saying two different entities with the same identity. How does that make sense? Do you have more than one Jesus ?

There was one Jesus in the form of a servant; whereas the same individual identity existed in the form of God (Phil 2:6,7) before the incarnation and after the ascension.

Your answer does not address my post...

Any power that anyone has, whether in heaven or in earth, comes from God. The power given by God is potentially unlimited. It was given to the ascended Jesus and to the Logos without limit. That is why he is said to be clothed with the glory of God.

I never claimed otherwise... You are the one saying Jesus = The Word as God, od some defacto God.

There is no acccess to or fellowship with the Father except by Jesus. Therefore Jesus is your de facto God (i.e. Lord), but not "the God" who is the Father.

What does that have to do with Jesus being a regular man...? I asked you...How does the passage nullify what I said? Was Jesus a regular man? Regular men grow in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and people.

Jesus asserted God was his Father even from his youth. Regular men do not assert such a thing.

Because God is his father...but he only received the fullness of the HS at baptism...

Whatever. I'm not getting into when God sent the "fulness of the Holy Spirit" to Jesus. Personally, I don't think anyone is qualified to say. All we know is that the Spirit was manifested at his baptism.

Then you guessed wrong...He exercises his lordship because God made him Lord. God did not make him God. One does not need godlike powers to exercise Lordship.

Would you like to explain how he exercises Lordship without God-like powers? Especially, how he exercises judgement over the whole world?

You are saying the Logos is not God but the Logos is God.

I am thinking your level of education in general languages & grammar is insufficient for you to understand what Jn 1:1 is talking about: i.e. the Logos having / exercising the properties of God, in association with the Father, whilst not being "the God" (i.e. the origin of all things). Do not underestimate the level of learning & education needed to understand the scriptures. This is why their explication is generally the preserve of scholars.

It says all power...It does not say what the power is...

All power is all power over what is in the world, or outside of the world in terms of creation.

 

[Newbirth]

In Jn 1:14.

Your claim that the Word is not Jesus before Jesus was born therefore you cannot say Jesus emptied anything...

The one entitled the Logos became Jesus. Jesus was given the name "Jesus" at birth. I just follow the narrative.

You are being silly...Who is the one that became Jesus? If someone who was not Jesus emptied himself then it was not Jesus who emptied himself as you are trying to claim. You are not following any narrative but your own.

His identity existed in heaven as the one entitled Logos.

Whose identity in heaven as the one entitled Logos? You seem to be saying that Jesus existed in heaven as the Logos. But when I say it you chastise me.

There was one Jesus in the form of a servant; whereas the same individual identity existed in the form of God (Phil 2:6,7) before the incarnation and after the ascension.

So you are conceding that Jesus is the Word. How can the word be God his father? We do not have two Gods, do we? If the word is God then he must be another God.

Any power that anyone has, whether in heaven or in earth, comes from God. The power given by God is potentially unlimited. It was given to the ascended Jesus and to the Logos without limit. That is why he is said to be clothed with the glory of God.

Therefore, Jesus, who is the Word cannot be God in any way shape, or form.

There is no acccess to or fellowship with the Father except by Jesus. Therefore Jesus is your de facto God (i.e. Lord), but not "the God" who is the Father.

Jesus is not God in any way shape or form you are admitting two Gods. Lord does not mean Jesus is a God or defacto God as you claim

Jesus asserted God was his Father even from his youth. Regular men do not assert such a thing.

Jesus did... wasn't Adam a regular man? Adam was not born like us was he? If Jesus was not a regular man then Adam was not a regular man either.

Whatever. I'm not getting into when God sent the "fulness of the Holy Spirit" to Jesus.

because you have no argument against it.
John 3:34
For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.

Personally, I don't think anyone is qualified to say. All we know is that the Spirit was manifested at his baptism.

John explained it...
John 1:16
And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.

Would you like to explain how he exercises Lordship without God-like powers? Especially, how he exercises judgement over the whole world?

The same way anyone exercises lordship over their servants... You are desperately trying to make Jesus into a God.

I am thinking your level of education in general languages & grammar is insufficient for you to understand what Jn 1:1 is talking about: i.e. the Logos having / exercising the properties of God, in association with the Father, whilst not being "the God" (i.e. the origin of all things). Do not underestimate the level of learning & education needed to understand the scriptures. This is why their explication is generally the preserve of scholars.

The gospel is very simple...your nonsense makes it complicated...
2 Corinthians 1:12
For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world, and more abundantly to you-ward.
2 Corinthians 11:3
But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

All power is all power over what is in the world, or outside of the world in terms of creation.

So how does that help your argument? You are the one asking what was the power given to Christ.

And what was the power given to Christ? Matthew 28:18

I said it does not say what power. It says all power.

 

[John Milton]

When you have proved it, I'll credit it.

I have already on other matters, but I will for this point, too:

It has further been speculated whether the anarthrous Θεός should not be translated indefinitely as "a God". Although this translation has been rejected, its possibility in principle has been conceded. [emphasis added]

I warned you that you don't understand your sources.

You are a professional disinformation specialist. You are clueless as to the theology of Jesus, which you repudiate. You know nothing of Greek NT scholarship, in which you are unread. I know not what religion you are or why you are here. All you do is demonstrate your ignorance of every subject you touch on.

This didn't age well for you, did it?

Now I'm waiting for the credit you promised.

 

[cjab]

I have already on other matters, but I will for this point, too:

I warned you that you don't understand your sources.

Read on:

[Theos] is anarthrous because it is predicate. But this for a Greek does not mean "a
God" (which would have been Θεός τις or εις Θεός), nor does it mean "the
God" (ό Θεός). It means simply "God". The question of definite or indefinite
does not arise for a Greek in this context, because Θεός as predicate
denotes property or essence, not an individual. Thus, no question arises
as to whether the Logos is the only God or one of many. As for the qualitative
use, apart from its liability to varying interpretations, it should
be rejected both because the existing θείος is not used, and because God
is a 'person' not an attribute. From the theological point, too, we see
that John's use of Θεός (instead of ό Θεός) was not only grammatically
correct, but also reflected his theological conception. At the beginning,
when the Logos was, God was already there. John does not confuse the
Two. The Logos was God and yet he was not ilie God (which he reserves
for the Father). But that does not make him a whit less God than the
Father, for later in his Gospel he is going to use the dialectic statements
that "I and the Father are One" and '"The Father is greater than I". The
third clause shows a beautiful balance between the two and is the result
of mature reflection on the problem of Godhead.

This didn't age well for you, did it?

Not for you, no.

Now I'm waiting for the credit you promised.

Dream on. A possibility in principle means, "theoretically without regard to the noun itself."

Thus if "God" was replaced by the Greek for "cow/fat woman" (αγελάδα), it would be legitimate to translate "The Logos was a cow", because it makes no English sense to say "The Logos was cow."

Your approach reduces "God" to the nature of an animate being. Hence it does no justice to the dignity of God as God. It carries the implication of a polytheistic view of God, which is opposed to the scriptural insistence upon monotheism.

Your approach is to pander to polytheism.

 

[John Milton]

Read on:

[Theos] is anarthrous because it is predicate. But this for a Greek does not mean "a
God" (which would have been Θεός τις or εις Θεός), nor does it mean "the
God" (ό Θεός). It means simply "God". The question of definite or indefinite
does not arise for a Greek in this context, because Θεός as predicate
denotes property or essence, not an individual. Thus, no question arises
as to whether the Logos is the only God or one of many. As for the qualitative
use, apart from its liability to varying interpretations, it should
be rejected both because the existing θείος is not used, and because God
is a 'person' not an attribute. From the theological point, too, we see
that John's use of Θεός (instead of ό Θεός) was not only grammatically
correct, but also reflected his theological conception. At the beginning,
when the Logos was, God was already there. John does not confuse the
Two. The Logos was God and yet he was not ilie God (which he reserves
for the Father). But that does not make him a whit less God than the
Father, for later in his Gospel he is going to use the dialectic statements
that "I and the Father are One" and '"The Father is greater than I". The
third clause shows a beautiful balance between the two and is the result
of mature reflection on the problem of Godhead.

That's not reading on. That came earlier in the text. The author states later (the part that I quoted) that they ruled out that rendering, but that it is possible. You aren't being honest with your sources.

Not for you, no.

Not for you. You can't make the author say what he doesn't say.

Dream on. A possibility in principle means, "theoretically without regard to the noun itself."

No, it doesn't. It means the translation is a grammatical possibility.

Thus if "God" was replaced by the Greek for "cow/fat woman" (αγελάδα), it would be legitimate to translate "The Logos was a cow", because it makes no English sense to say "The Logos was cow."

Your approach reduces "God" to the nature of an animate being. Hence it does no justice to the dignity of God as God. It carries the implication of a polytheistic view of God, which is opposed to the scriptural insistence upon monotheism.

Your approach is to pander to polytheism.

This is part nonsense, part slander. You lied when you said you would give credit when you were given proof. You are outright lying now.