Election

Chalcedon

Well-known member
Since you know I have shown you over and over how I reach my conclusions, it makes me wonder what spirit you are of
Here lets give this a try. Please demonstrate your hermeneutics for us seth. You can pick which verse to demonstrate your ability with a short , medium or longer verse. The choice is all yours !

Colossians 2:9
For in Him all the fullness of the Deity dwells bodily.

or

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

or

Hebrews 9:15
15 For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant,
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
Here lets give this a try. Please demonstrate your hermeneutics for us seth. You can pick which verse to demonstrate your ability with a short , medium or longer verse. The choice is all yours !

Colossians 2:9
For in Him all the fullness of the Deity dwells bodily.

or

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

or

Hebrews 9:15
15 For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant,
here is one of the problems with what many of you are doing. You use your hermeneutic to prove you are right. You beg the question in that you already have stated what the truth is before you go searching, You do not look for truth, you look for verification.
I have done my best to escape that model
 

Chalcedon

Well-known member
here is one of the problems with what many of you are doing. You use your hermeneutic to prove you are right. You beg the question in that you already have stated what the truth is before you go searching, You do not look for truth, you look for verification.
I have done my best to escape that model
Can you say COPOUT !
 

Chalcedon

Well-known member
If you have any specific questions about the verses you wanted me to explain to you, please ask your questions and we can both talk about what we see.
Sure all those passages have Jesus in the present tense with His being Mediator, Man, Body etc............. Also the one God is in the present.

But you have all those in the past tense.

And since Paul is using syllogism in 1 Timothy 2:5 with :

There IS One God

and

There IS One Mediator

You cannot have God in the present and Mediator in the past. They are either both past or present you cannot have one without the other to be consistent.

You claim to understand logic but you clearly have demonstrated you toss logic out the window in 1 Timothy 2:5 to support your false idea that Jesus is no longer a mediator or a man yet contradict yourself by saying there is still a God.

Things that make you go hmmmmmmmm.

You are clearly using eisegesis by reading your own personal ideas into the text rather than allowing the rules of grammar and syntax to form your ideas. You are demonstrating eisegesis not exegesis.

hope this helps !!!
 

Dizerner

Well-known member
Colossians 2:9
For in Him all the fullness of the Deity dwells bodily.

One interesting thing to note... an omnipresent Deity could not in fact fully dwell in a body, as some of it would always be elsewhere.

And the verse makes a point to emphasize "all" the fullness, as if to prevent any misunderstanding that part of it was outside.

Makes you wonder if a Deity could in fact divest some of its attributes for a time.
 

Chalcedon

Well-known member
One interesting thing to note... an omnipresent Deity could not in fact fully dwell in a body, as some of it would always be elsewhere.

And the verse makes a point to emphasize "all" the fullness, as if to prevent any misunderstanding that part of it was outside.

Makes you wonder if a Deity could in fact divest some of its attributes for a time.
You are making a personal assumption not a biblical one saying an Omnipresent Deity could not in fact dwell in a body.

But that is exactly what the Incarnation is and even though you cannot wrap your mind around it with reason and logic it nevertheless doesn't make it so dizerner.

Jesus is not part God, he has all the Fulness of Deity ( fulness means lacking nothing) dwelling in Him. The Son did not give up any Deity or else The Trinity would no longer be the Trinity. God would of stopped being God. The Triune God is Eternal and if for one millisecond if the Father, Son or Spirit was not fully God then God was no longer God.

This is one reason the human mind rejects the Trinity and the Incarnation because it defies logic and human reasoning. Its the number 1 and 2 reasons for people rejecting Christianity.

hope this helps !!!
 

preacher4truth

Well-known member
One interesting thing to note... an omnipresent Deity could not in fact fully dwell in a body, as some of it would always be elsewhere.

And the verse makes a point to emphasize "all" the fullness, as if to prevent any misunderstanding that part of it was outside.

Makes you wonder if a Deity could in fact divest some of its attributes for a time.
Utter nonsense...
 

TibiasDad

Well-known member
You are making a personal assumption not a biblical one saying an Omnipresent Deity could not in fact dwell in a body.
I would not say a “personal assumption”, but rather a purely logical one. You’re correct that logically it is impossible to fully comprehend the Godhead, there is always the need of faith!

Doug
 

Chalcedon

Well-known member
I would not say a “personal assumption”, but rather a purely logical one. You’re correct that logically it is impossible to fully comprehend the Godhead, there is always the need of faith!

Doug
Agreed but Scripture says all the fulness of Deity which means nothing in His Deity was lacking, There could be no more filling of Deity, it was full to the brim so to speak.

I like Vincent Greek Word Studies on this below.

Vincent's Word Studies
Fullness
See on Colossians 1:19.

Godhead (θεότητος)

Only here in the New Testament. See on Romans 1:20, where θειότης divinity or godhood is used. Appropriate there, because God personally would not be known from His revelation in nature, but only His attributes - His majesty and glory. Here Paul is speaking of the essential and personal deity as belonging to Christ. So Bengel: "Not the divine attributes, but the divine nature."

Bodily (σωματικῶς)

In bodily fashion or bodily-wise. The verse contains two distinct assertions: 1. That the fullness of the Godhead eternally dwells in Christ. The present tense κατοικεῖ dwelleth, is used like ἐστιν is (the image), Colossians 1:15, to denote an eternal and essential characteristic of Christ's being. The indwelling of the divine fullness in Him is characteristic of Him as Christ, from all ages and to all ages. Hence the fullness of the Godhead dwelt in Him before His incarnation, when He was "in the form of God" (Philippians 2:6). The Word in the beginning, was with God and was God (John 1:1). It dwelt in Him during His incarnation. It was the Word that became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth, and His glory which was beheld was the glory as of the Only begotten of the Father (John 1:14; compare 1 John 1:1-3). The fullness of the Godhead dwells in His glorified humanity in heaven.

2. The fullness of the Godhead dwells in Him in a bodily way, clothed the body. This means that it dwells in Him as one having a human body. This could not be true of His preincarnate state, when He was "in the form of God," for the human body was taken on by Him in the fullness of time, when "He became in the likeness of men" (Philippians 2:7), when the Word became flesh. The fullness of the Godhead dwelt in His person from His birth to His ascension. He carried His human body with Him into heaven, and in His glorified body now and ever dwells the fullness of the Godhead.

"O, for a sight, a blissful sight

Of our Almighty Father's throne!

There sits the Savior crowned with light,

Clothed in a body like our own.

"Adoring saints around Him stand,

And thrones and powers before Him fall;

The God shines gracious through the man,
 

Chalcedon

Well-known member
And here he is on Colossians 1:19

Vincent's Word Studies
It pleased the Father that in Him should all fullness dwell (ἐν αὐτῷ εὐδόκησεν πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα κατοικῆσαι)
Εὐδοκέω to think it good, to be well pleased is used in the New Testament, both of divine and of human good-pleasure; but, in the former case, always of God the Father. So Matthew 3:17; Luke 12:32; 1 Corinthians 1:21. The subject of was well pleased, God, is omitted as in James 1:12, and must be supplied; so that, literally, the passage would read, God was well pleased that in Him, etc. Rev., it was the good pleasure of the Father. Fullness, Rev, correctly, the fullness. See on Romans 11:12; see on John 1:16. The word must be taken in its passive sense - that with which a thing is filled, not that which fills. The fullness denotes the sum-total of the divine powers and attributes. In Christ dwelt all the fullness of God as deity. The relation of essential deity to creation and redemption alike, is exhibited by John in the very beginning of his gospel, with which this passage should be compared. In John the order is: 1. The essential nature of Christ; 2. Creation; 3. Redemption. Here it is: 1. Redemption (Colossians 1:13); 2. Essential being of the Son (Colossians 1:15); 3. The Son as Creator (Colossians 1:16); 4. The Church, with Christ as its head (Colossians 1:18). Compare 2 Corinthians 5:19; Ephesians 1:19, Ephesians 1:20, Ephesians 1:23. Paul does not add of the Godhead to the fullness, as in Colossians 2:9 since the word occurs in direct connection with those which describe Christ's essential nature, and it would seem not to have occurred to the apostle that it could be understood in any other sense than as an expression of the plenitude of the divine attributes and powers.

Thus the phrase in Him should all the fullness dwell gathers into a grand climax the previous statements - image of God, first-born of all creation, Creator, the eternally preexistent, the Head of the Church, the victor over death, first in all things. On this summit we pause, looking, like John, from Christ in His fullness of deity to the exhibition of that divine fullness in redemption consummated in heaven (Colossians 1:20-22).

There must also be taken into the account the selection of this word fullness with reference to the false teaching in the Colossian church, the errors which afterward were developed more distinctly in the Gnostic schools. Pleroma fullness was used by the Gnostic teachers in a technical sense, to express the sum-total of the divine powers and attributes. "From the pleroma they supposed that all those agencies issued through which God has at any time exerted His power in creation, or manifested His will through revelation. These mediatorial beings would retain more or less of its influence, according as they claimed direct parentage from it, or traced their descent through successive evolutions. But in all cases this pleroma was distributed, diluted, transformed, and darkened by foreign admixture. They were only partial and blurred images, often deceptive caricatures, of their original, broken lights of the great Central Light" (Lightfoot). Christ may have been ranked with these inferior images of the divine by the Colossian teachers. Hence the significance of the assertion that the totality of the divine dwells in Him.

Dwell (κατοικῆσαι)

Permanently. See on Luke 11:26. Compare the Septuagint usage of κατοικεῖν permanent dwelling, and παροικεῖν transient sojourning. Thus Genesis 37:1, "Jacob dwelt (permanently, κατῴκει) in the land where his father sojourned (παρῷκησεν A.V., was a stranger). Perhaps in contrast with the partial and transient connection of the pleroma with Christ asserted by the false teachers. The word is used of the indwelling of the Father, Ephesians 2:22 (κατοικητήριον τοῦ Θεοῦ habitation of God); of the Son, Ephesians 3:17; and of the Spirit, James 4:5.
 

TibiasDad

Well-known member
One interesting thing to note... an omnipresent Deity could not in fact fully dwell in a body, as some of it would always be elsewhere.

And the verse makes a point to emphasize "all" the fullness, as if to prevent any misunderstanding that part of it was outside.

Makes you wonder if a Deity could in fact divest some of its attributes for a time.
I think you’re conflating two types of aspect; “all” is in reference to the totality of the being of God, while this “all” is within a certain spatial or confined circumstance, namely, bodily.

The “all” cannot be limited in any way or it disqualifies the meaning of the word “all”!

Doug
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
Sure all those passages have Jesus in the present tense with His being Mediator, Man, Body etc............. Also the one God is in the present.

But you have all those in the past tense.

And since Paul is using syllogism in 1 Timothy 2:5 with :

There IS One God

and

There IS One Mediator

You cannot have God in the present and Mediator in the past. They are either both past or present you cannot have one without the other to be consistent.

You claim to understand logic but you clearly have demonstrated you toss logic out the window in 1 Timothy 2:5 to support your false idea that Jesus is no longer a mediator or a man yet contradict yourself by saying there is still a God.

Things that make you go hmmmmmmmm.

You are clearly using eisegesis by reading your own personal ideas into the text rather than allowing the rules of grammar and syntax to form your ideas. You are demonstrating eisegesis not exegesis.

hope this helps !!!
So your question is why does the Bible say Jesus "is" our mediator. Why not "was" our Mediator.
It states there IS one mediator between man and God. the answer lies in partly what a mediator is.
In the past I have talked to you about an architect. In English it is common to ask "Who IS the architect of that building." We ask this way, despite knowing that he is no longer drawing designs, but has finished.
A mediator is the person in court who works with both parties to come to an agreement, before they approach the judge for judgement, the mediator facilitates conversation between plaintiff and defendant so they can agree before the bench..
The Bible states that Jesus did this once in His blood. Two things jump out "once" and "in His blood" along with that the Bible speaks of the fallacy of Christ having to offer His blood over and over.
He is the mediator of the New Covenant between man and God, because He was both and good represent both sides.
What I have seen here is that you and others want to dismantle the truth that Jesus mediated a new covenant once for all time in His blood, and you want to promote the idea, that he did not really do it once for all time in His blood.
 

Chalcedon

Well-known member
So your question is why does the Bible say Jesus "is" our mediator. Why not "was" our Mediator.
It states there IS one mediator between man and God. the answer lies in partly what a mediator is.
In the past I have talked to you about an architect. In English it is common to ask "Who IS the architect of that building." We ask this way, despite knowing that he is no longer drawing designs, but has finished.
A mediator is the person in court who works with both parties to come to an agreement, before they approach the judge for judgement, the mediator facilitates conversation between plaintiff and defendant so they can agree before the bench..
The Bible states that Jesus did this once in His blood. Two things jump out "once" and "in His blood" along with that the Bible speaks of the fallacy of Christ having to offer His blood over and over.
He is the mediator of the New Covenant between man and God, because He was both and good represent both sides.
What I have seen here is that you and others want to dismantle the truth that Jesus mediated a new covenant once for all time in His blood, and you want to promote the idea, that he did not really do it once for all time in His blood.
But the same passage says there IS one God. So you cannot have presently One God without One Mediator. You put yourself into a GIANT PICKLE with no escape.

oops.............................................................................

I didn't mean for you to trip over your own reasoning and logic. And I see you ran away from showing biblical hermeneutics with 1 Timothy 2:5 which you claimed you were capable of showing us seth.

Major failure once again. All you did was reason away that He is our Mediator without demonstrating that from the text.

EVERYONE and I mean EVERYONE on this forum can clearly see that EXCEPT YOU.

hope this helps !!!
 
Top