Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped
As eye-rolling as this sounds, I think what's at the core of this issue is literally "what do you mean by 'God'?"
For me, it's nonsensical to say, "Jesus is God but He's not God the Father", if the word "God" both times in that sentence means exactly the same thing. It's totally self-contradictory, and creation itself shows us God is not a contradictory being. It is true that Jesus repeatedly says "there is one God, the Father, etc....." Okay then, so what does it mean when we seemingly contradict Jesus's own words and say Jesus is God?
This, again, is what I was trying to get at with "God-kind", or even family. For example, Elohim, as we know, is a plural construct. Other words that end in "-im" like Nephilim, etc.....refer to a whole race of beings. I have no problem saying Jesus is divine, eternal, of God-kind, of the divine family,or an eternal race, etc. As such, Jesus being the eternal Word of God makes perfect sense. His being the I Am makes sense, because He thus always was/is/will be. His being slain before the foundation of the world, all things coming into being through Him, etc.... makes sense because He's God-kind and thus shares all those eternal attributes of God the Father.
When BJB says "Jesus is not God" and when Ohio and Unto say "Jesus IS God"......I'm serious here.....what does each of you mean by "God"?
When there is "one God, the Father" and we say "Jesus is God but not God the Father".....what do we actually mean by that last sentence? What does "God" mean to you there?
|
Paul, in 1 Cor 8 is talking about idols and the religious situation in Corinth that the believers have to deal with. PAUL says, not boxjobox that to us there is but ONE GOD THE FATHER. Why is there such a need to stumble over this? If Paul is making such a definitive statement of Christian belief, let’s accept it as a main point of the foundational belief of Paul and the Church.
Jesus is the Christ, the son of the Living God. God made him Lord and Christ. This is what is preached, taught, believed by the foundational Church. And the scripture testifies to this which God has done. It was a new thing, that was well talked about and explained both to the Jews and the gentiles, because this was the new news- the gospel. If there was new news that a man is God, that God is triune, that God is three people, that God became a man, I’m sorry, but it’s not proclaimed in my NT scripture. Something that profound- so different than what the Jews and the gentiles knew, would HAVE TO BE preached, taught, explained on every page of the NT. Is it logical to say it was taught, it just didn’t make it into the scripture? Come now!
But it was developed, preached, taught, sung written about starting in the 3rd to 5th century and practiced for 1500 years after. (After so many were tortured and murdered who did not accept it). I mean, look at it historically, and stop trying to bend scripture to conform to it. Now. What did Jesus tell the church in Pergemum and Thyatira?