Jesus is 100% God and 100% man at the same time

[MoreCoffee]

and if God then satan has a right to say that it wasnt fair because despite your previous post God is good and cannot sin and if Jesus had accepted any of the temptations He would have sinned so if God cannot sin then that wasnt a very fair test was it

What creature has a right to dispute God? While it is true that God allows men dispute with him [SUP]Gen 18:22-33[/SUP] no one has a right to do so. So if the devil wants to dispute with God then he may be allowed to but he would have no right to dispute. The truth is that Jesus is unlike any man living under sin because Jesus never sinned and was never under condemnation as a sinner yet all men (and women) are under condemnation [SUP]Romans 3:9-20[/SUP]. Thus if fair means that Jesus has to be under sin to meet some standard for fairness then redemption is not fair but I do not believe that any fairness like that matters. Jesus is God manifest in the flesh [SUP]Acts 20:28; Romans 9:5[/SUP] and not a sinner.

 

[Sword7]

He was both but He also laid aside all His position and power in order to be our perfect sacrifice as man, if not then He did nothing as God cannot be tempted but man and can be and we know that Jesus was tempted

well... IMO... He did not lay aside His Divinity but merely all the privileges of such. I suspect that's what you mean, Bill? Jesus was ALWAYS fully GOD and always fully man: 100% both, all the time.

does the scripture state that exactly ? or does your denomination states that exactly ?

I wonder if any one will go back and address the questions posed on the topic by means of discussion ,rather then rush in with defense of a phrase coined by mere men .
people would not discuss an issue in this manner if they sat across the room , they would allow for tone and thoughtful reflections as they offer one another a second hot beverage or perhaps crackers and cheese .

 

[psalms 91]

Yes Josiah that is exactly what is meant as I am sure our friend knows. As I said it gets tiresome does it not

 

[Pedrito]

Pedrito finds it of interest that in response to Sword7's statements in Post #274 on Page 28:
“We agree only that it is what man has coined as a phrase.
We agree he was 100 percent man and is now returned to the father .
But was he at all times in his flesh 100%God ... ?”,

a statement was made in Post #276 on Page 28:
“If you deny that Jesus was at some point NOT God then you do not agree with the truth of the trinity and should not be posting in the Christian Theology or Christian Debate forums here on the site. Our statement of faith is the Nicene creed.”

Perhaps Pedrito is a little sensitive, but he finds that response to contain a degree of intimidation.

The original Nicene Creed (as formulated at Nicaea in 325AD) says of the “one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God”: “Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man;”

The so-called “Nicene Creed” (as formulated at Constantinople in 381AD) says of the “one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God”: “Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man;”

Both creeds say he was made man. They say nothing about his remaining 100% God at the same time.

In fact, the “100% God and 100% man at the same time” as it is now explained, did not become official church doctrine until the Council of Chalcedon in 451AD.

So to accuse Sword7 of non-adherence to the “Nicene Creed” of 381AD, because he questions a doctrine that was not officially formulated until 451AD, seems somewhat artificial.

Does it not?

 

[Lamb]

If you wish to discuss the site rules formed by the site owner then please begin a thread in the Members Admin Center. This thread is not suitable for that discussion. Thank you

 

[atpollard]

Let me ask you this, when tempted was He God? If so how was He tempted when it says that God cannot be tempted, also did He redeem man or God?

Hopefully, it isn't too late for me to take a shot at this.

Prior to MY salvation, I had a sin nature (fallen nature, Adamic curse, flesh ... take your pick of your favorite phrase) and no Holy Spirit dwelling within me (because MY hour had not yet come for God's grace to be revealed). Thus when I was tempted, I was physically able to choose to do either sin or the law. I can assure you that even at my worst, I knew right from wrong. Never was I a sociopath. Yet without exception, I chose to follow my fallen nature and freely chose sin. It is a sad truth that people will act according to their true nature. Even when I appeared to do 'good', make no mistake, it was sin. I was acting out of carefully planned 'motivated self interest' to achieve a desired end that was not to honor God.

After MY salvation, when I finally UNDERSTOOD the gospel and was transformed and obtained the promised 'new heart of flesh' and the 'deposit guaranteeing my inheritance' (the Holy Spirit), I was still faced with temptations to sin but now I have two warring natures (old and new) that present me with the choice, the real choice, to yield to temptation (as I once did 100% of the time) or to resist temptation and call on God to deliver me (an option now available to me that was once not in my arsenal of weapons). So that is me. You can decide if any of that applies to you.


Let's talk about Jesus.

Hebrews 2:14-18 [NIV]
Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death. For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants. For this reason he had to be made like them, fully human in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.

Jesus became a man in order that he might suffer as men suffer and be tempted as men are tempted. Jesus became one of us for many reasons, too many for this post to list, but he clearly became one of us.


John 1:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Yet Jesus (the eternal Word) came among us "FULL OF GRACE AND TRUTH". Who do you know that is FULL of grace and truth? Who do you know that has their own innate GLORY?
Remember the lesson that I shared from my life about how I struggled with sin both before and after I believed and confessed (Romans 10:9) ... because of the measure of GRACE that I had received. Jesus was FULL OF GRACE. Thus as a man, his flesh could be hurt and tempted. I am reminded of the temptation in the Garden of Gethsemane, where the man Jesus was tempted and distressed to the point of sweating blood! Yet just as the old me had no choice but to ultimately be true to my (fallen) nature, Jesus had no choice but to ultimately be true to his nature ... his Divine nature.

So just as fallen man is tempted and offered the choice between good and evil, but their true nature will cause them to always choose evil (fallen man is incapable of choosing good) [Ephesians 2:1-3], so the Word become flesh is tempted and offered the choice between good and evil.

John 14:6-11 [NIV]
Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really know me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”

Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.”

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’? Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the works themselves.

Even on the Earth, the bond of unity between God the Father and God the Son was unbroken. To see Jesus WAS to see God. Thus Jesus could be tempted, but he could not violate his nature any more than we could violate our natures. Jesus was tempted and would always choose good over evil. It is part of his non-fallen, incorruptible Divine nature.

Thank you for letting me play.

 

[user1234]

Thanks, atpollard !!!

 

[Josiah]

In fact, the “100% God and 100% man at the same time” as it is now explained, did not become official church doctrine until the Council of Chalcedon in 451AD.

It was OFFICIALLY, FORMALLY, UNIVERSALLY proclaimed there, but it's present in the Nicene Creed, too:


We believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered death and was buried,
and rose again on the third day
in accordance with the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory
to judge the living and the dead
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.

We believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic church.
I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins
and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.



Note the embolden. Note that it says all creation is through JESUS (the He goes back to Jesus, not Father... the second paragraph is about Jesus, the first being about the Father). The whole point of the second paragraph is that Jesus is BOTH God AND man - both, inseparable. Now, I agree - the Council of Chalcedon clarified all this better, articulated the ancient faith more clearly, but this critical teaching was there from the start.



.

 

[Pedrito]

In Post #299 on Page 30, MoreCoffee stated:

Didn't Jesus say "you shall not tempt the Lord your God"? Matt 4:7 He was quoting the Law Deut 6:16.

The context of Matthew 4:7 is enlightening.
Matthew 4:5-7:
“5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,
6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.”

Satan tells Jesus to take a normally fatal plunge because God will send angels to break his fall.

Jesus says he is not prepared to tempt God in that way.

How do we know that that is the correct explanation?

Because Satan acknowledged Jesus to be the Son of God (in line with other Scripture). Satan did not state that Jesus would be able to break his own fall because he was God.

The temptation was therefore for Jesus to knowingly place himself in a position of unnecessary danger, and force God to act to save him.

 

[Pedrito]

MoreCoffee made an interesting point about prophecy in Post #248 on Page 25. He included the passage Deuteronomy 18:20-22:
“20 The prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’
21 And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?’— 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.”

Paul considered himself to have the power of prophecy. He delivered pronouncements concerning the future – pronouncements that he considered had been given to him by the Spirit of God, as had the prophets of old been given their prophecies.

In 1 Timothy 4:3, Paul, speaking of a particular group of people that would arise in the future and depart from the faith (the Greek word ὕστερος husterois, is often more correctly translated as "later" and gives "in later times" as opposed to "in the latter times"), Paul says that one identifying characteristic of that then-future group would be "forbidding to marry".

Looking back, should we consider Paul to be a false prophet, or did his prophecy actually find fulfilment?”

 

[MoreCoffee]

Gnostic sects forbid their members to marry. That happened within saint John's lifetime.

 

[Josiah]

In fact, the “100% God and 100% man at the same time” as it is now explained, did not become official church doctrine until the Council of Chalcedon in 451AD.

Okay....

non-adherence to the “Nicene Creed” of 381AD, because he questions a doctrine that was not officially formulated until 451AD, seems somewhat artificial.

Well..... I think the concept was WELL embraced in 325 and 381 and certainly seems implied by the Creed - but I don't disagree with you that it was not explicitly and officially and dogmatically stated until Chalcedon. Still, IMO, 451 was kinda a long time ago. And it was officially and ecumentically and universally accepted, embraced and proclaimed among Christians for a pretty long time.



A blessed Lent....



- Josiah

 

[Pedrito]

MoreCoffee offered, regarding Paul's prophecy that there would be an Christian group departing from the truth and characterised by "forbidding to marry" (Post #311 on Page 32):
“Gnostic sects forbid their members to marry. That happened within saint John's lifetime.”

Indeed. But what further clarification did Paul give in the rest of 1 Timothy 4:3?
“and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.”

So now Paul has pinponted an organisation which, among other things, forbid marriage among certain members, and forbids the consumption of certain foods. (Paul did not state the conditions under which the consumption would be forbidden.)

One could be forgiven for associating Paul's prophetic warning with forbidding the consumption of meat on Fridays, and the dietary prohibitions associated with Lent (none of which were associated with the apostolic way in any way).

And while it is true that in the Jewish culture general fasting was practiced, and also among the apostolic church, the when and how and if, was up to the individual.

==============================================================================================

Pedrito begs forgiveness for straying a little off topic. He was however, following a train of thought originally prompted by MoreCoffee.

Pedrito’s future posts will be on target with respect to the original topic. Unless someone else chooses to extend this side thread with further posts. Pedrito might claim indulgence to respond in that case. (And maybe throw in some more prophetic evidence, if so.)

 

[MoreCoffee]

MoreCoffee offered, regarding Paul's prophecy that there would be an Christian group departing from the truth and characterised by "forbidding to marry" (Post #311 on Page 32):
“Gnostic sects forbid their members to marry. That happened within saint John's lifetime.”

Indeed. But what further clarification did Paul give in the rest of 1 Timothy 4:3?
“and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.”

So now Paul has pinponted an organisation which, among other things, forbid marriage among certain members, and forbids the consumption of certain foods. (Paul did not state the conditions under which the consumption would be forbidden.)

One could be forgiven for associating Paul's prophetic warning with forbidding the consumption of meat on Fridays, and the dietary prohibitions associated with Lent (none of which were associated with the apostolic way in any way).

And while it is true that in the Jewish culture general fasting was practiced, and also among the apostolic church, the when and how and if, was up to the individual.

==============================================================================================

Pedrito begs forgiveness for straying a little off topic. He was however, following a train of thought originally prompted by MoreCoffee.

Pedrito’s future posts will be on target with respect to the original topic. Unless someone else chooses to extend this side thread with further posts. Pedrito might claim indulgence to respond in that case. (And maybe throw in some more prophetic evidence, if so.)

Some Gnostic sects required their members to adhere to strict rules regarding diet. Jews did too. In fact one might think that the main dietary restriction advocating group in apostolic times were the Jews.

 

[popsthebuilder]

I'm sorry to keep asking the same question and really do mean no disrespect towards the beliefs of any but I'm still wondering why an eternal omnipotent omniscient benevolent creator GOD would need to manifest itself in utter fullness to be a blood sacrifice to itself in order for people to go about sinning and believing they are safe and have eternal blissful life. I've asked around here and other forums and none can logically answer this question because the premise itself is illogical.

It would be very much appreciated if someone could actually give a real, in scripted, logical answer.

Thanks in advance.

As always;

peace

faith in selfless unity for good

 

[MoreCoffee]

I'm sorry to keep asking the same question and really do mean no disrespect towards the beliefs of any but I'm still wondering why an eternal omnipotent omniscient benevolent creator GOD would need to manifest itself in utter fullness to be a blood sacrifice to itself in order for people to go about sinning and believing they are safe and have eternal blissful life. I've asked around here and other forums and none can logically answer this question because the premise itself is illogical.

It would be very much appreciated if someone could actually give a real, in scripted, logical answer.

Thanks in advance.

As always;

peace

faith in selfless unity for good

What makes you think that Jesus was a sacrifice?

 

[popsthebuilder]

What makes you think that Jesus was a sacrifice?

His self sacrifice and crusifiction is sort of noted within our Bible, and other sacred texts as well. Not to mention; a vast majority of "Christians" seem to gravitate around the notion of the blood of Christ which was spilt.

peace morecoffee. I know we haven't seen eye to eye in some time, but I do value your input and opinion.



faith in selfless unity for good

 

[Lamb]

I'm sorry to keep asking the same question and really do mean no disrespect towards the beliefs of any but I'm still wondering why an eternal omnipotent omniscient benevolent creator GOD would need to manifest itself in utter fullness to be a blood sacrifice to itself in order for people to go about sinning and believing they are safe and have eternal blissful life. I've asked around here and other forums and none can logically answer this question because the premise itself is illogical.

It would be very much appreciated if someone could actually give a real, in scripted, logical answer.

Thanks in advance.

As always;

peace

faith in selfless unity for good

The answer is because God is the only one who could save us. We cannot save ourselves by trying to live sinless lives since we can never be perfect enough. Adam and Eve fell and the consequences of that was to have "death" and Jesus Himself chose to die so we wouldn't have to. His death on the cross atoned for our sins. Those who do not repent of their sins do not receive the forgiveness won at the cross. Rejecting the Savior means damnation.

As believers we try to live our lives as God wants us but we do mess up. Thankfully God's forgiveness is there. Those believers who willfully sin are warned that they could fall from faith, turning away from the Savior and His forgiveness because they think they don't need it. No one advocates living a sinful life. But we have to realize that we are still in these human bodies and they do sin. The Holy Spirit guides us into the truth of our sin and leads us to repentance bringing us to faith that we are forgiven.

 

[MoreCoffee]

His self sacrifice and crusifiction is sort of noted within our Bible, and other sacred texts as well. Not to mention; a vast majority of "Christians" seem to gravitate around the notion of the blood of Christ which was spilt.
peace morecoffee. I know we haven't seen eye to eye in some time, but I do value your input and opinion.
faith in selfless unity for good

The same bible that says that Jesus is the lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world and that calls Christ our Passover implying that he is a sacrifice also says that he is God manifest in the flesh and that he is God. So that explains why Christians think of Jesus as God.

 

[popsthebuilder]

And yet none can answer my question

faith in selfless unity for good