The orthodox doctrine is logically impossible. As Huston Smith, scholar of comparative religion, points out, it would not have been logically impossible if the creed said that Jesus was somewhat divine and somewhat human. But this is expressly what the creed denies. For orthodox Christians, Jesus cannot possess only some human qualities; he must possess all. He must be fully human. At the same time, he cannot possess only some divine qualities; he must have all. He must be fully divine. This is impossible because to be fully divine means one has to be free of human limitations. If he has only one human limitation then he is not God. But according to creed he has every human limitation. How, then, can he be God? Huston Smith calls this a blatant contradiction. In his book The World’s Religions, he writes:
We may begin with the doctrine of the Incarnation, which took several centuries to fix into place. Holding as it does that in Christ God assumed a human body, it affirms that Christ was God-Man; simultaneously both fully God and fully man. To say that such a contention is paradoxical seems a charitable way to put the matter — it looks more like a blatant contradiction. If the doctrine held that Christ was half human and half divine, or that he was divine in certain respects, while being human in others, our minds would not balk. (The World’s Religions, p. 340).
Jesus taught the mankind to pray to the Father, our Creator, not to himself. In fact, he did not mention himself in any way, nor did he indicate that we should pray in his name. His instructions were very specific, we are to pray to God alone.
Oh really?
-- New American Standard
John 14:14 "If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it.
-- New Jerusalem
John 14:14 If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it.
-- New American
John 14:14 If you ask anything of me in my name, I will do it.
-- New Revised Standard
John 14:14 If in my name you ask me for anything, I will do it.
The result of human errors and the misinterpretation of the Bible leads many Christians to believe that Jesus is God. The first verse of John is very misleading in explaining the word of God. “In the beginning was the Word; The Word was in God's presence, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). An objective reading of this verse raises the question: If the “Word” was in “God's presence”, how could it be God? When something is in your presence, it has to be, by definition, separate from you. The logical understanding of these lines is that the “Word” originates from God, or represents God. In addition, “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us, and we have seen his glory: the glory of an only son coming from the Father filled with enduring love” (John 1:14). This verse makes a clear distinction between the Word and the Father. In no way does it argue for the divinity of Jesus. The Word comes from God, and thus reflects the glory of the Creator. This understanding is confirmed by the fact that throughout the Gospels, Jesus emphasizes that he did not speak on his own, that God told him what to say. This clearly indicates that Jesus delivered the Word of God, not that he was God. Here is an illustration, “whatever I say is spoken just as he instructed me" (John 12:44-50). In John 8:40, Jesus describes himself as "a man who has told you the truth which I have heard from God”. Thus again we see that Jesus delivered the Word of God.
"Human errors and the misinterpretation of the Bible" leading Christians to believe Jesus is God? No, it is just reading the clear words of Scripture and believing them. Let's read it again:
John 1:
1. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2. He was in the beginning with God.
3. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.
4. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.
5. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
6. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John [the Baptist].
7. This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe.
8. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
9. That was the true Light which gives light to every man who comes into the world.
10. He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him.
11. He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him.
12. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name:
13. who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
14. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
The subject of those verses is THE WORD. V. 14 tells us WHO this WORD is. The only one it could be referring to ("the only begotten of the Father") is Christ, pre-incarnate and incarnate. As the pre-incarnate Word of God, He was in the beginning and He was WITH God and He WAS GOD (v. 1). He created all things and nothing was created without Him (v. 2, 10).
Let me copy and paste here part of a prior post:
The Greek word for "God" used in the second clause of the verse (“and the Word was with God”) is the definite form ho theos, meaning ‘The God’. However, in the third clause (“and the Word was God”), the definite article "ho" (=the) is missing, so the Greek word used for ‘God’ is the indefinite form theos, which means ‘'God". There are rules of Greek grammar that explain that. Let me see if I can articulate them.
First, in the Greek language, there is no indefinite article, like "a". For a sentence to be translated with an "a" the translator may look for the definite article "the" or "ho" and if none is there, he might render it, for example, "boy" or "a boy" depending on the context; he would not render it "the boy".
Secondly, in the third clause of John 1:1, the word order in the original Greek is literally, "and God was the Word" But the subject of the entire verse is "the Word" not God. So to make it clear that "the Word" is the subject, there can be no "the" before "God" or it would be uncertain what the subject of the clause is and what the predicate nominative is. That is, it would be literally, "and the God was the Word." In that case God and Word would be interchangeable and we would not know which is the subject and which is the predicate nominative. The definite article "the" is left out before "God" not so a translator would render it "a God" or "a god" but so that we know "the Word" is the subject and "God" is the predicate nominative.
So, if "the Word" is the subject and "God" is the predicate nominative, what does the clause mean when it says, "and the Word was God"? The use of the definite article and "God" in the second clause, "and the Word was with [the] God" shows the distinction of persons, one WITH the other---two persons, the Word (Jesus before the incarnation) and the Father.
But in the third clause, "the Word was God," the word "God" is a descriptive noun telling us not WHO the Word is, but WHAT the Word is. He is GOD or DEITY, as to His essence, substance or nature. He is not the Father, with whom He is, but He is the same as the Father in terms of His essence, substance or nature. He is fully God or Deity, as the Father is, but He is not the Father. He is a separate personage, equal to the Father in His essence, substance or nature. But since that essence, substance, or nature is the SAME for both the Father and the Word, there are not TWO Gods, but ONE.
Consequently, John 1:1, can accurately be translated, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
Now, it is true that when the Word was made flesh, Jesus humbly submitted Himself totally to the Father's will---said what the Father wanted Him to say, did what the Father wanted Him to do, and died when the Father wanted Him to die:
Phil 2:
5. Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus,
6. who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,
7. but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a servant, and coming in the likeness of men.
8. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.
9. Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name,
10. that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth,
11. and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
I am just trying to be faithful to the Word of God. Paul writing to Christians at Rome said in
Romans 8 (RSV):
8. and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
9. But you are not in the flesh, you are in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Any one who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.
If you belong to Christ, you have the Spirit of Christ dwelling in you. "Any one who does not have the Spirit of Christ does NOT belong to Him." So if you don't belong to Christ, you don't have His Spirit dwelling in you. Simple enough. What spirit do you think dwells in you? Christ's?
Peace
Christ had the spirit of God within him, so that means i also have it as God is the Spirit! - (See verses provided previously)
Think we'll stop debating as you won't seem to see sense!
Ėk Gusā Alhu Mėrā
The One Lord, the Lord of the World, is my God Allah.
Dhan Guru Arjan Dev Mahraaj Ji!
Kal Meh Bėḏ Atharbaṇ Hū Nā Kẖuḏā Alhu Bẖa.
In the Dark Age of Kali Yuga, the Atharva Veda became prominent; Allah became the Name of God.
Originally Posted by AvarAllahNoor
Jesus taught the mankind to pray to the Father, our Creator, not to himself. In fact, he did not mention himself in any way, nor did he indicate that we should pray in his name. His instructions were very specific, we are to pray to God alone.
Originally Posted by Phil12123 Oh really?
-- New American Standard
John 14:14 "If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it.
-- New Jerusalem
John 14:14 If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it.
-- New American
John 14:14 If you ask anything of me in my name, I will do it.
-- New Revised Standard
John 14:14 If in my name you ask me for anything, I will do it.
Peace
format_quote Originally Posted by AvarAllahNoor
That's because he was a Prophet, and God was working via him.
Or, because HE is God and can hear and answer prayer.
From the above quote of what you first wrote, then my answer, then your answer, I have a question for you. Are you ever humble enough to EVER admit you're wrong? On this Board, I have been shown to be wrong and I owned up. I admitted it. I'm not perfect and obviously imperfect people are sometimes wrong. But HUMBLE IMPERFECT PEOPLE at least admit it when they're wrong. And I don't say that because I'm proud of my humility, but as a teaching point, or an example. As a further example, I consider Woodrow to be a humble guy. When I make a valid point, he admits it. What about you?
"Human errors and the misinterpretation of the Bible" leading Christians to believe Jesus is God? No, it is just reading the clear words of Scripture and believing them. Let's read it again:
John 1:
1. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2. He was in the beginning with God.
3. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.
4. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.
5. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
6. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John [the Baptist].
7. This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe.
8. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
9. That was the true Light which gives light to every man who comes into the world.
10. He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him.
11. He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him.
12. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name:
13. who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
14. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
EDIT
......
Interesting, one must assess the possible meaning of the word "Logos", and History of the above statement that appears in the biginning of John 1.
Before st John adopted it has been used by the greek and the jews to convey certain religiouse teaching.
"It reappears in the writings of the Stoics, and it is especially by them that this theory is developed. God, according to them, "did not make the world as an artisan does his work, but it is by wholly penetrating all matter that He is the demiurge of the universe" (Galen, "De qual. incorp." in "Fr. Stoic.", ed. von Arnim, II, 6); He penetrates the world "as honey does the honeycomb" (Tertullian, "Adv. Hermogenem", 44), this God so intimately mingled with the world is fire or ignited air; inasmuch as He is the principle controlling the universe, He is called Logos; and inasmuch as He IS the germ from which all else develops, He is called the seminal Logos (logos spermatikos). This Logos is at the same time a force and a law, an irresistible force which bears along the entire world and all creatures to a common end, an inevitable and holy law from which nothing can withdraw itself, and which every reasonable man should follow willingly (Cleanthus, "Hymn to Zeus" in "Fr. Stoic." I, 527-cf. 537). Conformably to their exegetical habits, the Stoics made of the different gods personifications of the Logos, e. g. of Zeus and above all of Hermes." [1]
Also to note the Logos is not conceived of as nature or immanent necessity, but as an intermediary agent by which the transcendent God governs the world. This conception appears in Plutarch, especially in his "Isis and Osiris"; from an early date in the first century of the Christian era, it influenced profoundly the Jewish philosopher Philo. [1]
Philo
Philo had speculated as to the Logos; but their works are known only through the rare fragments which Christian authors and Philo himself have preserved. Philo alone is fully known to us, his writings are as extensive as those of Plato or Cicero, and throw light on every aspect of his doctrine; from him we can best learn the theory of the Logos, as developed by Alexandrian Judaism. The character of his teaching is as manifold as its sources:
sometimes, influenced by Jewish tradition, Philo represents the Logos as the creative Word of God ("De Sacrific. Ab. et Cain"; cf. "De Somniis", I 182; "De Opif. Mundi", 13);
at other times he describes it as the revealer of God, symbolized in Scripture by the angel of Jahveh ("De Somniis", I, 228-39, "De Cherub.", 3; "De Fuga", 5; "Quis rer. divin. haeres sit", 201-205).
Oftener again he accepts the language of Hellenic speculation; the Logos is then, after a Platonistic concept, the sum total of ideas and the intelligible world ("De Opif. Mundi", 24, 25; "Leg. Alleg.", I, 19; III, 96),
or, agreeably to the Stoic theory, the power that upholds the world, the bond that assures its cohesion, the law that determines its development ("De Fuga", 110; "De Plantat. Noe," 8-10; "Quis rer. divin. haeres sit", 188, 217; "Quod Deus sit immut.", 176; "De Opif. Mundi", 143).
Throughout so many diverse concepts may be recognized a fundamental doctrine: the Logos is an intermediary between God and the world; through it God created the world and governs it; through it also men know God and pray to Him ("De Cherub.", 125; "Quis rerum divin. haeres sit", 205-06.) In three passages the Logos is called God ("Leg. Alleg.", III, 207; "De Somniis", I, 229; "In Gen.", II, 62, cited by Eusebius, "Praep. Ev.", VII, 13); but, as Philo himself explains in one of these texts (De Somniis), it is an improper appellation and wrongly employed, and he uses it only because he is led into it by the Sacred Text which he comments upon. Moreover, Philo does not regard the Logos as a person; it is an idea, a power, and, though occasionally identified with the angels of the Bible, this is by symbolic personification.
You may wan't to read the whole article, to see the different doctrinal anology of the Word Logos.
Yes Jesus prayed and in doing so taught His disciples how to pray.
Matthew 6:9-13
Pray then like this: Our Father who art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name.
Thy kingdom come.
Thy will be done,
On earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread;
And forgive us our debts,
As we also have forgiven our debtors;
And lead us not into temptation,
But deliver us from evil.
is that all...how he prayed. (I m full of surprised)
i m interested to discuss here the word Our Father
Matthew 6:9-13
Pray then like this: Our Father who art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name.
Our Father means all human's father right
This Our Father/GOD also the Father of Jesus/Isha(Pbuh) according to the Bible.
Both Human and Jesus have the same Father
In that sense we all are son of GOD (prove me wrong)
Jesus = Son of God = All human being (prove me wrong)
So how come Jesus = creator of human being/GOD
I find some similarity in Muslim and others believe that is
Jesus (pbuh)= Created by God= all Human
I wonder people in that ancient time
May used to say Son of God instead of created by GOD (who knows)
like the Bible most of the time God is named as a Father.
But Jesus (pbuh) is not the same as ordinary human
Bcoz he was Prophet
He did had some super human activities/miracles
what other prophets also had.
a very interesting question arise here
Jesus is God in ur sense right than
Why Jesus did never told anyone to Worship him.
Jesus/Isha (pbuh) not only make other learned how to pray but also he pray by alone privately. It mention lot of time in the Bible. Let discuss it.
How did Jesus/Isha (pbuh) Pray:
The Gospels contain many references to Jesus praying, including:
Matthew 14:23: Jesus went up on the mountain by himself to pray.
Matthew 26:36-44: Jesus went with three disciples, left them behind and went further to pray alone. This is the well known passage in which his disciples fell asleep at Gethsemane, just before Jesus' arrest and execution.
Mark 1:35: Jesus is went to a solitary place to pray.
Luke 3:21: This passage describes how Jesus was baptized and was in prayer when the Holy Ghost descended. Unfortunately, this passage does not describe how and where Jesus was praying.
Luke 5:16: Jesus is described as often going to lonely places to pray by himself
Luke 6:12: Jesus withdrew to a mountainside to pray. Verse 13 implies that he was alone at the time.
Luke 9:19: Jesus was praying alone, with his disciples in the vicinity.
Luke 22:41-43: Jesus withdrew from his disciples "about a stone's throw" to pray by himself.
John 16, 17: These chapters are ambiguous about the circumstances of Jesus' prayer just before his arrest. He first talked to his disciples; then he prayed, then he went with his disciples across the Kidron valley. It is not clear where the disciples were situated when Jesus prayed. But if he was consistent with the pattern described in other passages, he would have left the disciples behind, and prayed in private.
Don’t say he pray in order make other learned. He prays like others pray to God.
If Jesus is God than why he need to Pray/submitting to his Father/God ()
That is indeed shocking ... what no opulent church with stain gla s s windows and lots of pretty candles and extravagant robes and huge hats to the heads of the ordained and golden canes, organs and choirs chanting? I am shocked.... Jesus (PBUH) must have gotten it all wrong since so many Christians have to be right...
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
Or, because HE is God and can hear and answer prayer.
From the above quote of what you first wrote, then my answer, then your answer, I have a question for you. Are you ever humble enough to EVER admit you're wrong? On this Board, I have been shown to be wrong and I owned up. I admitted it. I'm not perfect and obviously imperfect people are sometimes wrong. But HUMBLE IMPERFECT PEOPLE at least admit it when they're wrong. And I don't say that because I'm proud of my humility, but as a teaching point, or an example. As a further example, I consider Woodrow to be a humble guy. When I make a valid point, he admits it. What about you?
Peace
Yes, i can admit i'm wrong, when i am that is! I don't refute anything in the Bible, but i find it difficult to fathom that God would appear on earth in human form, when other main religions claim (and the bible) that God is not born. So i'm sure you'd appreciate that this is a very difficult statement just to accept without questioning, no?
Also Jesus on the cross made the following statement 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?' Why would he say this to God if he was God himself? Is he talking to himself? You see what i'm aiming at? As i've said before, i'm not knocking your faith just trying to learn more about it!
Ėk Gusā Alhu Mėrā
The One Lord, the Lord of the World, is my God Allah.
Dhan Guru Arjan Dev Mahraaj Ji!
Kal Meh Bėḏ Atharbaṇ Hū Nā Kẖuḏā Alhu Bẖa.
In the Dark Age of Kali Yuga, the Atharva Veda became prominent; Allah became the Name of God.
God and Man have opposite properties, such as one is All Knowing whilst the otherone isnt, and therefore one cannot be 100% of both simultaneously.
If One is 100% man then he cannot at the same time be 100% Banana, 100% Lion, 100% Angel or of course 100% God, and vice versa. I cannot be 100% of both the opposites. If the entitiy has even 1% of Man then he can only be 99% of God. The "Hypostatic Unity" of Jesus of Christianity results in such logical contradictions.
But Christians would give the explanation that these cannot be understood by human mind and limitations, if we cant even understand the basic CONCEPT of god by elementary logic then it only leaves room for Blind Faith, and whats a point in talking about God if we cannot even comprehend the basic concept, such as his BASIC nature?
Also Jesus on the cross made the following statement 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?' Why would he say this to God if he was God himself? Is he talking to himself? You see what i'm aiming at?
Could it be that i've found the flaw in what you claim Phil12123?? As you've not answered my question!
Ėk Gusā Alhu Mėrā
The One Lord, the Lord of the World, is my God Allah.
Dhan Guru Arjan Dev Mahraaj Ji!
Kal Meh Bėḏ Atharbaṇ Hū Nā Kẖuḏā Alhu Bẖa.
In the Dark Age of Kali Yuga, the Atharva Veda became prominent; Allah became the Name of God.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Quote
)
)
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks