Misunderstand by Jws and Protestants

[journeyman]

Rev. 20:9 which is at the end of the 1000 year rule of Christ we read that.......
"And they marched up over the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, but fire came down from heaven and consumed them,".

It's the end of His reign in mery over the unrepentant.

 

[journeyman]

You said..........
"The 1st resurrection is real by faith in Him and it's now, not later. That's all."

Just so that everyone is one the same page, the 1st Resurrection is in "Phases".

#1 was Jesus Christ Himself (the “first fruits,” 1 Corinthians 15:20),
#2 will be the resurrection of “the dead in Christ” at the Lord’s return (1 Thessalonians 4:16) = Rapture
#3 will be the resurrection of the martyrs at the end of the tribulation (Revelation 20:4).
#4 Old Testament saints will also be raised at the end of the tribulation, and they are also part of the first resurrection.

Jesus is the 1st resurrection. So when the Holy Spirit dwells in us we're resurrected "in Christ"

 

[Runningman]

Hi Runningman

I would contend that such an idea is also supported by Luke writing to us in the Acts of the Apostles this:

The God of our fathers raised up Jesus whom you murdered by hanging on a tree.
God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He has raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm: 'You are My Son, Today I have begotten You.'
let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole.

And Paul wrote to us this:

Paul, an apostle (not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised Him from the dead),
And more testimony from Paul on the matter:
that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

Now, I proclaim that I don't know the actual relationship between God and Jesus, beyond what they have each one said of the other. God says that Jesus is His Son. Jesus says that God is his Father. I'm good with that. If it must be that a born again believer must believe that Jesus is God, then I shall stand condemned, except that Jesus paid the price for my sin. And the only sin that is unforgiveable is to blaspheme God's Spirit. The Holy Spirit. I'm also pretty confident that if God demand that we believe that His Son is Him, then He would have made that point more clear to us. As it is, it doesn't really seem to be clear at all with all the disagreement on the issue.

I agree.

I mean no believer denies that Jesus is the Son of God.

It's a growing trend to deny the sonship of Jesus because being God's begotten Son is problematic to Jesus being an eternal being and is therefore a problem to Jesus being God in some theologies. You may be familiar with monogenés having a dual meaning in John 1:18; it can mean only begotten or unique. Well, there are those who will insist Jesus isn't the only begotten Son, but the unique Son. However, we do know clearly from Hebrews 1:5 that Jesus was begotten in the sense of being offspring at his resurrection as you point out above with Acts 13:33.

1 John 2
23Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father, but whoever confesses the Son has the Father as well.

But many seem to deny that Jesus is God. And I believe that's because it isn't some theological truth that God has made plain, even though the Scriptures declare that God has made such things plain to us.

I believe that this 'Jesus is God' dogma, which I honestly think has it's foundation with the Catholic fellowship, has been adopted and pounded into people for so long that some believe it to be true because denying it makes them anathema to a lot of the 'fellowship of the church'. But is it true or not?

God bless,
Ted

I am in the same boat as you it seems. I really have no horse in the race. I would actually be inclined to believe Jesus is God if it was a theological truth that God had made plain. As it stands, there is nothing explicit about Jesus being God in the Bible. The key to being a Christian is following what Jesus believed. He said he is a man with a God he called his Father, the only true God. Therefore my God will be Jesus' God.

 

[miamited]

Good morning Runningman

I am in the same boat as you it seems. I really have no horse in the race. I would actually be inclined to believe Jesus is God if it was a theological truth that God had made plain. As it stands, there is nothing explicit about Jesus being God in the Bible. The key to being a Christian is following what Jesus believed. He said he is a man with a God he called his Father, the only true God. Therefore my God will be Jesus' God.

Well, let me be clear that I'm not one to think that Jesus is only a man, either. I believe that there are three 'beings' that make up, what I refer to as the God head. I mean, it does seem clear that there were more than one personages involved in the creation event. God says, "Let us make man in our image". In the image of God He made man. But I'm not just a spirit being and so I know that I'm not made in the physical image of God. Nor do I think that I look physically like the Holy Spirit of God. It seems that physically we were made in the image of Jesus. Spiritually, however, is a different matter. But I have to understand that our spirit isn't really like God's Spirit, at least since sin entered the equation, or there wouldn't be this need for our spirit to be 'born again' as Jesus implies that we are by receiving God's Spirit within us.

So, I'll be the first to admit that I don't know all of the inter-relationship of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. But I do know that the Scriptures do show that there are three that give testimony of God. Jesus, the Spirit and the word. I've read the gospels. Jesus spent three years providing us his testimony concerning the Father. All that He has done and is doing and how He loves us and cares for us. I do know that the Spirit, Jesus tells us, is given to the believer to testify of both sin and righteousness in their life from the time that they trust in what Jesus has done and seek to repent of the sinful life that they have lived. And of course, I've read the Scriptures that give us the testimony of all of these things. So yes, there are three that God has provided to mankind to give us the testimony of who 'He' is.

I also find that there is fairly ample evidence that, at least Paul, considers that God and Jesus are separate in some way. And as has been discussed, John in his writing of the Revelation seems to make clear early on in the first couple of sentences that there is a God, who gave unto His Son, a testimony of the things that are to come that was handed down to John. I have also read where we are told that in the throne room of God, there is the God who is God, seated on a throne and there is Jesus, the lamb who was slain, laid out before Him who sits on the throne.

So, I'm fine with sticking with the fairly clear claim that God has explained to us in His testimony of the relationship between God and Jesus. God is Jesus' Father. Jesus is God's Son. The only begotten, and I understand that as Jesus, the man who walked among us, that begotten means that his, DNA for lack of a better understanding of the cellular level of his make up, came from God. And I'm fine with not going beyond that. I mean, we know that Joseph had no part in the zygote of Jesus that was implanted in Mary's womb. So, where did his maleness and the impregnation of a human egg come from. I contend that however that cellular level is manipulated by God, Jesus has God's whatever it is, that impregnated the egg that formed Jesus.

I'm also confident, that despite what some are trying to impress here, that our understanding this concept that 'Jesus is God', isn't a part of understanding that we have to have in order that we may take God up on His offer of eternal salvation. I mean, the Scriptures, especially in the new covenant writings make claim after claim after claim that salvation comes in believing the testimony of Jesus and accepting that his death for our sin has paid our penalty for our sin. That in accepting that, we then, through the power of the indwelling Spirit begin to live a life that daily should become more pleasing to God with a person who has a heart to be more like Jesus.

I also have to give pause, when I read that Jesus is the firstborn from the dead. And that we also shall be born from the dead. That we can be like the Son, but we can never be like the Father. I mean, people say, well you can't do all the miracles that Jesus did so we can't have that power. I'm sorry, but Jesus says that we'll do greater things than he has done if our faith is real. And as I have written before, the Scriptures also seem to make clear to us over and over that Jesus died for our sins. But I know that the Scriptures declare that God cannot die.

So, I plead ignorance in this matter of understanding the relationship of the three personages of the God head. But I don't think that the Scriptures make clear that Jesus is God. When Jesus tells Phillip that if he has seen him he has seen God, I believe that he meant God's nature. That through Jesus we see the mercy that God has for us. The love that God has for us. The compassion that God has for us. He is, as Paul declares, in his nature the exact representation of God. But he himself, the living entity Jesus, doesn't seem to be God.

Now, if as some say, that we must believe that to be saved, although I can't find anywhere that the Scriptures make that claim, then I guess I stand condemned.

Others will tell me, "Oh, we know that he is God because he stood before the Jewish leaders and said, "I am!" But then I read where Jesus clearly says that the words he speaks are not his words. That the very words he speaks, much as God promised Moses and Aaron, were given him to speak by God, the Father. So, I can see in this that Jesus is standing before these foolish Jewish counselors mocking him and seeking some sort of sign that he has the authority to do the things that he's doing, that just like with Moses and Aaron, God tells Jesus to say to them, "I am!" To let them know that the authority he has to do these things, comes from God. I mean, that was the question they asked him, "By whose authority do you do these things?" And God spoke through His Son and told them, "I God have given him that authority!"

And honestly, for me, there are another couple of dozen, at least, places in the Scriptures that seem to indicate that there is some physical separative difference between 'who' God is, and 'who' Jesus is. In the old covenant God clearly refers to the one He is sending to us as His servant. In the psalms we read that Jesus claims that God made him trust Him. Psalm 22, the very psalm that accounts all of the things that are happening to Jesus on the day that he was crucified before our very eyes we read: From birth I was cast on you; from my mother’s womb you have been my God. and again, Yet you brought me out of the womb; you made me trust in you, even at my mother’s breast. Peter writes this: Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!

So for those who believe that Jesus is God, I'm fine with that, it that's what the Scriptures have convicted them concerning that relationship. But to make some claim that we have to believe that to be saved. No, you can't find any place in the Scriptures that declares that is a necessary part of one's salvation.

That's my 2¢ worth.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Rodger]

Jesus is the 1st resurrection. So when the Holy Spirit dwells in us we're resurrected "in Christ"

Yes that is true.

That is referred to as "Positional Sanctification".

We are IN Christ so that spiritually we are where He is which is heaven, however we have not died yet or been Raptured so "Practical Sanctification" says that we are still here on the erath waiting for one of those events to claim us.

 

[Rodger]

Good morning Runningman


Well, let me be clear that I'm not one to think that Jesus is only a man, either. I believe that there are three 'beings' that make up, what I refer to as the God head. I mean, it does seem clear that there were more than one personages involved in the creation event. God says, "Let us make man in our image". In the image of God He made man. But I'm not just a spirit being and so I know that I'm not made in the physical image of God. Nor do I think that I look physically like the Holy Spirit of God. It seems that physically we were made in the image of Jesus. Spiritually, however, is a different matter. But I have to understand that our spirit isn't really like God's Spirit, at least since sin entered the equation, or there wouldn't be this need for our spirit to be 'born again' as Jesus implies that we are by receiving God's Spirit within us.

So, I'll be the first to admit that I don't know all of the inter-relationship of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. But I do know that the Scriptures do show that there are three that give testimony of God. Jesus, the Spirit and the word. I've read the gospels. Jesus spent three years providing us his testimony concerning the Father. All that He has done and is doing and how He loves us and cares for us. I do know that the Spirit, Jesus tells us, is given to the believer to testify of both sin and righteousness in their life from the time that they trust in what Jesus has done and seek to repent of the sinful life that they have lived. And of course, I've read the Scriptures that give us the testimony of all of these things. So yes, there are three that God has provided to mankind to give us the testimony of who 'He' is.

I also find that there is fairly ample evidence that, at least Paul, considers that God and Jesus are separate in some way. And as has been discussed, John in his writing of the Revelation seems to make clear early on in the first couple of sentences that there is a God, who gave unto His Son, a testimony of the things that are to come that was handed down to John. I have also read where we are told that in the throne room of God, there is the God who is God, seated on a throne and there is Jesus, the lamb who was slain, laid out before Him who sits on the throne.

So, I'm fine with sticking with the fairly clear relationship that God has explained to us in His testimony of the relationship between God and Jesus. God is Jesus' Father. Jesus is God's Son. The only begotten, and I understand that as Jesus, the man who walked among us, that begotten means that his, DNA for lack of a better understanding of the cellular level of his make up, came from God. And I'm fine with not going beyond that. I mean, we know that Joseph had no part in the zygote of Jesus that was implanted in Mary's womb. So, where did his maleness and the impregnation of a human egg come from. I contend that however that cellular level is manipulated by God, Jesus has God's whatever it is, that impregnated the egg that formed Jesus.

I'm also confident, that despite what some are trying to impress here, that our understanding this concept that 'Jesus is God', isn't a part of understanding that we have to have in order that we may take God up on His offer of eternal salvation. I mean, the Scriptures, especially in the new covenant writings make claim after claim after claim that salvation comes in believing the testimony of Jesus and accepting that his death for our sin has paid our penalty for our sin. That in accepting that, we then, through the power of the indwelling Spirit begin to live a life that daily should become more pleasing to God with a person who has a heart to be more like Jesus.

I also have to give pause, when I read that Jesus is the firstborn from the dead. And that we also shall be born from the dead. That we can be like the Son, but we can never be like the Father. I mean, people say, well you can't do all the miracles that Jesus did so we can't have that power. I'm sorry, but Jesus says that we'll do greater things than he has done if our faith is real. And as I have written before, the Scriptures also seem to make clear to us over and over that Jesus died for our sins. But I know that the Scriptures declare that God cannot die.

So, I plead ignorance in this matter of understanding the relationship of the three personages of the God head. But I don't think that the Scriptures make clear that Jesus is God. When Jesus tells Phillip that if he has seen him he has seen God, I believe that he meant God's nature. That through Jesus we see the mercy that God has for us. The love that God has for us. The compassion that God has for us. He is, as Paul declares, in his nature the exact representation of God. But he himself, the living entity Jesus, doesn't seem to be God.

Now, if as some say, that we must believe that to be saved, although I can't find anywhere that the Scriptures make that claim, then I guess I stand condemned.

Others will tell me, "Oh, we know that he is God because he stood before the Jewish leaders and said, "I am!" But then I read where Jesus clearly says that the words he speaks are not his words. That the very words he speaks, much as God promised Moses and Aaron, were given him to speak by God, the Father. So, I can see in this that Jesus is standing before these foolish Jewish counselors mocking him and seeking some sort of sign that he has the authority to do the things that he's doing, that just like with Moses and Aaron, God tells Jesus to say to them, "I am!" To let them know that the authority he has to do these things, comes from God.

And honestly, for me, there are another couple of dozen, at least, places in the Scriptures that seem to indicate that there is some physical separative difference between 'who' God is, and 'who' Jesus is. In the old covenant God clearly refers to the one He is sending to us as His servant. In the psalms we read that Jesus claims that God made him trust Him. Psalm 22, the very psalm that accounts all of the things that are happening to Jesus on the day that he was crucified before our very eyes we read: From birth I was cast on you; from my mother’s womb you have been my God. and again, Yet you brought me out of the womb; you made me trust in you, even at my mother’s breast. Peter writes this: Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!

So for those who believe that Jesus is God, I'm fine with that, it that's what the Scriptures have convicted them concerning that relationship. But to make some claim that we have to believe that to be saved. No, you can't find any place in the Scriptures that declares that is a necessary part of one's salvation.

That's my 2¢ worth.

God bless,
Ted

Allow me to say to all reading these posts that the two Bible doctrines that are the hardest to wrap your hear around is Predestination and The Trinity.

I have studied Scriptures for over 50 years and I confess that The Trinity is still a challenge. I also confess that the "word" is not in the Bible however....it is IMPLIED from Genesis to the Revelation.

Foe those who do not accept Jesus as God in the flesh, may I say and remind you that While still in the human flesh Jesus said, "I am the resurrection and the life" (John 11:25).
He also said that He was the "I AM" of the Bible (John 8:57-58; Exodus 3:14-15).
Hebrews 1:8-9 refers to both Jesus and the Father as God.
Matthew wrote before His birth that Jesus would be called "God with us" (Matthew 1:23).
Clearly Jesus was divine, God in the flesh.

Now----Why does it matter that Jesus is God in the flesh?​

It is important to identify Jesus as “God in the flesh” for many reasons, but the two primary reasons are that..... 1) He claimed to be God in the flesh and
2) His death on the cross and resurrection mean something different if He is God in the flesh.

For anyone denting or questioning the Divinity of Jesus please take time to consider
Hebrews 10:12–14 where the author says.....
"When Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified."

Friends, Nobody but God could fulfill the requirements of covering the whole world for their sins (Matthew 26:28).

What each person believes about Jesus' true identity determines his/her eternal destination—either accept His sacrifice, believing He is God in the flesh dying for you and rising in power back to life, and spend eternity with Him, or reject these ideas and spend eternity separated from Him.

 

[Rodger]

It's the end of His reign in mery over the unrepentant.

I am not sure what you mean......"in mery".

The unrepentant will be the children of the humans who survived the Tribulation and those children will have to accept Christ just as did their parents. As the Scriptures literally say....a multitude will not and they are destroyed by God when they attack Jerusalem.

That ends the 1000 year Rule of Christ and ushers in the New Heaven and New Earth.

 

[Rodger]

And Jesus was sinned against.

Good. Now, how was there "no law"?

That's what I've been saying.

That's what I said.

Then why are we having this back and forth?????

Romans 7:7-25 tells us that Man sinned even when there was NO law. The Law convicted man of his sin.
Sin before the Law was not a transgression in the sense of breaking the written words of the law; it was simply sinful humanity expressing its sinful nature: self-serving, hurtful, deceptive, and immoral.

 

[Rodger]

If an animal can do anything do remove sin, how much more a sinless man? God dying for our sins isn't the idea they were trying to get across. God is immortal and cannot die. It would seem that if God did not die in your theology, which He didn't, then the unfortunate outcome is you would still be in your sins.



Not exactly. According to Hebrews 5:7, Jesus cried out in tears to God asking to be saved from death, yet he endured the cross anyway. However, God still heard Jesus because of his reverence (his deep respect) for God. So what was Jesus saved from? He was resurrected from death.

Hebrews 5​

7During the days of Jesus’ earthly life, He offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the One who could save Him from death, and He was heard because of His reverence.​

Death held Jesus until God intervened. It will be the same for those who are counted worthy to take part in the resurrection of the dead at the end of this age.

Acts 2​

24But God raised Him from the dead, releasing Him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for Him to be held in its clutches.​

All of this means Jesus isn't God.

My dear friend.....an animal can not do anything whatsoever to remove a mans sin. The shed blood of that animal was received as a substitute to COVER that sins of the man. That is exactly what Jesus did in the Garden of Eden when He slew the animals for their skins to COVER Adam and Eve of their nakedness.

You then said.........
"God is immortal and cannot die. It would seem that if God did not die in your theology, which He didn't, then the unfortunate outcome is you would still be in your sins."

I think that by your own words we are beginning to get to the root of why you are a Universalist. You have not accepted the Lord Jesus Christ as your Saviour.!!!

You see, again by your own words, when a you reject the Lord Jesus Christ as the God of the Bible, you just choose to label Him as immoral. Non-believers have been known to accuse God of being hypocritical, selfish, arrogant, judgmental, hateful, and even homicidal—a moral monster so by your own words, you have not said anything new.

In order for you to say, “God is immoral,” you have to define morality in a way that justifies that claim. But what meaningful standard can exist, other than God, for moral principles? What is the basis of your claim??

May I say to you that OPINIONS are not accepted! Opinion is not enough—for the claim “God is an IMMORAL monster” to be meaningful, it has to be based on some unchanging standard. Ideas such as “suffering” or “human flourishing” are not objective. There is no rational reason for opinions or subjective ideas to be the source of moral reasoning.

Acts 2:24 KJV.........
“Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.”

The phrase “not possible” in this context emphasizes the impossibility of Jesus remaining dead. His resurrection was inevitable; it could not be otherwise. God’s power triumphed over death, and Jesus was raised to life.

So then in the LITERAL understanding of Acts 2:24, we see that it affirms that Jesus, though crucified and buried, could not be held captive by death. His resurrection demonstrates His divine nature and power, reinforcing the truth that Jesus is indeed God.

 

[journeyman]

I have to admitt that I am confused by your comments. They just do not make sense to me.

Leviticus 4:3 indicated only a blemish-free bull would be acceptable as a sacrificial offering to the Lord.

Only God can grant salvation, yet it is man alone who is guilty and must pay. No animal could truly be a sufficient sacrifice because it is people who are guilty (Hebrews 10:1-4). Man must die for his sin, yet man cannot save himself, only God can.

Jesus came to earth as fully God and fully man (John 1:14; 1 John 4:2). He did not lose nor give up His deity. As such, Jesus is the only sinless man (Hebrews 4:15) — perfectly blemish-free and wholly acceptable to God and able to sit down in the sovereign position at the right hand of God.

Yes. This is why all sinners repent for sinning against the Son, just as we sin against God. Jesus forgives the repentant.

 

[Rodger]

When is the first resurrection??

The 1st Resurrection is in several "Phases or Stages".

#1. Jesus was the 1st to rise from the dead.---” 1 Corinthians 15:20,

#2. The Rapture of believers--------------------"1 Thessalonians 4:16

#3. The resurrection of the martyrs at the end of the tribulation -----Revelation 20:4.

#4. The Old Testament saints will also be raised at the end of the tribulation.

The SECOND Resurrection will be for the lost wicked judged by God at the great white throne judgment prior to being cast into the lake of fire. The second resurrection, then, is the raising of all unbelievers; the second resurrection is connected to the second death. It corresponds with Jesus’ teaching of the “resurrection of damnation” (John 5:29).

 

[Rodger]

I should have studied some end time stuff.
Too late now,,,no interest.
Thanks!

My friend.......it is never too late to read and study and be encouraged by the Word of God!

 

[Rodger]

Yes. This is why all sinners repent for sinning against the Son, just as we sin against God. Jesus forgives the repentant.

Agreed.

That is because all judgment is given unto the Son.

 

[journeyman]

Then why are we having this back and forth?????

Because Jesus didn't come representing sinful men before His Father.
He came representing His Father before sinful men.

Romans 7:7-25 tells us that Man sinned even when there was NO law. The Law convicted man of his sin.
Sin before the Law was not a transgression in the sense of breaking the written words of the law; it was simply sinful humanity expressing its sinful nature: self-serving, hurtful, deceptive, and immoral.

Sin is sin regardless. The written law made it clear that all sin is against God. For this reason sin could be recognized as "exceedindly sinful."

They knew the law when they conspired against our Lord. He simply chose not to enforce it against them. He didn't bring the law against Him or they would have been executed. Understand?

 

[Runningman]

Good morning Runningman

Good morning miamited.

Well, let me be clear that I'm not one to think that Jesus is only a man, either. I believe that there are three 'beings' that make up, what I refer to as the God head. I mean, it does seem clear that there were more than one personages involved in the creation event. God says, "Let us make man in our image". In the image of God He made man. But I'm not just a spirit being and so I know that I'm not made in the physical image of God. Nor do I think that I look physically like the Holy Spirit of God. It seems that physically we were made in the image of Jesus. Spiritually, however, is a different matter. But I have to understand that our spirit isn't really like God's Spirit, at least since sin entered the equation, or there wouldn't be this need for our spirit to be 'born again' as Jesus implies that we are by receiving God's Spirit within us.

True enough and I agree, but I have a slightly different and nuanced understanding of creation since Isaiah 44:24 says YHWH created alone. Yet, in Matthew 11:25, Jesus called the Father the Lord of heaven and earth. Since Jesus is never called the Lord of heaven and earth in scripture, then I have come to the understanding that based on this precedent, that Acts 17:24-25 speaks of the God who created everything and gives life to everyone as the Lord of heaven and earth. Therefore, the creator is the Father.

Why there is an account of "more than one personage" may indicate God having a conference with other beings, but when the actual creation was occurring, what does Genesis 2:4 say? "This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made them."

So what I gather, based on YHWH saying He created alone and there is no other God aside from Himself in Isaiah 45:5, that the Father is the supreme God and that with Him are other subordinate, subservient, beings.

I may comment on the rest later, but right now that's all I have time for.

 

[Rodger]

Because Jesus didn't come representing sinful men before His Father.
He came representing His Father before sinful men.

Sin is sin regardless. The written law made it clear that all sin is against God. For this reason sin could be recognized as "exceedindly sinful."

They knew the law when they conspired against our Lord. He simply chose not to enforce it against them. He didn't bring the law against Him or they would have been executed. Understand?

I do not know where you learned your theology, but I do know that it was not from the Bible. I am not saying that to be argumenitive with you, just makeing an observation.

Romans 8:3–4 says,
“For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.”

When the Bible refers to “the flesh” it usually means the human tendency to sin that we all inherited from Adam. When Adam and Eve chose to rebel against God’s commandment, they became “sinful flesh.”

At that moment, sin entered God’s perfect world and began to corrupt everything. Since every human being came from Adam, we have all inherited his fallen nature. So every person is born as a sinner.

Jesus did not have an earthly father, so He did not inherit a sin nature as all other human beings do. He took on human flesh, yet He retained His full divinity. He lived the life we live, suffered as we suffer, and learned and grew as we learn and grow, but He did it all without sin. Because God was His Father, He lived only in the likeness of sinful flesh. Jesus inherited the flesh from His mother, Mary, but not the sin from Joseph.

Jesus became man in order to be our substitute.

Yes, I agree that sin is sin but you must also realize that all moral law begins with God. Because we were created in the image of God, we have His moral law written within our hearts.

 

[Runningman]

My dear friend.....an animal can not do anything whatsoever to remove a mans sin. The shed blood of that animal was received as a substitute to COVER that sins of the man. That is exactly what Jesus did in the Garden of Eden when He slew the animals for their skins to COVER Adam and Eve of their nakedness.

You then said.........
"God is immortal and cannot die. It would seem that if God did not die in your theology, which He didn't, then the unfortunate outcome is you would still be in your sins."

I think that by your own words we are beginning to get to the root of why you are a Universalist. You have not accepted the Lord Jesus Christ as your Saviour.!!!

You see, again by your own words, when a you reject the Lord Jesus Christ as the God of the Bible, you just choose to label Him as immoral. Non-believers have been known to accuse God of being hypocritical, selfish, arrogant, judgmental, hateful, and even homicidal—a moral monster so by your own words, you have not said anything new.

In order for you to say, “God is immoral,” you have to define morality in a way that justifies that claim. But what meaningful standard can exist, other than God, for moral principles? What is the basis of your claim??

May I say to you that OPINIONS are not accepted! Opinion is not enough—for the claim “God is an IMMORAL monster” to be meaningful, it has to be based on some unchanging standard. Ideas such as “suffering” or “human flourishing” are not objective. There is no rational reason for opinions or subjective ideas to be the source of moral reasoning.

Acts 2:24 KJV.........
“Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.”

The phrase “not possible” in this context emphasizes the impossibility of Jesus remaining dead. His resurrection was inevitable; it could not be otherwise. God’s power triumphed over death, and Jesus was raised to life.

So then in the LITERAL understanding of Acts 2:24, we see that it affirms that Jesus, though crucified and buried, could not be held captive by death. His resurrection demonstrates His divine nature and power, reinforcing the truth that Jesus is indeed God.

According to Leviticus 16:15-19; 4:20,26,31,35; 5:10,13,16,18; 6:7 there is atonement for sins by the usage of animal sacrifices in the Old Covenant. The idea being conveyed is that animal sacrifices aren't a permanent atonement for the sin. The priests were doing the sacrifices annually as a result.

Jesus on the other hand, is regarded as the perfect sacrifice. While under the animal sacrifice system they had to repeat the sacrifice as often as necessary, they don't have to do that under the New Covenant. Jesus isn't sacrificed repeatedly when people sin. He was sacrificed one time never to be sacrificed again. The atoning sacrifice of Jesus is accessed by faith, but the actual forgiveness of sins is sourced from the Father. There is a lot of good info on this subject in Hebrews as well.

We remain in God's grace, covered by Jesus' sacrifice, by perusing goodness and righteousness. If we sin, we can confess our sins to God who is, in turn, faithful to forgive us. The idea here isn't lip service, but true repentance with corresponding drive toward not repeating the same offence.

1 John 1
7But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin.
8If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

 

[Runningman]

I think that by your own words we are beginning to get to the root of why you are a Universalist.

You have not accepted the Lord Jesus Christ as your Saviour.!!!

You see, again by your own words, when a you reject the Lord Jesus Christ as the God of the Bible, you just choose to label Him as immoral.

Non-believers have been known to accuse God of being hypocritical, selfish, arrogant, judgmental, hateful, and even homicidal—a moral monster so by your own words, you have not said anything new.

May I say to you that OPINIONS are not accepted!

for the claim “God is an IMMORAL monster”

Rodger I believe you had completely misunderstood what I wrote. Please go back and read my previous message. You seem to think I made a claim about something I never said. I actually wasn't even sure you had meant to address that to me at first.

Also, please make an effort to not default to demonizing me anymore. I have been respectful to you and I would greatly appreciate it if you could do the same for me. Thank you and God bless.

 

[Rodger]

Rodger I believe you had completely misunderstood what I wrote. Please go back and read my previous message. You seem to think I made a claim about something I never said. I actually wasn't even sure you had meant to address that to me at first.

Also, please make an effort to not default to demonizing me anymore. I have been respectful to you and I would greatly appreciate it if you could do the same for me. Thank you and God bless.

I do not think that i misunderstood you. I read what you actually said and responded to your actual words.

If you believe that by that actuion you were demonized, I apologize. That was not my intention at all.

Again, what I posted was in responce to what you said literally.

 

[Runningman]

I'm also confident, that despite what some are trying to impress here, that our understanding this concept that 'Jesus is God', isn't a part of understanding that we have to have in order that we may take God up on His offer of eternal salvation. I mean, the Scriptures, especially in the new covenant writings make claim after claim after claim that salvation comes in believing the testimony of Jesus and accepting that his death for our sin has paid our penalty for our sin. That in accepting that, we then, through the power of the indwelling Spirit begin to live a life that daily should become more pleasing to God with a person who has a heart to be more like Jesus.

Asking God to be more like Jesus is the kind of prayer He wants to answer because that is already what He desires.

I also have to give pause, when I read that Jesus is the firstborn from the dead. And that we also shall be born from the dead. That we can be like the Son, but we can never be like the Father. I mean, people say, well you can't do all the miracles that Jesus did so we can't have that power. I'm sorry, but Jesus says that we'll do greater things than he has done if our faith is real. And as I have written before, the Scriptures also seem to make clear to us over and over that Jesus died for our sins. But I know that the Scriptures declare that God cannot die.

God cannot die. Very clear.

So, I plead ignorance in this matter of understanding the relationship of the three personages of the God head. But I don't think that the Scriptures make clear that Jesus is God. When Jesus tells Phillip that if he has seen him he has seen God, I believe that he meant God's nature. That through Jesus we see the mercy that God has for us. The love that God has for us. The compassion that God has for us. He is, as Paul declares, in his nature the exact representation of God. But he himself, the living entity Jesus, doesn't seem to be God.

I agree.

Now, if as some say, that we must believe that to be saved, although I can't find anywhere that the Scriptures make that claim, then I guess I stand condemned.

We won't be condemned.

Others will tell me, "Oh, we know that he is God because he stood before the Jewish leaders and said, "I am!" But then I read where Jesus clearly says that the words he speaks are not his words. That the very words he speaks, much as God promised Moses and Aaron, were given him to speak by God, the Father. So, I can see in this that Jesus is standing before these foolish Jewish counselors mocking him and seeking some sort of sign that he has the authority to do the things that he's doing, that just like with Moses and Aaron, God tells Jesus to say to them, "I am!" To let them know that the authority he has to do these things, comes from God. I mean, that was the question they asked him, "By whose authority do you do these things?" And God spoke through His Son and told them, "I God have given him that authority!"

That's plausible for sure since Jesus did testify that what he speaks is not from himself, but from the Father. On the other hand, even if Jesus wasn't speaking what the Father told him to say in that particular instance, then just saying "I am" isn't an explicit declaration of being God anyway.

One of the things that has interested me for awhile about John 8:58 is that apparently Jesus put the primary clause at the end of the sentence. While not grammatically incorrect, it's unconventional; it's also worth noting that isn't how Jesus normally spoke when he was either speaking on his own behalf or speaking on behalf of God. It's also not how YHWH worded it when He spoke about being the I AM in Exodus 3:14,15. In my opinion, whether or not Jesus actually spoke in this way doesn't mean necessarily transfer Jesus was literally before Abraham. All of the writings about the Messiah before Abraham were prophetic.

And honestly, for me, there are another couple of dozen, at least, places in the Scriptures that seem to indicate that there is some physical separative difference between 'who' God is, and 'who' Jesus is. In the old covenant God clearly refers to the one He is sending to us as His servant. In the psalms we read that Jesus claims that God made him trust Him. Psalm 22, the very psalm that accounts all of the things that are happening to Jesus on the day that he was crucified before our very eyes we read: From birth I was cast on you; from my mother’s womb you have been my God. and again, Yet you brought me out of the womb; you made me trust in you, even at my mother’s breast. Peter writes this: Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!

So for those who believe that Jesus is God, I'm fine with that, it that's what the Scriptures have convicted them concerning that relationship. But to make some claim that we have to believe that to be saved. No, you can't find any place in the Scriptures that declares that is a necessary part of one's salvation.

That's my 2¢ worth.

God bless,
Ted

Do you think that believing Jesus is God could possibly be idolatry since he's a human?