God as Spirit or flesh and bone

[alanmolstad]

Please tell us what the Bible says spirit is....
As far as I know the Bible does not try to compare the Spirit to anything made.
The Spirit is not like anything we see around us in creation.

But we do have a few terms that the Bible does ***ociate wih the term "Spirit"

The Bible tells us that "God is spirit", but then it also says that when we worship God we must do so in "spirit and in Truth"

So from this we see that there is a strong connection between the Bible's use of the term "spirit" and the word "truth"

To this I would add that not only does the Bible tell us that "God is spirit" but it also tells us that "God is Love", and then goes on to describe what love is > "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud."

So that is how we see the Bible describing God.

[alanmolstad]

[B]Please show us where the bible says God has a body. Give us the chapter and verse:

WELL.... the Bible does talk about the Lord's wings.......

[Russianwolfe]

What don't you understand about 'spirit has not flesh and bones?' Just because YOU can't understand what it means, does not make it a false teaching. A spirit is intangible.


I understand what Christ told the apostles after his resurrection quite clearly. But I also know that spirit is not a dog nor a cat. But how does that help us understand what spirit really is? Do you know of a Bilblical definition of what spirit is? Please share.



Please show us where the bible says God has a body. Give us the chapter and verse(s) Can you tell us why we can't see God? If God has a body, then why must he be worshiped only in spirit?

Please discuss Mormonism. I'll be waiting...:rolleyes:

Lets see. Christ has a body. He is God. How many Gods do you believe in? Only one, I expect. So that means that God is not just spirit but has a body. Or don't you believe in the resurrection? If you don't, how can you claim to be a Christian if you don't believe in the resurrection?

Do I really need to quote scripture to prove that Christ has a body? You didn't quote scripture when you referred to Christ's statement that he had flesh and bones but I knew what you were referring to. So do I need to quote scripture to show that Christ has a body?

You can't see me but I know I exist. Do you doubt that?

Marvin

[Russianwolfe]

As far as I know the Bible does not try to compare the Spirit to anything made.


Logical fallacy: Argument from Silence. Point is null and void.



The Spirit is not like anything we see around us in creation.

Another logical fallacy: You are arguing from a false premise, which would be the first statement. You continue to argue falsely.





But we do have a few terms that the Bible does ***ociate with the term "Spirit"

The Bible tells us that "God is spirit", but then it also says that when we worship God we must do so in "spirit and in Truth"


Using the word in the definition is not a valid definition. You cannot define salt as tasting salty.





So from this we see that there is a strong connection between the Bible's use of the term "spirit" and the word "truth"


Irrelevant. That does not give us a definition of spirit.





To this I would add that not only does the Bible tell us that "God is spirit" but it also tells us that "God is Love", and then goes on to describe what love is > "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud."

So that is how we see the Bible describing God.

But nothing of what you have said helps us to understand what spirit is. You have deflected and attempted to becloud the issue but have not shown us any Biblical definition of what spirit is. We are as ******** now and we were before I asked the question.

Marvin

[alanmolstad]

Everything I always say can be supported by the Bible...thus Im limited to the text alone for my answers...

If you find me saying something that is not found in the Bible let me know....

[Russianwolfe]

Everything I always say can be supported by the Bible...thus Im limited to the text alone for my answers...

If you find me saying something that is not found in the Bible let me know....

Does this mean that you will never know what spirit is from the Bible?

Marvin

PS Seems that if God is spirit as you claim, and the Bible doesn't tell you what spirit is, then does that mean that you don't really know what God is?

[alanmolstad]

Does this mean that you will never know what spirit is from the Bible?

It means that I can invent all kinds of things on my own.
I can pull tons of ideas out of a hat and claim that each is "truth"

But only the ideas of mine that are in agreement with the Bible are actually true....

Therefore if Im asked a question or challenged on a teaching, my answer has to be centered around the simple text of the Bible.


This is the example we see when Jesus was challenged in the wilderness and always answered with scripture.



So what the Bible tells us is the truth...even if it is not worded in a way that we would have liked.
For example, we dont really know anything about how Jesus looked.
He is my Lord and my God, yet the bible does not tell us anything about his looks.....

So while I worship the Lord truly, I cant be asked to discribe him from the text alone, because I only have the text to use in my answer, and the text in many, many places does not seem all that interested in the silly questions men have asked over the last 2000 years

God is Spirit, and when i die my body is put into the ground and my spirit goes to the Lord who gave it.....
But dont ask me the question "What does your spirit look like?" because i cant answer that from the Text....

[alanmolstad]

so to review...

god is spirit, always was, always will be.
But for our salvation, the Son was wrapped in flesh and born as a man.

Understand the Son was, is now, and will always be God.

and Understand that the son was, is now and will always be spirit.

But for our salvation he was made man and wrapped in the flesh of mortal man so he could die.

Jesus was borm of mary is a human body of flesh and blood.
He died, and was truly as dead as all human get who die.
And Jesus was raised to life in an everlasting body of flesh and bone.

This is the first example of what will one day happen to all who believe.
We will die in these tents of flesh and blood, and be raised to new life in everlasting bodies of flesh and bone....

[TheSword99]

I understand what Christ told the apostles after his resurrection quite clearly. But I also know that spirit is not a dog nor a cat. But how does that help us understand what spirit really is? Do you know of a Bilblical definition of what spirit is? Please share.



Lets see. Christ has a body. He is God. How many Gods do you believe in? Only one, I expect. So that means that God is not just spirit but has a body. Or don't you believe in the resurrection? If you don't, how can you claim to be a Christian if you don't believe in the resurrection?

Do I really need to quote scripture to prove that Christ has a body? You didn't quote scripture when you referred to Christ's statement that he had flesh and bones but I knew what you were referring to. So do I need to quote scripture to show that Christ has a body?

You can't see me but I know I exist. Do you doubt that?

Marvin

Spirit is a supernatural, incorporeal being without a body.(without material existence) Christ was always with God as John 1 testifies of, and was God. When Christ came to earth as a man in order to die for our sins he had to have a body, or else he could not die. How many times does Jesus have to say: "I and the Father are one"? "Before Abraham was, I AM" "I AM the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end." God told Moses: "I AM the I AM."

I see that Christ now having a body is a stumbling block for the lds. It does not mean that Jesus is now an exalted man. He is still GOD. This is why angels worship him which would be blasphemy if He was not God. This is why your knee and mine will bow and confess Christ as LORD. Do not limit God. God said He is NOT a man. Never was. The bible tells us: "In the beginning God." NOT: "In the beginning man."

[glm1978]

I understand what Christ told the apostles after his resurrection quite clearly. But I also know that spirit is not a dog nor a cat. But how does that help us understand what spirit really is? Do you know of a Bilblical definition of what spirit is? Please share.



Lets see. Christ has a body. He is God. How many Gods do you believe in? Only one, I expect. So that means that God is not just spirit but has a body. Or don't you believe in the resurrection? If you don't, how can you claim to be a Christian if you don't believe in the resurrection?

Do I really need to quote scripture to prove that Christ has a body? You didn't quote scripture when you referred to Christ's statement that he had flesh and bones but I knew what you were referring to. So do I need to quote scripture to show that Christ has a body?

You can't see me but I know I exist. Do you doubt that?

Marvin


The LDS believes that God has a body of flesh and bone in order to substantiate Joseph Smith's so-called first vision. John 4:24 claims God is a spirit (lit. God is Spirit). Even Smith at one time taught God the Father was a personage of spirit (Lectures on Faith, Lecture Fifth).

[Russianwolfe]

And so you have answered many questions that I nevered asked. Can we please stick to the questions that I have asked?

Marvin

PS. The question is, what is the Biblical defintion of what spirit is!



It means that I can invent all kinds of things on my own.
I can pull tons of ideas out of a hat and claim that each is "truth"

But only the ideas of mine that are in agreement with the Bible are actually true....

Therefore if Im asked a question or challenged on a teaching, my answer has to be centered around the simple text of the Bible.


This is the example we see when Jesus was challenged in the wilderness and always answered with scripture.



So what the Bible tells us is the truth...even if it is not worded in a way that we would have liked.
For example, we dont really know anything about how Jesus looked.
He is my Lord and my God, yet the bible does not tell us anything about his looks.....

So while I worship the Lord truly, I cant be asked to discribe him from the text alone, because I only have the text to use in my answer, and the text in many, many places does not seem all that interested in the silly questions men have asked over the last 2000 years

God is Spirit, and when i die my body is put into the ground and my spirit goes to the Lord who gave it.....
But dont ask me the question "What does your spirit look like?" because i cant answer that from the Text....

[Russianwolfe]

Spirit is a supernatural, incorporeal being without a body.(without material existence)


How do you know this is true? Do you have Biblical support for these statements? If not, how do you know that these statements are true?



Christ was always with God as John 1 testifies of, and was God.


It also says that he was with God. So who is this God that Christ is with?



When Christ came to earth as a man in order to die for our sins he had to have a body, or else he could not die.


Agreed. But there is one other things. His Father had to be God the True God or else his death on the cross would not have been voluntary.



How many times does Jesus have to say: "I and the Father are one"?


But he does not say that he and the Father are the same essence. (This bit of nonsense was created by Greek philosophers posing as Christians.) Only that they are one. God also says that a man and a woman will become one flesh? Does that mean that they become one essence? How is this any different than what Christ said?



"Before Abraham was, I AM" "I AM the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end." God told Moses: "I AM the I AM."


I have always taught that from the Fall onward, the only God that man had any dealings with was Christ. These verses, even though you gave no reference so we could check them, imply the same thing.



I see that Christ now having a body is a stumbling block for the lds.


Absolutely not. It is you who claim to worship only one God but your God exists in two different states at the same time, both with a body and as spirit only. The stumbling block is yours, my path is clear.



It does not mean that Jesus is now an exalted man.


Why then are we told over and over by the likes of you, that Christ was 100% man and 100% God? If Christ was man at one point, then it is obvious that he is now an exalted man, exalted by God the Father.



He is still GOD.


Never said otherwise.



This is why angels worship him which would be blasphemy if He was not God.


Or when John, in Revelation, tries to worship an angel as Christ and is forbidden?



This is why your knee and mine will bow and confess Christ as LORD. Do not limit God. God said He is NOT a man.


Again no supporting scripture. But if you will examine the scripture that you are referencing, you will find that it is talking the character of God and not whether God has a body or not. You are misusing this scripture. In other words, wresting the scripture.



Never was.


Doesn't say that. You are arguing from silence now and that makes your argument null and void.



The bible tells us: "In the beginning God." NOT: "In the beginning man."

Of course it doesn't. God had to be God to create the earth. But if you really want to examine the scripture, it really says, "In the beginning, the Gods". Elohim is plural and that is the word that is usually translated as God.

Marvin

[Russianwolfe]

The LDS believes that God has a body of flesh and bone in order to substantiate Joseph Smith's so-called first vision. John 4:24 claims God is a spirit (lit. God is Spirit). Even Smith at one time taught God the Father was a personage of spirit (Lectures on Faith, Lecture Fifth).

And you don't understand your cut/paste of this claim. If you read the whole lecture you would be making this false statements.

And no we don't believe this becuase of the first vision. We believe it because God has revealed it. And the Bible clearly teaches it.

The Bible states that Christ has a body of flesh and bone. Christ is God isn't he? Or do you believe otherwise? Therefore, since Christ is God, even you have to believe that God has a body.

Marvin

[alanmolstad]

PS. The question is, what is the Biblical definition of what spirit is!
"wind, or breath" would be the simple translation of the bible's term.

from there you have to study the wider context of how the term appears in a sentence, and how it is to be understood in that given context....(as with any word you are studying)


For example, the Holy Spirit is part of the Trinity....equal in nature to person of the Father or the Son....

Back in my time in Bible school, I learned that one of the ways to understand the Holy Spirit is to think if "God's breathing....God's outgoing Word...

Now in some Christians schools they hold that man is made up of 3 parts..."Body, Soul, and Spirit"
I have looked at this idea and come to the point where I just believe that men are basicly 2 things....we are flesh and we are Soul/Spirits...

The flesh is part of the earth, and this we share with all other things from the earth like rocks and birds and fish and trees.

The Spirit/or Soul of man is that part of us that is given by God and has nothing to do with how things are evolved and arrived at in creation.

Now, we have to always also keep in mind that men have learned a lot more about how the human body works than we did 1000s of years ago.
We no longer believe that just because you might sneeze that you may have lost your Spirit "God Bless You!"

So while early man looked at the big difference between a dead person and a living person, "(breathing") and came up with the idea that in some way 'air' was the 'life" , and this led to all kinds of religious teachings.....We need to just make sure we understand that such terms in the Bible like "wind" and "breath" are mostly symbolic in many contexts....this is how I look at the statement by the mom of Jesus when she talked about both her 'soul" and her 'spirit"

[Russianwolfe]

"wind, or breath" would be the simple translation of the bible's term.


Those would be similes not definitions.




from there you have to study the wider context of how the term appears in a sentence, and how it is to be understood in that given context....(as with any word you are studying)



Again, I am looking for you to provide a Biblical defintion, not guess work based on how a word is used. All that will tell is how the word is used, it will not tell you what spirit is.





For example, the Holy Spirit is part of the Trinity....equal in nature to person of the Father or the Son....

Back in my time in Bible school, I learned that one of the ways to understand the Holy Spirit is to think if "God's breathing....God's outgoing Word...



Again, similes not definitions.




Now in some Christians schools they hold that man is made up of 3 parts..."Body, Soul, and Spirit"
I have looked at this idea and come to the point where I just believe that men are basicly 2 things....we are flesh and we are Soul/Spirits...



Again, Biblical definitions not guesses or speculations.




The flesh is part of the earth, and this we share with all other things from the earth like rocks and birds and fish and trees.

The Spirit/or Soul of man is that part of us that is given by God and has nothing to do with how things are evolved and arrived at in creation.

Now, we have to always also keep in mind that men have learned a lot more about how the human body works than we did 1000s of years ago.
We no longer believe that just because you might sneeze that you may have lost your Spirit "God Bless You!"

So while early man looked at the big difference between a dead person and a living person, "(breathing") and came up with the idea that in some way 'air' was the 'life" , and this led to all kinds of religious teachings.....We need to just make sure we understand that such terms in the Bible like "wind" and "breath" are mostly symbolic in many contexts....this is how I look at the statement by the mom of Jesus when she talked about both her 'soul" and her 'spirit"

Sorry, but you haven't given us a Biblical defintion of any kind. All I see are similes based on guesswork. Is that considered Biblical?

How about giving us the Biblical definition?

Marvin

[alanmolstad]

Those would be similes not definitions.



.... as far as I remember , this is the definition of the term "Spirit" i.e., "pneuma"

I remember that from Bible school!...LOL

It is the base word for our word pneumatic.

[alanmolstad]

How about giving us the Biblical definition?

That is, the word is the same basic word for what we translate as "breath" or for "wind"...and perhaps "air"...

This is why Jesus at John 3:8 compares the spirit to the wind.

"The wind ****s wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit."

The connection between the 'wind" and the 'spirit" that Jesus taught is clearly indicated in the Text.

Thus this is not only the Bible's definition, it is our Lord's as well.....

The spirit of the Lord (Holy Spirit) is God's breath, his words spoken, the divine wind (kamikaze)

[dberrie2000]

God is ALWAYs spirit.....always......always and always...

and for our salvation God wrapped himself in flesh and blood and was made man so that he might die for our sin.

God was, is and will always be spirit!

But God became flesh and blood so he could die.

Right now Jesus was raised in a human body of flesh and bone and will have this same body forever.

Well--that brings a question. When you state "God" here--are you referring to God the Son--or God the Father?

You have God the Son as flesh and bone. Is God the Father the same substance?

If not--could you explain the "****ousios" (same substance) God of the Trinitarian creeds?

[alanmolstad]

You have God the Son as flesh and bone. Is God the Father the same substance?



The son of God is just as much "God" as the faher is "God"

The son is just as much pure "spirit" as the father is...

But the difference is that the Son is also fully man too.
The son became man, but never stopped being pure Spirit.

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post----Well--that brings a question. When you state "God" here--are you referring to God the Son--or God the Father?

You have God the Son as flesh and bone. Is God the Father the same substance?

If not--could you explain the "****ousios" (same substance) God of the Trinitarian creeds?


The son of God is just as much "God" as the faher is "God"

The son is just as much pure "spirit" as the father is...

But the difference is that the Son is also fully man too.
The son became man, but never stopped being pure Spirit.

But 'pure spirit" does not touch upon the point of why the Trinitarians have God the Son as flesh and bone--and the Father as a Spirit only.

The "****ousious"(same substance) God of the creeds declare they are of the same substance.

[alanmolstad]

.....

The "****ousious"(same substance) God of the creeds declare they are of the same substance.

Yes, the father is not more "god" that the Son is 'god"

Both the Father and the Son are equal in nature, for their nature is the one eternal God.

So the Father is pure spirit and the Son is pure spirit.
But so that he could suffer death on the cross, the Son was born as a human.

But in being made a man the Son did not give up being God.
The Son always is God.
Thus the Son is always pure spirit like the father and so they are in unity of "substance' at all times.

So this is why Christians believe that Jesus Christ has TWO NATURES.....
Jesus is both 100% God and 100% man.

Jesus is in unity with on the substance issue with the Father forever
and Jesus is in unity with me on the substance issue as both Jesus and I are fully human.

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post-----But 'pure spirit" does not touch upon the point of why the Trinitarians have God the Son as flesh and bone--and the Father as a Spirit only.

The "****ousious"(same substance) God of the creeds declare they are of the same substance.


Yes, the father is not more "god" that the Son is 'god"

Both the Father and the Son are equal in nature, for their nature is the one eternal God.

So the Father is pure spirit and the Son is pure spirit.
But so that he could suffer death on the cross, the Son was born as a human.

But in being made a man the Son did not give up being God.
The Son always is God.
Thus the Son is always pure spirit like the father and so they are in unity of "substance' at all times.

So this is why Christians believe that Jesus Christ has TWO NATURES.....
Jesus is both 100% God and 100% man.

Jesus is in unity with on the substance issue with the Father forever
and Jesus is in unity with me on the substance issue as both Jesus and I are fully human.

Still does not explain why the Bible has Jesus as flesh and bone, and the Creeds have both the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost as the "****ousious"(same substance) God.

[alanmolstad]

Still does not explain why the Bible has Jesus as flesh and bone, and the Creeds have both the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost as the "****ousious"(same substance) God.

Yes, the father the son and the HS are the same in their 'god-ness"

They have the same nature....their nature is God./
None is more 'god" than the other.

The father, the son and the HS are all equal in nature.

thus they have the same "substance" when speaking of their god-nature.

[alanmolstad]

and jesus was born flesh and blood.

Jesus still is always pure spirit, when talking about his nature as God.

but he now also was born as flesh and blood.

he is called "The man Christ Jesus"

So the Bible is very clear in that Jesus is fully human (flesh) in addition to being fully God, (spirit)





So to review....
Jesus is like me in that we share the same substance, and that substance is our human nature of flesh.

Jesus is like the father in that they share the same substance, and that substance is pure spirit.

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
Still does not explain why the Bible has Jesus as flesh and bone, and the Creeds have both the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost as the "****ousious"(same substance) God.


Yes, the father the son and the HS are the same in their 'god-ness"

They have the same nature....their nature is God./
None is more 'god" than the other.

The father, the son and the HS are all equal in nature.

thus they have the same "substance" when speaking of their god-nature.

Do you consider "god-nature" a substance?

[alanmolstad]

Do you consider "god-nature" a substance?Im not sure....

I think in the context of my answer I am thinking that one way to understand this issue is to make sure you understand that the "substance" of god...(Whatever you wish to call it) is shared in equal measure by the father, the son and the HS.

This means that whatever you think the father's naure is, the son and the HS share this in equal measure.

none is more 'god" that the others.

None is less "god" than the others.


if one is Spirit, then all are spirit in equal nature....and their nature is God.

[alanmolstad]

So to review:

jesus is pure spirit, having the same substance as the father in his nature as god.

Jesus is "flesh and bone" now because he is a resurrected human.

Jesus had a body of flesh and blood when he was conceived in the womb of Mary.
This body died later on a cross.

This deals only with the HUMAN nature of christ, but we always have to keep in mind that Jesus also have a God-nature too.

Thus Jesus has two natures at the same time.

He is of one substance with the father, and>
he is fully Human as with us.

[alanmolstad]

this is a basic teaching of the bible, as such it is important to me that if you have some doubts about the concept, or would like to go over some questions, that you go ahead and ask whatever is on your mind...

ask

[dberrie2000]

Im not sure....

I think in the context of my answer I am thinking that one way to understand this issue is to make sure you understand that the "substance" of god...(Whatever you wish to call it) is shared in equal measure by the father, the son and the HS.

This means that whatever you think the father's naure is, the son and the HS share this in equal measure.

none is more 'god" that the others.

None is less "god" than the others.

Again--the only way I connect "nature" with substance, is when one is referring to a physical cons***ution.


if one is Spirit, then all are spirit in equal nature....and their nature is God.

Then by a like standard--if one has a body of flesh and bone--then all have the same?

[alanmolstad]

Again--the only way I connect "nature" with substance, is when one is referring to a physical cons***ution.




the word "substance" depends a lot on how you mean the word?...how you have set up the fuller contex?

So when talking about the nature of "God" we would say that his substance is Pure spirit.

Or pure love.
or pure truth.

But mostly in this context I would say that the substance of God is spirit.

[alanmolstad]

Then by a like standard--if one has a body of flesh and bone--then all have the same?
No remember......only the Son is human.

So the substance of the Lord is spirit.
and the substance of humans is flesh.

So because Jesus is BOTH
God and Man, he has both a divine nature of pure spirit.
and-
a human nature of flesh.


The Father has the same substance as the son, but the father does not have a human nature.....

The HS has the same substance as the Son, but the HS does not have a human nature.

So all three members of the Trinity share in common the same divine substance...but only the Son has a human substance too.



ask more questions!

[alanmolstad]

John 1:1....

"the Word was with God, the Word was God.
The Word became flesh...."


but the Word never stopped being God.

[alanmolstad]

So the Word (Jesus) is God.....always was, always will be.

But the Word became man.

The Word never stopped being God, but the Word now has 2 natures

[dberrie2000]

the word "substance" depends a lot on how you mean the word?...how you have set up the fuller contex?

So when talking about the nature of "God" we would say that his substance is Pure spirit.

Or pure love.
or pure truth.

But mostly in this context I would say that the substance of God is spirit.

The Biblical record bears witness that it is also flesh and bone:


Luke 24:39---King James Version (KJV)


39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.



So--do you relate that substance to Christ only--or both the Father and the Son?

[alanmolstad]

The Biblical record bears witness that it is also flesh and bone:



Ok, just a quick note on that...

The phrase "Flesh and Blood" means "mortal"

the phrase "Flesh and Bone" mean immortal.

Jesus was born with a mortal body of flesh and blood.

Jesus died...his mortal body died.

Then Jesus was resurrected in an immortal body of "Flesh and Bone"



so the two phrases mean two totally different things.

They are describing the nature of the human body Jesus had and has now.

the nature of his human body changed in the resurrection.

[alanmolstad]

So--do you relate that substance to Christ only--or both the Father and the Son?


The humanity of Jesus is not shared by other members of the trinity.

The father did not become man
The Holy Spirit did not become man.
Only the Son became man as we read in John1:1


But the deity of Christ is shared by the other members of the trinity.

So the Substance of the Father is like the substance of the Son and the HS ,. in that all are pure spirit.

[alanmolstad]

ask more, this is fun!;)

[alanmolstad]

well..no more questions?

Lets see if we might review what the Bible teaches then to make sure we are all up to speed.


The "substance" of God is spirit.
Now there are other way to define the term "substance', but for now Im going to define it as "pure Spirit"

This means that when i say that "Jesus is God" I am talking about the divine nature of Jesus. But at the same time I have to keep in mind that Jesus has 2 different natures for he is both God (pure spirit as is the father) and human (flesh like me)


So this is why Christians teach that Jesus was of the "same substance" with the Father.
For in his divine nature Jesus is God as much and in the same way that the Father is God and the HS.

So the father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit are the "same substance"

and I define that substance as "pure spirit"



So that is the first nature of Jesus, but there is also the other nature.
The human nature of Christ.
This is not shared by the father nor the Holy Spirit.

This is taught in John 1, "The word became4 flesh"

The Father did not become flesh
The Holy Spirit did not become flesh, but the Word (Jesus) did become flesh.

Jesus was born flesh and blood.
Lived as a man.
Died as a man
resurrected as a man .

right now jesus has an everlasting body of flesh and bone.
The same body that died, but it has a new nature.

[dberrie2000]

dberrie----The Biblical record bears witness that it is also flesh and bone:
Luke 24:39---King James Version (KJV)

39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.


So--do you relate that substance to Christ only--or both the Father and the Son?


[QUOTE=alanmolstad;140305]The humanity of Jesus is not shared by other members of the trinity.

The father did not become man
The Holy Spirit did not become man.
Only the Son became man as we read in John1:1


But the deity of Christ is shared by the other members of the trinity.

So the Substance of the Father is like the substance of the Son and the HS ,. in that all are pure spirit.

But not like the flesh and bone of the Son. If they are the "****ousious" God--and there is only one God--how can that God have different substances?
"****ousious" means "same substance".

[alanmolstad]

[quote]dberrie----The Biblical record bears witness that it is also flesh and bone:

...yes, AFTER THE RESURRECTION!


The phrase "Flesh and Blood" means mortal life.

The different phrase "Flesh and Bone" means eternal life.


Do you see that?

[alanmolstad]

-how can that God have different substances?
"****ousious" means "same substance".

They have the SAME substance!

same!, same!, same!

I have never said that in their deity they were different...

Go look what I have written...
(Written over and over on this I might add)

The Father and the Son are of the SAME substance....

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
The humanity of Jesus is not shared by other members of the trinity.

The father did not become man
The Holy Spirit did not become man.
Only the Son became man as we read in John1:1


But the deity of Christ is shared by the other members of the trinity.

So the Substance of the Father is like the substance of the Son and the HS ,. in that all are pure spirit.


dberrie---But not like the flesh and bone of the Son. If they are the "****ousious" God--and there is only one God--how can that God have different substances?
"****ousious" means "same substance".


They have the SAME substance!

same!, same!, same!

I have never said that in their deity they were different...

But Jesus Christ in His deity is flesh and bone--is the Father of the same substance in His deity?

If not--how are they the same substance?


Go look what I have written...
(Written over and over on this I might add)

The Father and the Son are of the SAME substance....

You have the Father as Spirit--and the Son as Spirit and flesh and bone--how is that the same substance?

[alanmolstad]

But Jesus Christ in His deity is flesh and bone--

No, in his divine nature he is only pure spirit.

[alanmolstad]

You have the Father as Spirit--and the Son as Spirit and flesh and bone--how is that the same substance?

The answer is that Jesus has two totally different natures.

At one with the same substance with the father. (spirit)
At one with men with the same substance as men (flesh)

[dberrie2000]

The answer is that Jesus has two totally different natures.

At one with the same substance with the father. (spirit)
At one with men with the same substance as men (flesh)

Which means that the substance of the Son does not match the substance of the Father--Jesus possesses something the Father does not, in substance--right?

[Billyray]

Which means that the substance of the Son does not match the substance of the Father--Jesus possesses something the Father does not, in substance--right?
The Father is spirit. The Son has a resurrected body.

[alanmolstad]

But Jesus Christ in His deity is flesh and bone--



No he is not!

Jesus is flesh and bone in his humanity.

[alanmolstad]

Which means that the substance of the Son does not match the substance of the Father--Jesus possesses something the Father does not, in substance--right?


No , they are of the same substance in their nature a God.

But Jesus as a 2nd nature two that the Father does not have.


So Jesus has the very same substance as the father in his deity,
Yet in his humanity Jesus is what the father is not..."human"

[alanmolstad]

So to review.

The Bible tells us that God is spirit.
That means in his nature as God that jesus is also pure spirit.

This comes out to us in the teachings at John 1.

But 2000 years ago the Word became flesh.
the father did not become flesh
the Holy Spirit did not become flesh.
And whats more, the Bible says that jesus never stopped being God (pure spirit) to become flesh.


So Jesus is still pure spirit as God.

But because Jesus is also man he has a body, whereas the father and the HS do not have bodies of flesh

thus Jesus has two totaly different natures.
One is the nature of God with the father being of the same substance as the father (Spirit)

and the other nature is human, and so Jesus now has a body of flesh.

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
Which means that the substance of the Son does not match the substance of the Father--Jesus possesses something the Father does not, in substance--right?


No , they are of the same substance in their nature a God.

But Jesus as a 2nd nature two that the Father does not have.

So Jesus has the very same substance as the father in his deity,

But the scriptures state that Christ possessed flesh and bone in His deity:


Luke 24:39---King James Version (KJV)


39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

You do agree that God the Father does not possess this attribute--right?

[alanmolstad]

But the scriptures state that Christ possessed flesh and bone in His deity:


Luke 24:39---King James Version (KJV)


39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

You do agree that God the Father does not possess this attribute--right?

No...the Bible tells us at John 1 that the Word was with God, the Word was God...
So at that point of the story the Word did not have a human nature nor body.

then later in John the Bible tells us that the "Word became flesh" and was made man....NOW here at this point the Word was given a 2nd nature.

at that point in our history the word became flesh.


So to review.
The Word was, is now, and will always be, "spirit" as we see in the first part of John1.

But the Word became flesh.
So the word that is always spirit, was made man who is flesh.

Thus the flesh is only dealing with the "HUMAN NATURE" of Jesus.

but in his divine nature Jesus is always pure spirit as is the father pure spirit.



Remember Jesus has 2 natures
one like the father is all ways
the other like man in all ways


So when Jesus said that a spirit does not have flesh and bone, he was pointing out his "HUMANITY"!!!!!



this means that because the father does not have a Human nature, that the father does not have a body of flesh and bone.


This is the 2nd nature that Christ has that the father does not have.

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post---But the scriptures state that Christ possessed flesh and bone in His deity:

Luke 24:39---King James Version (KJV)


39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

You do agree that God the Father does not possess this attribute--right?


No...the Bible tells us at John 1 that the Word was with God, the Word was God...
So at that point of the story the Word did not have a human nature nor body

But He does now--and He does in His deity. Are you attempting to make the point Christ was only deity before His resurrection or mortal existence?

Alan--Christ was resurrected deity when He showed Himself to His disciples as a resurrected man of flesh and bone.

The Trinitarians claim is that God the Father does not share this substance with His Son--right?

[James Banta]

But He does now--and He does in His deity. Are you attempting to make the point Christ was only deity before His resurrection or mortal existence?

Alan--Christ was resurrected deity when He showed Himself to His disciples as a resurrected man of flesh and bone.

The Trinitarians claim is that God the Father does not share this substance with His Son--right?

Why would you think that? The Eternal Father shares all the experiences of Jesus? Or that Jesus doesn't share all with the Father After all they are the one true and living God.. It is your false impressions of God's nature that makes you separate them.. IHS jim

[dberrie2000]

Why would you think that? The Eternal Father shares all the experiences of Jesus? Or that Jesus doesn't share all with the Father After all they are the one true and living God.. It is your false impressions of God's nature that makes you separate them.. IHS jim

Are you stating that God the Father has a body of flesh and bones also?

[James Banta]

Are you stating that God the Father has a body of flesh and bones also?

Only in and through Jesus and Jesus remains 100% Spirit through the Father.. They are one God not two separate and distinct Gods.. IHS jim

[alanmolstad]

Are you stating that God the Father has a body of flesh and bones also?
No, The Father does not have a human nature.

The Father's substance of his deity is the same as the Son.

But only the Son is 100% human.

[alanmolstad]

But He does now--and He does in His deity. Are you attempting to make the point Christ was only deity before His resurrection or mortal existence?

......

I dont think you understand the Trinity.

let me explain it here.

Jesus is the Lord God Almighty.
Jesus is always pure spirit.
Jesus became flesh, yet always remained pure spirit.

Jesus is pure spirit wrapped in flesh.

Thus the father and the Son are one in substance.
But the Son also has a 2nd nature that is human too!

[alanmolstad]

Alan--Christ was resurrected deity ....

No,
Rather the humanity of Jesus died, but the Deity of Jesus can never die.

Thus the resurrection of Christ is not of his deity but is of his humanity.


Remember Jesus has to natures, he is both God and man.

[alanmolstad]

The Trinitarians claim is that God the Father does not share this substance with His Son--right?


well there is a historical debate within the church at the terms used...

At some churches they use the phrase, "Being of LIKE substance..."

Other churches use the phrase "Being of the same substance as the father"


However when you dig into what they claim as the big difference you find yourself splitting hairs.

I just say "same" and leave it at that.

[alanmolstad]

ask more....I enjoy answering questions on this stuff....

[dberrie2000]

dberrie---Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
Are you stating that God the Father has a body of flesh and bones also?


Only in and through Jesus

So--you believe God the Father does indeed possess flesh and bone?


and Jesus remains 100% Spirit through the Father..

Are you saying that "Jesus remains 100% Spirit through the Father.. " means that He is not also flesh and bone also? Or that Jesus and the Father are both?

Luke 24:39---King James Version (KJV)


39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

[dberrie2000]

well there is a historical debate within the church at the terms used...

At some churches they use the phrase, "Being of LIKE substance..."

Other churches use the phrase "Being of the same substance as the father"

What substance do you believe the Father possesses that is like this substance:

Luke 24:39---King James Version (KJV)


39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.


However when you dig into what they claim as the big difference you find yourself splitting hairs.

I just say "same" and leave it at that.

Not at all--if you believe that their substance is the same--then how do you explain the faith alone belief that God the Son possesses a body of flesh and bone--and the Father does not?

So--does God possess a body of flesh and bone--or Jesus only?

You see the problem you face? It questions the validity of the faith alone's theology of the Trinity itself.

[alanmolstad]

What substance do you believe the Father possesses that is like this substance:

.....Spirit....the substance is spirit

[alanmolstad]

l--if you believe that their substance is the same--then how do you explain the faith alone belief that God the Son possesses a body of flesh and bone--and the Father does not?

.

The Word became flesh....

The Father did not become flesh, but the Word did.

So the Son and the Father have the same substance in their deity, (Spirit) but the Son has a 2nd nature that is human. (Flesh)

[alanmolstad]

So--does God possess a body of flesh and bone--or Jesus only?



The Bible says that Only the Word became flesh.

So that means that Jesus is fully human, but not the father nor the HS.

[alanmolstad]

.

You see the problem you face? It questions the validity of the faith alone's theology of the Trinity itself.There is no problem here at all.

Jesus is human, so he has a human body.
The father is not human, so he does not have a body...


But in their nature as God both the Father and the Son are of the same substance, for their substance as God is Spirit.

[dberrie2000]

There is no problem here at all.

Jesus is human, so he has a human body.
The father is not human, so he does not have a body...

If that is true--then you have the Father and the Son with differing substances--period.

[James Banta]

If that is true--then you have the Father and the Son with differing substances--period.

That would be true if Jesus were only human but as He is 100% human He is also 100% God.. There is One God not three. No God, even if you believe that Isaiah 43:10 means "only for this world", was ever formed before the God speaking on this p***age, and there will never be one formed in the future.. One God, the Father is called God, Jesus is called God, and the Holy Spirit is called God. Unless two of them are liars then these three Persons are the one true God.. That is a part of scripture that LDS Doctrine can't deal with in their doctrine of God's nature.. Because it differs so completely with what the Bible teaches even to the point of it's founder teaching that there are three Gods and no one could contradict it. That teachings makes mormonism a pagan religion with no connection to God's truth, No connection to the Jesus who said that He is the YHWH.. IHS jim

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
There is no problem here at all.

Jesus is human, so he has a human body.
The father is not human, so he does not have a body...


Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
If that is true--then you have the Father and the Son with differing substances--period.


That would be true if Jesus were only human but as He is 100% human He is also 100% God.. There is One God not three.

Then that would only raise the question--is God 100% human--or not? Does God have a body of flesh and bone?

You do understand--you can only separate that substance at the individual level--God the Father verses God the Son, as to the flesh and bone question. You can have them as two different substances. But there is only one God in the Trinitarian belief--does that one God have a body of flesh and bone?

[alanmolstad]

If that is true--then you have the Father and the Son with differing substances--period.
No, they are of the same substance in their deity.

But the Son has a 2nd nature, the Son is human where the father is not.

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post
If that is true--then you have the Father and the Son with differing substances--period.


No, they are of the same substance in their deity.

But the Son has a 2nd nature, the Son is human where the father is not.

So--are you saying that the Son's flesh and bone is not part of His deity? If the Father is different in that He does not possess this second nature--flesh and bone--are you saying that the Son has a substance the Father does not have?

[alanmolstad]

So--are you saying that the Son's flesh and bone is not part of His deity?
At Last!you have landed on the core truth of the Christian church!

The Word became flesh.
The Son of God is 100% human and 100% God.

Of the same substance with the Father in his deity

Of the same substance as man in his......."HUMANITY!"


So the human body of Christ is from his Humanity, not his deity.

[alanmolstad]

..... If the Father is different in that He does not possess this second nature--flesh and bone--are you saying that the Son has a substance the Father does not have?


YES!

As we learn in John1:1
The Word BECAME flesh.

The Father did not become flesh
The HS did not become flesh.
Only the Word became flesh.


So the Son is of the same substance as the father in his Deity, but also has a 2nd nature that the Father does not have.


So the Son is of the same substance as the Father!
And, the Son is also totally human, so he has a normal human body....although right now it is a resurrected body, yet it is still human.


The Father did not become flesh in John 1:1, and so that is why the father does not have a body of flesh.



So this is why Jesus said "A spirit does not have flesh and bone as you see i have"
The Father is spirit, therefore the father does not have a body of flesh and bone.

What Jesus was pointing out is his "HUMANITY!"
It is the humanity of Jesus that has a body of flesh, not his Deity.

Jesus is always God Almighty, so Jesus is always pure Spirit, but Jesus became flesh and so he also has a human body.

He is always still spirit, but he pointed out that a spirit does not have flesh and bone, so he was pointing to his Humanity, not his deity.

[dberrie2000]

At Last!

The Word became flesh.
The Son of God is 100% human and 100% God.

Of the same substance with the Father in his deity

Of the same substance as man in his......."HUMANITY!"


So the human body of Christ is from his Humanity, not his deity.

What is it about Christ's flesh and bone do you not consider as part of His deity?



Luke 24:39---King James Version (KJV)


39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

If Christ still possesses this flesh and bone--then it is an eternal part of His makeup. If God the Father does not possess flesh and bone, then God the Son is not ****ousious with the Father.

Again--is God a Spirit--or flesh and bone--or both?

[alanmolstad]

What is it about Christ's flesh and bone do you not consider as part of His deity?






All of it!...

The humanity of Jesus is of the flesh.
The deity of Jesus is of the spirit.

When Jesus said that a spirit does not have flesh he was teaching what Im saying.

The deity of Jesus is spirit, the humanity of Jesus is flesh.

Jesus has the same substance as the father in his deity,. and the same human nature as men.

So Jesus is both God and man.
This is what John 1;1 is teaching what it says that the "Word became flesh"

At no place in the whole bible does it say the father became flesh, nor the HS>

But at John 1 it is very clear in teaching that only the Word became flesh.

So Jesus has the same substance as the Father in his deity.

[alanmolstad]

Again--is God a Spirit--or flesh and bone--or both?

again, in his deity Jesus is spirit.
But in his humanity Jesus is flesh.....understand?

[alanmolstad]

So to review...

In his deity Jesus is what?........

In his deity Jesus is what?.......

The answer is that Jesus is Spirit and of the same substance with the Father.


And in the humanity Jesus is what?.......
What is Jesus in his humanity?.......

The answer is that Jesus is flesh.

[alanmolstad]

and that is what Jesus is talking about with the words "A spirit does not have..."

Jesus was referring to his humanity.

[James Banta]

and that is what Jesus is talking about with the words "A spirit does not have..."

Jesus was referring to his humanity.

So He is saying that a Spirit has no humanity? I think you are fishing for a meaning beyond what Jesus is saying.. He said that a Spirit doesn't have a body of flesh and bone.. Lets not do the twist with the Scripture.. IHS jim

[alanmolstad]

So He is saying that a Spirit has no humanity? I think you are fishing for a meaning beyond what Jesus is saying.. He said that a Spirit doesn't have a body of flesh and bone.. Lets not do the twist with the Scripture.. IHS jim Jesus was not referring to the divine nature...he was refering to his humanity.

Its like this, Jesus was the "Word" in John 1 and was pure spirit.
The word becomes flesh, but never stops being pure spirit.
This is why Jesus is said to be "The image of the invisible God", for Jesus is both God and man, both pure spirit and human flesh.
Jesus being God in his nature has the same substance as the Father and the Holy Spirit, and that substance is pure spirit.

But in his 2nd nature as being 100% human his substance is flesh.

jesus died.
Jesus died the same type of death that all men suffer, the same death that Adam died and p***ed on to all men.
Jesus overcame this death, and so we now have Jesus in s resurrected body of flesh, human flesh....but everlasting flesh.


So when Jesus said that a spirit does not have flesh and bone as you see I have , he is referring to his humanity.

This is then our only example of what our own resurrections will be like.

So when Jesus was pointing out his human body, he was drawing attention to his humanity.....the idea was that we can see Jesus human body, see it is now resurrected, and then have faith that our own human bodies of flesh will likewise come out of the grave one day.

[alanmolstad]

and that is what Jesus is talking about with the words "A spirit does not have..."

Jesus was referring to his humanity.
bump for review

[dberrie2000]

again, in his deity Jesus is spirit.

Was Jesus Christ Deity in this instance? :


Luke 24:39--King James Version (KJV)


39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

[alanmolstad]

Was Jesus Christ Deity in this instance? :


Luke 24:39--King James Version (KJV)


39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

Ah, remember Jesus has 2 natures, divine and?______and?_______

and 'human"!


So when the men saw him standing there after they knew he had truly died all they first thought was that it "Had to be his ghost", so Jesus told them to grab a hold of him and feel, for you cant feel a ghost....ghosts have no flesh.

But humans have flesh.....and Jesus was 100% human just as we are 100% human.


This allows us a guide to what our own resurrection will be like.
because we are just as human as Jesus is human, therefore just as Jesus was raised we then can have faith that God can also raise our own mortal human bodies from the grave.

So just because Jesus has 1st nature of being human with a body of flesh it does not mean for one second that he was not also fully God (John 20:28 )and with a 2nd nature of being divine/spirit, ( Luke 23:46).....

[alanmolstad]

I wonder why you don't answer "God the Father does not have a body of flesh and bones, God the Son has a resurrected body."

Could it be because it complicates your explanation?Im not sure I understood your question....But I can share what i have learned over the years...


the father has no body,,,the Father is pure spirit.

The Word of John 1:1 has no body, but in the story if the incarnation, the Bible tells us that the Word is wrapped in the flesh of a human and born of a woman.

So this does not mean that the WORD gave up being pure spirit, but rather the story tells us that the Word was given a 2nd nature.....and was made man.

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Postagain, in his deity Jesus is spirit.


Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View PostWas Jesus Christ Deity in this instance? :


Luke 24:39--King James Version (KJV)


39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.




Ah, remember Jesus has 2 natures, divine and?______and?_______

and 'human"!


Are you stating that Jesus was not divine in His resurrected form? Where do we find your explanation in the Bible?

[alanmolstad]

Are you stating that Jesus was not divine in His resurrected form?
Jesus has 2 natures....

fully God ("My Lord and my God")

fully man ( "the man Christ Jesus")

Both natures in the one person.
Fully God, fully man....


He died a fully human death, (just like us)
He was raised in an everlasting body of flesh and bone (just like we will be too)

[alanmolstad]

Where do we find your explanation in the Bible?


The human nature of Christ is talked about at 1 Timothy 2:5

The Divine nature of Christ is talked about John 20:28

[alanmolstad]

have we dealt with this topic enough then?

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post---Are you stating that Jesus was not divine in His resurrected form?


Jesus has 2 natures....

fully God ("My Lord and my God")

fully man ( "the man Christ Jesus")

Both natures in the one person.
Fully God, fully man....


He died a fully human death, (just like us)
He was raised in an everlasting body of flesh and bone (just like we will be too)

Does not touch my question. Was Jesus Christ, in His resurrected form--Divine?

[alanmolstad]

Jesus is the God/man.....always Divine, always human...

never a moment in the story of Jesus when he was not fully God and fully man...

This is the point of the incarnation, where God wrapped himself in human flesh and died as a man....so that we might have faith that one day we too will be raised just as Jesus was raised!

Thus, my answer is correct as posted -
"Jesus has 2 natures....

fully God ("My Lord and my God")

fully man ( "the man Christ Jesus")

Both natures in the one person.
Fully God, fully man....


He died a fully human death, (just like us)
He was raised in an everlasting body of flesh and bone (just like we will be too)"

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post---Are you stating that Jesus was not divine in His resurrected form?



Jesus is the God/man.....always Divine, always human...

never a moment in the story of Jesus when he was not fully God and fully man...

This is the point of the incarnation, where God wrapped himself in human flesh and died as a man....so that we might have faith that one day we too will be raised just as Jesus was raised!

Thus, my answer is correct as posted -
"Jesus has 2 natures....

fully God ("My Lord and my God")

fully man ( "the man Christ Jesus")

Both natures in the one person.
Fully God, fully man....


He died a fully human death, (just like us)
He was raised in an everlasting body of flesh and bone (just like we will be too)"

If Jesus was Divine always--then He was Divine both as flesh and bones--and spirit.


Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post----again, in his deity Jesus is spirit.

And as flesh and bones:


Luke 24:39---King James Version (KJV)


39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

[alanmolstad]

If Jesus was Divine always--
Jesus was always divine, but was then given a 2nd nature that is human.

He was no different than we are....

We know this because if he was different, if he was not truly "human" then the fact that god was able to raise his "non-human" body from the grave would be moot....

The resurrection of Christ would be moot as far as learning about our own resurrections...

[alanmolstad]

So what the resurrection body of Jesus is for us is a guide.....

it's how we can know and have faith that God who raised Jesus from the dead will also be able to raise us too...

This is why Jesus wanted his men to handle him and have faith, for he wants us to understand that our bodies will come back to life one day, just as his did....

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post---Are you stating that Jesus was not divine in His resurrected form?


Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post---Jesus is the God/man.....always Divine, always human...

never a moment in the story of Jesus when he was not fully God and fully man...

This is the point of the incarnation, where God wrapped himself in human flesh and died as a man....so that we might have faith that one day we too will be raised just as Jesus was raised!

Thus, my answer is correct as posted -
"Jesus has 2 natures....

fully God ("My Lord and my God")

fully man ( "the man Christ Jesus")

Both natures in the one person.
Fully God, fully man....


He died a fully human death, (just like us)
He was raised in an everlasting body of flesh and bone (just like we will be too)"



dberrie----If Jesus was Divine always--then He was Divine both as flesh and bones--and spirit.


Jesus was always divine, but was then given a 2nd nature that is human.

Again--if Jesus was always Divine--then He was Divine in any form or nature.


He was no different than we are....

Yes He was. He was the Only Begotten--He had a heavenly Father and an earthly mother, as to His flesh. He was different. Unique--as to the mortal physical body.

[alanmolstad]

Just so long as you understand that Jesus has two totally different natures...he was and is God Almighty, the only true god...("my Lord and my God")

and Jesus was and is truly 100% human just as we are, ("the MAN Christ Jesus")


so its 2 natures = one person

[dberrie2000]

Just so long as you understand that Jesus has two totally different natures...he was and is God Almighty, the only true god...("my Lord and my God")

and Jesus was and is truly 100% human just as we are, ("the MAN Christ Jesus")


so its 2 natures = one person

Actually--the "only true God" was not a designation used to denote Christ in the NT--but Christ's God.



John 17:3---King James Version (KJV)


3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

[Billyray]

Actually--the "only true God" was not a designation used to denote Christ in the NT--but Christ's God.

Do you believe Christ is a false god?

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post---Just so long as you understand that Jesus has two totally different natures...he was and is God Almighty, the only true god...("my Lord and my God")

and Jesus was and is truly 100% human just as we are, ("the MAN Christ Jesus")


so its 2 natures = one person


dberrie----Actually--the "only true God" was not a designation used to denote Christ in the NT--but Christ's God.


John 17:3---King James Version (KJV)


3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.


Do you believe Christ is a false god?

No--that is just the knee-**** reaction to scriptures that defy faith alone theology.

The fact is--the only One ever designated as the "only true God" or the "one God" in the NT was the God of Jesus Christ---God the Father.


Ephesians 4:4-6---King James Version (KJV)


4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;

5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

[Billyray]

No--that is just the knee-**** reaction to scriptures that defy faith alone theology.


But if the Father is the ONLY true God then you must believe that Jesus is a false god. Isn't that right?

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post---Just so long as you understand that Jesus has two totally different natures...he was and is God Almighty, the only true god...("my Lord and my God")


dberrie----Actually--the "only true God" was not a designation used to denote Christ in the NT--but Christ's God.


John 17:3---King James Version (KJV)


3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.


Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post---Do you believe Christ is a false god?


Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post---No--that is just the knee-**** reaction to scriptures that defy faith alone theology.

The fact is--the only One ever designated as the "only true God" or the "one God" in the NT was the God of Jesus Christ---God the Father.


Ephesians 4:4-6---King James Version (KJV)


4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;

5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.



But if the Father is the ONLY true God then you must believe that Jesus is a false god. Isn't that right?

No, anymore than John thought Jesus was a false God--or Paul. They were the ones who placed Christ outside of the "only true God" or the "one God" of the NT.


1 Corinthians 8:6---King James Version (KJV)


6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

It just means that the Trinitarian theology is false, as we have it today--not the Biblical text.

Billyray--the fact of the Divine Council destroyed that years ago. Or are you not aware of the fact that most Biblical scholars now accept that as a reality?

[Libby]

Reading a little bit on this thread and this is an area where I have come to agree with Orthodox Christianity.

The Bible does say that God is Spirit and I do believe encasing him in a human body (even an exalted body) is to diminish the greatness..the vastness, the immensity of who He truly is..

That doesn't mean He cannot show himself, at times, in a "physical" way, like the burning bush..or even with human characteristics (like Christ), but I don't think any of that is His permanent state of being.

[alanmolstad]

He was different. Unique--as to the mortal physical body.Nope......totally wrong by the way and missed the whole point of being born a 'man"

The bible is very clear that Jesus was made "man".....not "almost human"....

Not "almost a man"

Not "human-looking".......


None of that junk....

The Bible teaches us very clearly that Jesus was born of Mary and is a "man"

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

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post---He was different. Unique--as to the mortal physical body.


Nope......totally wrong by the way and missed the whole point of being born a 'man"

The bible is very clear that Jesus was made "man".....not "almost human"....

Not "almost a man"

Not "human-looking".......


None of that junk....


What is it about "The Only Begotten Son" you do not consider unique?

Could you explain for us what mortal man here on this earth ever had an earthly mother and a Heavenly Father?


The Bible teaches us very clearly that Jesus was born of Mary and is a "man"

Correct. A unique man. The Only Begotten Son. The only man ever born to this earth with a Heavenly Father and an earthly mother.

[alanmolstad]

What is it about "The Only Begotten Son"The term "only begotton" refers to the special relationship the father has with the son....
It's the bond...the special love between them...

This is why the Bible talks about a person being the "only begotten son" when that same son was not the first born son actually....there was a different son that was the first person born , but when you say that someone is the "only begotten" you are pointing to the special relationship you have with that person..

So this has nothing to do with biology, nothing to do with birth order, but has everything to do with a type of loving relationship you have with the person.

Now, while Jesus is the "only begotten" he is still fully human.

remember, there is not one line in the Bible that even slightly HINTS that Jesus was not a man......not 100% full human!!!!



So Jesus has to be 100% fully human as I am, or else I can not trust that the resurrection of Christ means i too can be resurrected.


But because I know that Jesus was fully a 'man'.....was fully a mortal human just as i am in every way, then i can look at his resurrection as a guide to my own future resurrection....

This is why the bible is so clear that Jesus is a "man"

Not a "man-like" creature....

not a "man-looking" person

not a Man/angel cross bread.....

But just a fully,normal, guy......just like me.


The resurrection of Jesus gives me the faith that just as God raised the fully human Body of Christ from the dead, he will be able in the same way to call my dead body from the grave....


AMEN!

[alanmolstad]

So before Jesus was wrapped in human flesh, he was still eternal god as is the father....

Jesus was known as the "WORD" in the book of John, and the WORD is eternally God ....

So Jesus was is and will always be god almighty...but 2000 years ago wrapped himself in human flesh and was born a 100% fully Human!

Still eternal God, without beginning , without ending,,,,
But so that he could die as a man, he was wrapped in the body of men....and was and is and will always be, fully 100% human!

[nrajeffreturns]

Now, while Jesus is the "only begotten" he is still fully human.
remember, there is not one line in the Bible that even slightly HINTS that Jesus was not a man......not 100% full human!!!!
So Jesus has to be 100% fully human as I am, or else I can not trust that the resurrection of Christ means i too can be resurrected.
But because I know that Jesus was fully a 'man'.....was fully a mortal human just as i am in every way, then i can look at his resurrection as a guide to my own future resurrection....

This is why the bible is so clear that Jesus is a "man"

Not a "man-like" creature....

not a "man-looking" person

not a Man/angel cross bread.....

But just a fully,normal, guy......just like me.
AMEN!


But when an LDS leader said that God was once like us, some contra-LDS people yelled "He said that God was a SINNER, because if God was just like us, and we are sinners, then it has to mean that God was a sinner."

I am willing to not jump to such unwarranted conclusions in the case of your statement, however. I prefer to ***ume that you mean that Jesus was just like you as far as having a human body was concerned....not that He was just like you in every way including being a sinner.

[Billyray]

But when an LDS leader said that God was once like us, some contra-LDS people yelled "He said that God was a SINNER, because if God was just like us, and we are sinners, then it has to mean that God was a sinner."

Then God was not really like us then Jeff was he?

"As man is God once was, as God is man may be."

And you can't expect to be like God if you reject the first part of the couplet.

[nrajeffreturns]

Then God was not really like us then Jeff was he?
Then according to your argument, Jesus was not really like Alan Molstad, was He?

So what are ya gonna do with Alan's definite statement that Jesus is "just a fully,normal, guy......just like me." ???

[Billyray]

Then according to your argument, Jesus was not really like Alan Molstad, was He?

Other than in a superficial ways we as people are in no way like God/Jesus. Rather we are his creation and he is our creator.

[Libby]

Other than in a superficial ways we as people are in no way like God/Jesus. Rather we are his creation and he is our creator.

Our spiritual likenesses are more than "superficial". God made us in his image, which I believe means his spiritual image. We share many of his attributes....love, a sense of justice, creativity, a general knowledge of right and wrong, etc. If we allow him into our lives, allow him to live in us and to sanctify us, he will begin to perfect those natural attributes.

[Billyray]

Our spiritual likenesses are more than "superficial". God made us in his image, which I believe means his spiritual image. We share many of his attributes....love, a sense of justice, creativity, a general knowledge of right and wrong, etc. If we allow him into our lives, allow him to live in us and to sanctify us, he will begin to perfect those natural attributes.
Would you say that you are just like God?

[Libby]

Would you say that you are just like God?

No. Far from it.

[nrajeffreturns]

Would you say that you are just like God?

Would Alan say that he is just like Jesus?

[Billyray]

No. Far from it.
What a blasphemous statement. No Christian that I know would ever make such a statement.

[Libby]

What a blasphemous statement. No Christian that I know would ever make such a statement.

Really?

Okay, then, Billy...we are EXACTLY like God.

I know if I had said THAT, you would also be screaming "blasphemy".

You're like some angry little kid who is just looking to punch something (namely me).

[alanmolstad]

Would Alan say that he is just like Jesus?well.....as far as my humanity?...yes!,


Im 100% HUMAN.....
Jesus is 100% human....

The Resurrection of Christ was a normal resurrection of a normal human body...that's why I known and have faith that i too will be raised from the dead..

If the body of Christ was different in nature than my own I could not be 100% sure his resurrection was at all relevant to my own....

[alanmolstad]

Then according to your argument, Jesus was not really like Alan Molstad, was He?

So what are ya gonna do with Alan's definite statement that Jesus is "just a fully,normal, guy......just like me." ???
in his humanity Jesus was just a normal guy....just like me....thats why i can be his true human "brother"

But in his other nature, the nature of Divine?...oh, then Jesus was equal to the father and the HS alone....and that why Jesus is the only mediator between God and man....being Both...

Jesus is one person with two totally different natures.

[alanmolstad]

But when an LDS leader said that God was once like us, some contra-LDS people yelled "He said that God was a SINNER,
the first I heard about the Mormon god being a sinner was when a link was posted on another forum to a Mormon's website where a Mormon believer came out with this idea and was attempting to show other Mormons that this is not a teaching they need to be afraid of....


as far as I know, thats the only place where someone has come up with this teaching...

[nrajeffreturns]

well.....as far as my humanity?...yes!,
I agree. Good answer.


Im 100% HUMAN.....
Jesus is 100% human....
Yes indeed.

And that is all Joseph Smith and Lorenzo Snow meant when they said that God was once like us.
Now, you may have to convince Billy of the truth of your belief about you and Jesus. But I am with you.

[Billyray]

Really?

Okay, then, Billy...we are EXACTLY like God.

I know if I had said THAT, you would also be screaming "blasphemy".

You're like some angry little kid who is just looking to punch something (namely me).
Libby your ignore scripture, you throw out sections of the Bible that you don't like, you refuse to support your opinions with scripture. And you call yourself Christian. Why should anyone believe you?

[Libby]

That's simply not true, Billy. I haven't thrown anything out...and I've very capable of supporting what I believe with scripture.

But, since I am in repentance mode, I do admit that I gave that impression a few months back.

Have I had questions and doubts? Yes. But, I am working my way through those problem areas with my Pastor. I never lost my faith in Christ...which is the only reason this was even possible.

Now, I am sorting out some of the heavier issues that I had with Calvinism. I'm not sure where that will take me.....it "might" take me right back to where I started....I don't know. But, at least, I am back within, what I consider, biblical belief/territory.

You can either make this more difficult for me...or try to encourage and help. It's up to you. So far you seem to be choosing to make it difficult.

[Billyray]

That's simply not true, Billy. I haven't thrown anything out...and I've very capable of supporting what I believe with scripture.


You believe that babies do not sin go ahead and give me some verses that support this position.

[Billyray]

Now, I am sorting out some of the heavier issues that I had with Calvinism. .

Why not go to an Arminian church--that seems simple enough.

[Libby]

Why not go to an Arminian church--that seems simple enough.

Yes, that is possible, at some point. Right now, my husband is very attached to this Reformed Church. The Pastor there has been very helpful to both of us, so I am reluctant to change, right now, even though my beliefs do not line up perfectly. But, there is really not a lot of constant emphasis on those problem areas, and I have actually grown in faith, in this church. The Pastor's sermons are very Christ centered....and he is very kind. It's really okay, for now.

[Billyray]

Yes, that is possible, at some point. Right now, my husband is very attached to this Reformed Church.

But you are having such a hard time with it that it seems like you are drifting further from God rather than closer. I am sure that there is a church that you and your husband can find that is more neutral, at least until you get through some of the issues that you are having and you could always go back. Bottom line is that in practical terms there is not a lot of differences between the two if you sit down and look at it. And that is why I don't mind talking about it because after all is said and done we basically come to the same conclusion. For example a person is either elect or not before he is even born and you can't change that. This is believed by both sides. Look at the atonement issue the atonement is applied only to the elect. This is also believed by both sides. Look at salvation, both believe that we are saved by grace through faith and not by works. Here is another issue--one belief says that you can loose your salvation and the other says that those who fall away were never saved in the first place but the result is still the same in that both would agree that the person is not saved.

[Libby]

But you are having such a hard time with it that it seems like you are drifting further from God rather than closer.

No, not really. I have actually come a long way in the last three months. And, like I said, my husband loves this church, especially the Pastor (and so do I, really), so I am afraid he simply would stop going, if I changed. That's what he did before. It took years to get him back in the church...I don't want to disturb what he has in this one.


Bottom line is that in practical terms there is not a lot of differences between the two if you sit down and look at it.

Yes, I'm coming around to seeing that...which is why I said, I could end up back where I started. I think, I just needed to work through some things that were troubling me. Sometimes, when you step away from something, for awhile, as I did, you can come back with a new perspective.

[Billyray]

Yes, I'm coming around to seeing that...which is why I said, I could end up back where I started. I think, I just needed to work through some things that were troubling me. Sometimes, when you step away from something, for awhile, as I did, you can come back with a new perspective.
Let me give you an example that shows that when you look at it in a practical way the Arminianism and Calvinism position are really closer than you realize.

1. Person A is elect and will be saved.

2. Person B is not elect and will not be saved.

3. Person A is elect and person B is not elect before either were even born.


Thus far we should be in agreement.

From my point of view person A is elect and will be saved, and person B is not elect and will not be saved.

From your perspective person A is elect and will be saved, and person B is not elect and will not be saved.

Despite our differences in why person A is elect and person B is not elect, it in no way changes the fact that person A is elect and person B is not elect. From a practical standpoint there is no difference.

Lets take that one step further. Neither you or I know who is elect and who is not elect thus both of us would share the gospel with both person A and person B and invite both to come to Christ by faith. And we both would agree that both persons have a choice to either accept Christ or reject him. We would also agree that the basis for salvation is faith and those who place their faith in Christ will be saved. We also would agree that person A will accept Christ sometime in his lifetime and that person B will never accept Christ. Again from a practical standpoint our beliefs are the same.

[Libby]

Let me give you an example that shows that when you look at it in a practical way the Arminianism and Calvinism position are really closer than you realize.

1. Person A is elect and will be saved.

2. Person B is not elect and will not be saved.

3. Person A is elect and person B is not elect before either were even born.


Thus far we should be in agreement.

From my point of view person A is elect and will be saved, and person B is not elect and will not be saved.

From your perspective person A is elect and will be saved, and person B is not elect and will not be saved.

Despite our differences in why person A is elect and person B is not elect, it in no way changes the fact that person A is elect and person B is not elect. From a practical standpoint there is no difference.

Lets take that one step further. Neither you or I know who is elect and who is not elect thus both of us would share the gospel with both person A and person B and invite both to come to Christ by faith. And we both would agree that both persons have a choice to either accept Christ or reject him. We would also agree that the basis for salvation is faith and those who place their faith in Christ will be saved. We also would agree that person A will accept Christ sometime in his lifetime and that person B will never accept Christ. Again from a practical standpoint our beliefs are the same.

Yes, I understand what you're saying and I agree...practically speaking, they are the same. I saw that when you pointed it out before...

[Billyray]

Yes, I understand what you're saying and I agree...practically speaking, they are the same. I saw that when you pointed it out before...
Now lets look at the example of a baby. Jeff would say that a baby all the way up until age 8 doesn't sin. You would say that a baby doesn't sin but a 3-4 year old and upward sins. And I would say that we all sin. We would likely all agree that a child is incapable of accepting Christ. My personal belief (which is not based on scripture because the Bible is silent on this issue, with the exception of David's child, which is why I don't state it as fact) is that a baby/child sins but that since he is incapable of understanding right or wrong and is incapable at that age of accepting Christ he or his is sinful but not accountable thus will likely be saved. Jeff on the other hand says that children up to age 8 don't sin (which means that they do sin but is not called sin because he doesn't know right from wrong i.e. not accountable) thus this is the basis for his or her salvation. In a practical sense we would agree on this point. And your belief is probably in between Jeff's belief and my belief.

[Libby]

Now lets look at the example of a baby. Jeff would say that a baby all the way up until age 8 doesn't sin. You would say that a baby doesn't sin but a 3-4 year old and upward sins. And I would say that we all sin. We would likely all agree that a child is incapable of accepting Christ. My personal belief (which is not based on scripture because the Bible is silent on this issue, with the exception of David's child, which is why I don't state it as fact) is that a baby/child sins but that since he is incapable of understanding right or wrong and is incapable at that age of accepting Christ he or his is sinful but not accountable thus will likely be saved. Jeff on the other hand says that children up to age 8 don't sin (which means that they do sin but is not called sin because he doesn't know right from wrong i.e. not accountable) thus this is the basis for his or her salvation. In a practical sense we would agree on this point. And your belief is probably in between Jeff's belief and my belief.

I'm not sure Jeff would agree that children don't sin...only that they are not accountable until around age eight. I think Jeff and I agree that babies don't sin (and my belief is mostly from observation....I just don't think one can call anything a new baby does "sin"). But, I think they do start sinning quite young (long before the age of three).

I think you're right that we can all agree that children are not "accountable" until they really understand what "sin" means and are old enough to turn to Christ.

[nrajeffreturns]

I'm not sure Jeff would agree that children don't sin...only that they are not accountable until around age eight.
Yes, that is pretty much it--what I believe is that 8 is the minimum age at which a person could safely be considered to be accountable. The actual age will very from person to person, depending individual circumstances such as intelligence, upbringing, environments, etc. For a retarded person from a broken home in an amoral 3rd-world country, a sufficient grasp of good and evil might not be reached until 20 or 40 or 60. A sociopath might never reach that state. That is why we try to only baptize people who seem to meet a minimum degree of accountability for their actions. IMO, some kids are precocious enough to reach that state before they are 8. But we wait until at least 8.


I think Jeff and I agree that babies don't sin (and my belief is mostly from observation....I just don't think one can call anything a new baby does "sin").
Yes. Not just by observation, though--you can arrive at that conclusion merely by common sense, too.


But, I think they do start sinning quite young (long before the age of three).
IMO, only in a few rare cases.


I think you're right that we can all agree that children are not "accountable" until they really understand what "sin" means and are old enough to turn to Christ.
If we ALL agree on the truth of that, then I am glad.

[Billyray]

Yes, that is pretty much it--what I believe is that 8 is the minimum age at which a person could safely be considered to be accountable.
If we ALL agree on the truth of that, then I am glad.

I think the very definition of the word sin helps us figure out who sins and who does not. If sin is the knowing, deliberate disobedience to God's will, then we sin when we understand that doing something would be wrong, and we deliberately do it anyway. In order to sin, you have to be able to sin. Babies can't sin because they lack both the requirements:

They don't understand what God's will is yet.
Therefore anything they did or failed to do was not rebellion against God on purpose.

If we understand the above, then it helps us figure out the group of people the NT was referring to where it says that all have sinned. It has to exclude babies, just like "ALL" excludes Jesus, because although Jesus knew right from wrong, good and evil, He never deliberately rebelled against God.

If I get too much change back at the store and I don't realize it, I took money that didn't belong to me, but I didn't do it on purpose, so it's not a sin. If I later realize my "sin" and I fail to return the money, THEN it's a sin.
So do children under the age of 8 know right from wrong?

[Billyray]

Yes. Not just by observation, though--you can arrive at that conclusion merely by common sense, too.

Do you base your doctrine on what you feel is right or wrong OR based on what the word of God teaches?

[Libby]

If we ALL agree on the truth of that, then I am glad.

Me too. And, I am really tired of this particular discussion. I think we have hit all sides of it.

[nrajeffreturns]

So do children under the age of 8 know right from wrong?

Some most likely do.

Do ALL babies under 1 year old know right from wrong?

[nrajeffreturns]

Do you base your doctrine on what you feel is right or wrong OR based on what the word of God teaches?
What I feel is right or wrong IS based on what the word of God teaches, so the answer is "both." :)

[Billyray]

What I feel is right or wrong IS based on what the word of God teaches, so the answer is "both." :)
But you have proven that your beliefs do not line up with the Bible, so the only thing that I can conclude is that you base your beliefs either on your feelings or some other source.

[Billyray]

Some most likely do.

Do ALL babies under 1 year old know right from wrong?
I don't think children in general are fully aware of right and wrong. But you didn't address the point I was making, you said "If sin is the knowing, deliberate disobedience to God's will. . .".

So do children under 8 sin or not?

[nrajeffreturns]

But you have proven that your beliefs do not line up with the Bible,
I say that YOU have proven the YOUR beliefs do not line up with the Bible. so the only thing that I can conclude is that you base your beliefs either on your feelings or some other source, such as a Creed or some tract or website.

[nrajeffreturns]

I don't think children in general are fully aware of right and wrong.
How fully is a 1-week-old baby aware of right and wrong?



So do children under 8 sin or not?
Some most likely do. Are you saying that ALL of them do? I guess you HAVE to say that, since you take the verse "all have sinned" to an irrationally literal extent.

[Billyray]

How fully is a 1-week-old baby of right and wrong?

As I said I don't think children--which would include infants--are fully aware of right and wrong.

[Billyray]

Some most likely do.
If children under the age of 8 are aware of right and wrong and sin what happens to them since they are not baptized?

[nrajeffreturns]

Their sins get remitted when they do get baptized.

[Billyray]

Their sins get remitted when they do get baptized.

What happens if they die prior to getting baptized?

[nrajeffreturns]

What happens if they die prior to getting baptized?

Someone who isn't dead yet can baptize them by proxy in a temple, of course!

[Billyray]

Someone who isn't dead yet can baptize them by proxy in a temple, of course!
So you believe that some children under 8 require baptism?

[nrajeffreturns]

So you believe that some children under 8 require baptism?

I believe that everyone who reaches a state of accountability and then sins, needs baptism, sooner or later. That's what's so great about LDS doctrine.

[Billyray]

I believe that everyone who reaches a state of accountability and then sins, needs baptism, sooner or later. That's what's so great about LDS doctrine.
http://mormon.org/faq/baptism-beliefs
". . .Immersion is symbolic of the death of a person’s sinful life and the rebirth into a spiritual life, dedicated to the service of God and His children. It is also symbolic of death and resurrection. (See Romans 6:3-6) Little children are redeemed through the mercy of Jesus Christ. They are “alive in Christ” and cannot sin. They do not need baptism until they understand the difference between right and wrong. The Lord has revealed that children should be baptized at eight years of age. (See Book of Mormon, Moroni 8:8-24; Doctrine and Covenants 29:46-47, 68:27). . ."

[alanmolstad]

The age of accountability means you reach the age where you are held accountable for your sins...it doesn't mean you start to sin at only that age...

There is a Bible verse that talks about how God "overlooked " the actions of people who for one reason or another were in the dark of their sins

[dberrie2000]

So you believe that some children under 8 require baptism?

Children under the age of 8 do not need baptism, if they die before that age.

[Billyray]

Children under the age of 8 do not need baptism, if they die before that age.

Do children under 8 years old sin?

[nrajeffreturns]

Do children under 8 years old sin?

Pretty sure the ones under 8 DAYS old don't sin, so that's all we need to know in order to conclude that it's wrong to say that "all have sinned" includes them.

[Billyray]

Pretty sure the ones under 8 DAYS old don't sin, so that's all we need to know in order to conclude that it's wrong to say that "all have sinned" includes them.
But what about the question that I actually asked you?

Do children under 8 years old sin?

[alanmolstad]

Pretty sure the ones under 8 DAYS old don't sin, .
Got a verse that teaches this?, or is it just your own idea you made up?

[nrajeffreturns]

But what about the question that I actually asked you?

Do children under 8 years old sin?

Either it's wrong to say that "all have sinned" includes all infants and fetuses, or it's right to say it. That's the bottom line.

Which side are you on regarding this issue?

[Billyray]

Either it's wrong to say that "all have sinned" includes all infants and fetuses, or it's right to say it. That's the bottom line.

Which side are you on regarding this issue?
Why are you dodging my question?

Do children under 8 years old sin?

[alanmolstad]

Why are you dodging my question?

Do children under 8 years old sin?
They sin.....but God is just and judges them accordingly...overlooking the sins of they who know not what they do.

[James Banta]

They sin.....but God is just and judges them accordingly...overlooking the sins of they who know not what they do.

Do you really believe that God "overlooks" sin, any sin? All it cost to bring those who don't understand the difference between right and wrong is the blood of our dear Lord Jesus. I wouldn't call that "overlooking" their sin.. IHS jim

[alanmolstad]

yes there is a bible verse that talks about god overlooking sins

[BigJulie]

Proof that these debates just go round and round---same stuff, over and over again.

[James Banta]

Proof that these debates just go round and round---same stuff, over and over again.

When someone (A criminal) comments the same crime over and over again do they not get the same lecture from the police and the judge? Of course! Have you given up the crime of worshiping three different Gods? As long as you haven;t the questions as to why not and the lectures on why it is wrong will continue.. IHS jim

[Libby]

Proof that these debates just go round and round---same stuff, over and over again.

Pretty much. And, no one's mind ever seems to change, which is kind of like the the definition of "insane"....we keep doing the same thing, expecting a different outcome. Crazy. :)

[James Banta]

Pretty much. And, no one's mind ever seems to change, which is kind of like the the definition of "insane"....we keep doing the same thing, expecting a different outcome. Crazy. :)

What we say here are seeds.. A few will fall on fertile soil and grow.. Others will fall on hard soil and the feet of men will grind them into powder.. I will continue to scatter the seeds and allow God to bring the increase.. IHS jim

[dberrie2000]

DBerrie2000 said: "even when Jesus Christ is added in the same sentence:"

St John17:3--"And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent."

The question is WHY is Jesus Christ even added to the same sentence? Because eternal life is dependent on what? By knowing the only true God and... who else? Why parallel the two?
1 John 5:20 "And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.


Sorry, JD, but that dog just ain't gonna hunt. One cannot state that there are different persons as God, and ***ign them two different substances--one a physical body,(God the Son) and the other without a physical body(God the Father) and then state it is the same substance.

Unless you want to establish the fact, that as God, where they all combine--- there is only one--that they are of the same substance. In that case--is it a Spirit and a physical Body--or just a Spirit?


Bump for anyone.

[alanmolstad]

The humanity of Christ has a body.....the divinity that he shares with the Father and the Spirit is pure Spirit.

Jesus has two full and complete natures....the father only has one, as does the Holy Spirit.

[dberrie2000]

Jesus has two full and complete natures....the father only has one, as does the Holy Spirit.

Interesting.

So--does God have two natures--or one?

[alanmolstad]

Perhaps I did not make it clear...

The Bible tells us that for our salvation, the Word became flesh...
The Word never stopped being fully God.
But so that man might forgiven the Word became flesh, and died.


So the nature of God did not change, for the Bible tells us that God changes not.
But the Word also took on himself the additional nature of mankind too.


Thus in the person of Christ we find both the nature of God (spirit) and the nature of man (flesh)

Two natures in the one person.
Fully God almighty, and fully man.

So The Son is fully God in the same way that the father and the Spirit are God, and that did not change.,
But unlike the Father or the Spirit the Son became man,,,,,,a spirit wrapped in flesh.




any questions?_________

[dberrie2000]

Perhaps I did not make it clear...

The Bible tells us that for our salvation, the Word became flesh...
The Word never stopped being fully God.
But so that man might forgiven the Word became flesh, and died.


So the nature of God did not change, for the Bible tells us that God changes not.
But the Word also took on himself the additional nature of mankind too.


Thus in the person of Christ we find both the nature of God (spirit) and the nature of man (flesh)

Two natures in the one person.
Fully God almighty, and fully man.

So The Son is fully God in the same way that the father and the Spirit are God, and that did not change.,
But unlike the Father or the Spirit the Son became man,,,,,,a spirit wrapped in flesh.

How can the Son be unlike the Father--if they are the same God? Are you claiming that God is unlike Himself? IOW--if God the Son has a resurrected body of flesh and bones--and the Father does not--then how can they be the same God?

[alanmolstad]

I wonder why you don't answer "God the Father does not have a body of flesh and bones, God the Son has a resurrected body."

Could it be because it complicates your explanation?an odd question to ask.

First off, God never has a body of flesh and bones, or flesh and blood, or flesh and french fries etc.
God is spirit and is always spirit.,

But so that Jesus could die, Jesus was born with a 2nd nature too.

Jesus did not stop being God/Jesus did not stop being pure Spirit.
But Jesus also has a 2nd nature as a fully human man.

And it is because of this 2nd nature that Jesus has a body.


The father never had a 2nd nature, nor the Holy Spirit, .....so no bodies too

....

[dberrie2000]

an odd question to ask.

First off, God never has a body of flesh and bones, or flesh and blood, or flesh and french fries etc.

Then you don't believe Jesus Christ is God?

Luke 24:39--King James Version (KJV)
39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

[alanmolstad]

Then you don't believe Jesus Christ is God?

.[/B]

I believe I have stated very clearly on many topics here that Jesus is God Almighty....the one and only God there is.

You can check but I think I have made that point very clear.......over and over...........and over some more....

[dberrie2000]

I believe I have stated very clearly on many topics here that Jesus is God Almighty....the one and only God there is.

Then you might want to collate that with your previous statements:


Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post an odd question to ask.

First off, God never has a body of flesh and bones, or flesh and blood, or flesh and french fries etc.

Luke 24:39--King James Version (KJV)
39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

[Berean]

Quote:





I thought this might be a good question for the forum to discuss. Any comments?

Of course.

The Book of Mormon says God is Spirit: Alma 18:26-28, Alma 22:8-11

While the D&C 130:22 says yes: "The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as a man's; the Son also...".

But D&C 38:1-7 says that Jesus is invisible: "I am in your midst and ye cannot see me."

While D&C Section 130:22 insists God has a body.

LoF says that the Godhead consists of both.. two personages, God the Father and God the Son, "the Father being a personage of spirit...[and] the Son,... a personage of tabernacle... and is called the Son because of the flesh..." The Son possesses "the same mind with the Father, which mind is the Holy Spirit... and these three cons***ute the Godhead, and are one..."

Alma 18:26-28 says God is a Great Spirit, confirming John 4:24 ("God is Spirit").

Apostle Bruce R. McConkie claims John 4:24 is mistranslated (Mormon Doctrine, "God As A Spirit"). Joseph Smith even omits that p***age from his "Inspired Version" of the Bible, perhaps for that same reason, perhaps not, but never mind that neither Smith nor McConkie seem to notice that Alma 18:26-28 (supposedly a Divinely inspired work) has the same translation as John 4:24, the alleged "mistranslated" and therefore "uninspired" work.

This is explained by Mormons by saying of course God is Spirit, we all are spirit because we have a spirit and so does God. But, the LoF p***age clearly points out the difference between the Father and the Son in that the Son is a "personage of tabernacle" and "of the flesh" while the Father is a "personage of Spirit."

Confused? You should be.

The problem is plain here; Once you tell a lie you have to keep telling lies, and eventually the truth catches up with you.

[Christian]

Quote:

I thought this might be a good question for the forum to discuss. Any comments?

The FATHER has no flesh nor bones. HIS SON JESUS TOOK ON the physical body.
John 4:24
24 God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth."
NKJV

And Jesus said:

Luke 24:39
39 Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have."
NKJV

For CHRISTIANS that is pretty much the END of the discussion.
The Father is Spirit
Spirits do not have flesh and bones.

Sorry, but you cannot make the God of the Bible into a mere man (even if you call it an 'exalted' man). God is NOT a man. nor the son of a man.

Num 23:19
19 "God is not a man, that He should lie,
Nor a son of man, that He should repent.
NKJV

Now will you want to disagree with GOD about it?

[Christian]

The fact of the matter is, Apologette--you have delved in precious little Biblical verse discussion. Anyone who have read your post knows that you mine in the dirt shafts--and the Bible is not in your forte. That is a fact.

According to WHO? YOU? YOU seem to have little or NO understanding of scripture at all. SO WHO ARE YOU to say the Bible is not in Apologette's forte? She CLEARLY knows more of the Bible than you do imho.

[Berean]

Of course.

The Book of Mormon says God is Spirit: Alma 18:26-28, Alma 22:8-11

While the D&C 130:22 says yes: "The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as a man's; the Son also...".

But D&C 38:1-7 says that Jesus is invisible: "I am in your midst and ye cannot see me."

While D&C Section 130:22 insists God has a body.

LoF says that the Godhead consists of both.. two personages, God the Father and God the Son, "the Father being a personage of spirit...[and] the Son,... a personage of tabernacle... and is called the Son because of the flesh..." The Son possesses "the same mind with the Father, which mind is the Holy Spirit... and these three cons***ute the Godhead, and are one..."

Alma 18:26-28 says God is a Great Spirit, confirming John 4:24 ("God is Spirit").

Apostle Bruce R. McConkie claims John 4:24 is mistranslated (Mormon Doctrine, "God As A Spirit"). Joseph Smith even omits that p***age from his "Inspired Version" of the Bible, perhaps for that same reason, perhaps not, but never mind that neither Smith nor McConkie seem to notice that Alma 18:26-28 (supposedly a Divinely inspired work) has the same translation as John 4:24, the alleged "mistranslated" and therefore "uninspired" work.

This is explained by Mormons by saying of course God is Spirit, we all are spirit because we have a spirit and so does God. But, the LoF p***age clearly points out the difference between the Father and the Son in that the Son is a "personage of tabernacle" and "of the flesh" while the Father is a "personage of Spirit."

Confused? You should be.

The problem is plain here; Once you tell a lie you have to keep telling lies, and eventually the truth catches up with you.

Bump for DBerrie

[alanmolstad]

Perhaps I did not make it clear...

The Bible tells us that for our salvation, the Word became flesh...
The Word never stopped being fully God.
But so that man might forgiven the Word became flesh, and died.


So the nature of God did not change, for the Bible tells us that God changes not.
But the Word also took on himself the additional nature of mankind too.


Thus in the person of Christ we find both the nature of God (spirit) and the nature of man (flesh)

Two natures in the one person.
Fully God almighty, and fully man.

So The Son is fully God in the same way that the father and the Spirit are God, and that did not change.,
But unlike the Father or the Spirit the Son became man,,,,,,a spirit wrapped in flesh.




any questions?_________

I really like my answer here.
I believe it really addressed the very core of the doubt that some non-Christians might have about the Lord.

[Christian]

Then quit reading your posts. They are full of them.

More snot-nosed snark.

[dberrie2000]

According to WHO? YOU? YOU seem to have little or NO understanding of scripture at all. SO WHO ARE YOU to say the Bible is not in Apologette's forte? She CLEARLY knows more of the Bible than you do imho.

Then perhaps you could give us some examples of Apologette using the Biblical scriptures?

James 2:24---New American Standard Bible (NASB)
24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

[dberrie2000]

The FATHER has no flesh nor bones. HIS SON JESUS TOOK ON the physical body.
John 4:24
[COLOR=#b22222]24 God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth."

Then those who worship Him are spirit also.

So--does God have a body of flesh and bones? You do believe there is only one God?

Luke 24:39--King James Version (KJV)
39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

[alanmolstad]

God does not have a body of flesh and bones.





Jesus is both God and man.


The human nature of Jesus has a body of flesh and bone
The divine nature of Jesus does not have a body of flesh and bone.



two natures in the one person......Amen!

[dberrie2000]

God does not have a body of flesh and bones.

Then, IMO--that is an admission you don't believe Jesus is God:

Luke 24:39--King James Version (KJV)
39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

[alanmolstad]

Then, IMO-.......
???

when have I ever asked for your opinion?

I really don't care what you believe.

It's like they say, "You can lead a horse to water.......but......"



the only thing Im actually obligated to do on your behalf is to be ready always to give to you an answer, the reason for the hope I have in Christ.


Im not obligated to force you to believe...

Im just telling you the only correct answer....

[alanmolstad]

When Jesus voluntarily lowered himself to become like one of us wouldn't that include Jesus following God the Father like we are asked to do?

This is the correct answer...

[alanmolstad]

Then, IMO--that is an admission you don't believe Jesus is God:

Luke 24:39--King James Version (KJV)
39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

Jesus is both God and man...

Thus while I can say the God does not have a body of flesh, I can yet say that Jesus has a body of flesh, yet is also God.

For the nature of God did not change in Jesus, but with the nature of God Jesus also has the nature of man...

[alanmolstad]

Is not Jesus God also? How can God have a body of flesh and bones--and be a Spirit only--without a body of flesh and bones?

The answer is that Jesus is fully "man"....
So in his human nature Jesus has a body of flesh.

God the Father does not have a human nature like Jesus has.

This means that God the father is equal to God the son in his divine nature....but that Jesus has a 2nd nature that the Father does not have.
And it is only because Jesus has this 2nd human nature that Jesus also has a body of flesh.

[alanmolstad]

so to review:

God does not have a body.
God is not a man

Jesus is both God and Man
Jesus has a body


any questions?

[Christian]

You have God having both a Spirit and a physical body. Is that true?

Aren't the Father and Son the same God?

So WHERE IS THE PHYSICAL BODY of the HOLY SPIRIT? Oh, HE IS GOD, but HE HAS NO FLESH OR BONES??? Consistent? Naaah. the berry has no explanation that fits Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 44:8 etc etc etc.

[BigJulie]

"so to review:

God does not have a body.
God is not a man

Jesus is both God and Man
Jesus has a body


any questions?"




I just came in to find the same arguments going round and round ;)

....and to see the "christians" are still adamantly arguing how God the Father and Jesus are different and not the same.

[alanmolstad]

In their nature as God, the Father and the Son are equal

But with the nature of God we read the the Son also took the nature of man to himself.
Thus he never stopped being equal to God, but he also has a 2nd nature being equal to us humans.

So the Son is both God almighty and man...

[alanmolstad]

"christians" are still adamantly arguing how God the Father and Jesus are different and not the same.








The church teaches that Jesus is not the father, nor the spirit, but the father the son and the spirit are the one true God.

The son has a 2nd nature of a man in addition to being fully God..

The father does not have this 2nd nature...nor does the spirit.

[BigJulie]

"In their nature as God, the Father and the Son are equal

But with the nature of God we read the the Son also took the nature of man to himself.
Thus he never stopped being equal to God, but he also has a 2nd nature being equal to us humans.

So the Son is both God almighty and man..."

Have you ever heard that a "but" negates any statement beforehand?

So yes, I get that you believe that God the Father and Christ are "equal" but not the same. You made my point.

[alanmolstad]

a while ago we had to switch companies that host this site, and in the change over I see that a few things are different.
I cant really post a quote of another member like I see we used to....and the censer is set very high to stop cussing, but it makes a bit hard to post words that have letters in that that trip the blocker setting.

I will see what can be done to fix that.

[alanmolstad]

The son and the father are equal in that they are the one true God.

But the son also has a 2nd nature being human...

So all that the father is, the son is....and thus equal..
But the father is greater than the son too, in that the son is human...100% human, and as such the son worships the father as his God..

Let me know if I have made this unclear...?

[BigJulie]

"The son and the father are equal in that they are the one true God.

But the son also has a 2nd nature being human...

So all that the father is, the son is....and thus equal..
But the father is greater than the son too, in that the son is human...100% human, and as such the son worships the father as his God..

Let me know if I have made this unclear...?"




Yes, so you keep saying...but..they are not the same. I get it.. you keep stating this over and over again. I do not disagree with the fact that you see them differently. You have made yourself very clear.

[alanmolstad]

We really need to fix the quote thingy

[alanmolstad]

so when talking about their divinity, the father and the son are the same....both are the One true God.

Totally equal in all ways....for they are equal in their nature, and there nature is the one God.

[alanmolstad]

so this is why Jesus could say,
"For I and my Father are One and the same!"

(See at 2:25 of video)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x_RQ0nYihU

[BigJulie]

So, which is is''that there nature is the same..or they are different...

now you are contradicting yourself.

You said:

"The father does not have this 2nd nature...nor the son has a 2nd nature of a man in addition to being fully God..
does the spirit."

and

"Totally equal in all ways"

Which is it?

(I put in the quote html codes--but let's see if they work.)--just changed the color as the quote stuff is not working for some reason---well just found out, none of the icons are working for me. Strange.

[BigJulie]

testtesttest test test test test

some stuff is working I guess.

[alan]

test test test test

some stuff is working I guess.

test test test

[alan]

we had to change a few things dealing with the server or something like that..

It's still not acting correct when we try to use the respond with a quote thingy..

But it finally better at getting registered more quickly!!!

This should allow new members to come here the first time, and get going faster.

The conformation email sent to your email address now take just a few moment.

it used to take up to a week!
Thats killed the number of people posting,,and killed the number of new people joining.

Im not sure if the auto-cencer is still turned up too high?...

[alan]

Now Julie....back to our topic-

(Oh and thanks for telling me about the issues the site still has posting. They are a pain but the ability of new members to now register is faster, so that should help topics get going faster now as people that just drop by can join the action a lot faster than they used to be able)

Now, Julie, I read your attempt to quote someone,,if it was me, and if that is something I wrote, then I misspelled the word "now" and it came out as "nor".

I use the word "nor" a lot when I post here...I like the word it seems...
But perhaps too much as it might have replaced the word "now" in this case???


anyway...here is what I would have wanted to say

In their divinity, the Son, the Spirit and the Father are all equal in nature, for their nature is the one true God.

One of the persons of the Trinity is not more "god" that the others.
all the persons of the Trinity are always equal in their divine nature

And this is why Jesus can say, "I and my Father are one and the same" for they are the same in their nature as God.

So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Spirit is God, yet there are not 3 gods, but only the one true God.
And God cant die.

Thats key to understanding the story of Jesus, that we keep in mind that in their eternal divine nature God cant die...
the Father cant die, the Son cant die, the Spirit cant die.

But because the Father wanted the Son to die for the sins of men so that men could be forgiven when they believe, the Father sent the Son into the world as a man.

So Jesus was given a 2nd nature as being human.

Jesus never stopped being God, so that means Jesus never stopped being totally equal to the Father in his nature as God.
Yet Jesus also has a 2nd nature now as a human like us, and that means that when considering this 2nd human nature Jesus is like us, and so is lower than the angels.

The 2nd nature could die.
This 2nd nature could be very stone cold dead.
This 2nd nature could be resurrected.


So this allowed Jesus to be able to pray to his God, for in his human nature he had to pray to the Father just like all other humans.
Yet Jesus was also God in his divine nature as well.

So now Jesus who is eternal God and who in his divine nature cant die, yet now in his 2nd human nature could and did die.

And when he was dead, The Son's divine nature raised his human nature from the grave.
and the Father raised the Son
and the Spirit raised the Son.

So all 3 members of the Trinity raised the human nature of the Son from the grave.

[dberrie2000]

so this is why Jesus could say,

"For I and my Father are One and the same!"



Could anyone give us a scriptural cite where Jesus made the claim--"For I and my Father are One and the same!"

Jesus certainly made the claim the "one God" of the biblical text was His God and Father, but nothing as to the same "one God."


John 20:17 King James Version (KJV)
17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

[alan]

You do realize that Im quoting the movie right?
(see post 448)

The phrase appears at the time in the movie when Jesus is rebuking the Jewish leadership.
While this is just a movie, it actually is based on a real story of the Bible and I will post a link where you can dig into the text that deals with the same topic


https://www.gotquestions.org/I-and-the-Father-are-one.html

[alan]

One of the key things to correctly understand the way Jesus used the phrase is to see the reaction Jesus would get.
He was seen to be calling himself "equal with God"

and they wanted to kill him for that.

So its not just talking about being united as one in agreement.

Or in purpose

Or in organization.

That would not have gotten the reaction that Jesus got...for even the Old Testament prophets had stated as much.
No, rather when Jesus spoke this it was aimed at teaching us that there is no difference in his nature with the Father.

This was a rather shocking thing for Jews to hear...a man making the claim to be equal in nature with Almighty God!