The Lord Jesus Christ

[Retrobyter]

 

 

Retrobyter said in post 88:

 

28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, (1) My Lord (Yeshua`) and (2) my God (the Father).

 

Rather:

 

28 And Thomas answered and said unto him (Yeshua), My Lord (Yeshua) and my God (Yeshua) . . .

 

Just as the "and" in Galatians 1:4, for example, isn't saying that the "God" and the "Father" there are two different people:

 

Galatians 1:4 Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father . . .

 

See also post #29 above.

 

 

 

Retrobyter said in post 88:

 

When Yeshua` asked in Matthew 19:17, Mark 10:18, and Luke 18:19, “Why callest thou me good?” The word “good” is the Greek word “agathos.” However, in John 10:11, 14, Yeshua` used a different word to say He was the “good shepherd”; it’s the Greek word “kalos."

 

Note that to imply that Jesus isn't "good" (agathos: G0018) "in any sense" (Strong's Greek Dictionary) is blasphemy.

 

For even some non-divine humans can be referred to (even by Jesus) as "good" (agathos) (e.g. Matthew 5:45, Matthew 22:10, Matthew 25:21,23, Luke 6:45, Luke 19:17, Luke 23:50, Acts 11:24, Titus 2:5). So how much more the only man who is without sin (Hebrews 4:15; 2 Corinthians 5:21)?

Shalom, Bible2.

Redirection? Seriously?! Anytime that someone says, “... is blasphemy,” he or she is trying to redirect the course of the argument, desperate to regain control of the argument because he or she suffered a setback. Let’s look at the term “blasphemy”:

NT:987 blasfeemeoo (blas-fay-meh'-o); from NT:989; to vilify; specially, to speak impiously:
KJV - (speak) blaspheme (-er, -mously, -my), defame, rail on, revile, speak evil.

NT:988 blasfeemia (blas-fay-me'-ah); from NT:989; vilification (especially against God):
KJV - blasphemy, evil speaking, railing.

NT:989 blasfeemos (blas'-fay-mos); from a derivative of NT:984 and NT:5345; scurrilious, i.e. calumnious (against men), or (specially) impious (against God):

KJV - blasphemer (-mous), railing.

(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

“Vilify?" “Impiously?” “Vilification?” “Scurrilous?” “Calumnious?” “Impious?” Who uses these words any more?! Quite simply, NT:987 is the verb form, NT:988 is the noun form, and NT:989 is the adjective form. Looking up “vilify,” one gets this as a definition:

vilify |ˈviləˌfī| verb (vilifies, vilifying, vilified) [ with obj. ] speak or write about in an abusively disparaging manner: he has been vilified in the press.DERIVATIVES vilifier nounORIGIN late Middle English (in the sense ‘lower in value’): from late Latin vilificare, from Latin vilis ‘of low value’ (see vile) .

“Abusively disparaging?” That’s almost as bad!

Looking up “disparaging,” one gets this as a definition:

disparagingadjectivedisparaging remarks: derogatory, deprecatory, denigratory, belittling; critical, scathing, negative, unfavorable, uncomplimentary, uncharitable; contemptuous, scornful, snide, disdainful; informal bitchy, catty; archaic contumelious. ANTONYMS  complimentary. disparageverbthey disparage Lawrence and his achievements: belittle, denigrate, deprecate, trivialize, make light of, undervalue, underrate, play down; ridicule, deride, mock, scorn, scoff at, sneer at; run down, defame, discredit, speak badly of, cast aspersions on, impugn, vilify, traduce, criticize, slur; informal pick holes in, knock, slam, pan, badmouth, dis, pooh-pooh; formal calumniate, derogate.ANTONYMS  praise, overrate.

Now, one can see that NT:987 means “to belittle” or “to denigrate” or “to badmouth” or “to PLAY DOWN" or ”to PUT DOWN!” THESE are the words that we use today. “To blaspheme” is just a transliteration of “blasfeemia,” but it simply means “to belittle."

I also believe that we should look up the word “impious” since NT:989 suggests that the word means “impious” when referring to God:

impious |ˈimpēəs, imˈpī-| adjectivenot showing respect or reverence, especially for a god: the emperor's impious attacks on the Church.• (of a person or act) wicked: impious villains.DERIVATIVES impiously adverb.impiousness nounORIGIN mid 16th cent.: from Latin impius (from in- ‘not’ + pius: see pious) + -ous.

So, "I’m not showing respect or reverence for Yeshua` because He is God" is what you imply. But, doesn’t that beg the question, “Is Yeshua` God?” And that question is what we are trying to determine in this argument! Thus, you’ve come full circle: Jesus is God because to say otherwise is not to show respect or reverence for Jesus who is God!  That’s circular reasoning, an error in logic.

Also, Galatians 1:4 ends with the phrase, “kata to theleema tou Theou kai Patros heemoon.” This phrase means “according-to the will of-the God and Father of-us.” The definite article for “Theou” (“God”) is present but not the definite article for “Patros” (“Father”).

John 20:28 uses the phrase “ho kurios mou kai ho theos mou.” TWO definite articles! TWO separate nouns! and TWO separate possessives! You really need to stick to the Greek!

Edited August 14, 2015 by Retrobyter
To add carriage returns

[thereselittleflower]

I didn't say that Jesus was not a physical child of Mary.    My point is that Jesus' life didn't come from Mary.   Jesus was pre-existent of his birth.   Jesus simply took on human flesh.  Jesus was still God, the moment Mary conceived.     The irony is that the RCC calls Mary of the Mother of God.  It is God who brought Mary into the world.   Jesus was/is Mary's Creator and He is the one who gave her life.  

Is Jesus fully man?   Does he have a human nature?

Shilo, you again err not understanding the thing whereof you speak.

 

"Mother of God" is a title that points directly to WHO Jesus IS.    

You yourself said Jesus was pre-existant of his birth, that he simply took on human flesh.     

You said Jesus was still God, the moment Mary conceived.

I totally agree with you.

The Catholic Church totally agrees with you.

There is no argument here except the one you are making up.

 

Mary had the eternal God in her womb for 9 months.

The ETERNAL GOD DWELT in her womb!

 

The ETERNAL GOD who dwelt in her womb for 9 months was born into this world through her.

When someone enters this world through birth, the one through whom they entered this world through birth is called their MOTHER.

 

Mother of God simply means that Mary bore God in her womb for 9 months and through her He came into this world as a baby.

 

What "Mother of God" means is that JESUS IS GOD.

 

Theotokos.  Bearer of God.  Mother of God.  They all say the same thing.   This was a title the early christians used, before Constantine, to proclaim Christ's DIVINITY from the moment of his conception.   This is a title used to defeat heresies that said he was less than fully God.

 

They all say  JESUS IS GOD.

 

 

 

Edited August 14, 2015 by thereselittleflower

[Guest shiloh357]

Mary is not the mother of God.    Mary is the mother of the humanity of Jesus in his incarnation.   As God, Jesus has no mother, as Jesus was pre-existent.   God is Mary's Creator.  God is Mary's Father, but God has no mother  

[Retrobyter]

I didn't say that Jesus was not a physical child of Mary.    My point is that Jesus' life didn't come from Mary.   Jesus was pre-existent of his birth.   Jesus simply took on human flesh.  Jesus was still God, the moment Mary conceived.     The irony is that the RCC calls Mary of the Mother of God.  It is God who brought Mary into the world.   Jesus was/is Mary's Creator and He is the one who gave her life.  

Is Jesus fully man?   Does he have a human nature?

Shilo, you again err not understanding the thing whereof you speak.

 

"Mother of God" is a title that points directly to WHO Jesus IS.    

You yourself said Jesus was pre-existant of his birth, that he simply took on human flesh.     

You said Jesus was still God, the moment Mary conceived.

I totally agree with you.

The Catholic Church totally agrees with you.

There is no argument here except the one you are making up.

 

Mary had the eternal God in her womb for 9 months.

The ETERNAL GOD DWELT in her womb!

 

The ETERNAL GOD who dwelt in her womb for 9 months was born into this world through her.

When someone enters this world through birth, the one through whom they entered this world through birth is called their MOTHER.

 

Mother of God simply means that Mary bore God in her womb for 9 months and through her He came into this world as a baby.

 

What "Mother of God" means is that JESUS IS GOD.

 

Theotokos.  Bearer of God.  Mother of God.  They all say the same thing.   This was a title the early christians used, before Constantine, to proclaim Christ's DIVINITY from the moment of his conception.   This is a title used to defeat heresies that said he was less than fully God.

 

They all say  JESUS IS GOD.

 

 

 

Shalom, thereselittleflower.

Actually, in this case, I’m going to have to side with shiloh357. (Shocker!) The Roman Catholic Church (not today but 1800 years or so ago) was the culprit! They got tired of the arguments with “heresies,” and DECLARED certain things to be “true” and outlawed all the rest! However, when one understands that “soul” means “one that breathes” and “spirit” is the “breath” of that individual, one begins to understand the importance of the body for human beings. For God, the Logos, to become flesh, He DID have to give up certain godly features (attributes), such as omnipresence and omniscience.

See, the key word in John 1:1-5 is “en” which means “WAS.” (And this is where shiloh357 and I split.) I have absolutely no problem with the Logos being God. However, the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us! That made Him human! His “spirit” was His “breath!” His “soul” was His “breathing body!” When He “gave up the spirit” on the cross thirty-some years later, He "breathed His last” (as far as any other human being at that moment could tell).

[Guest shiloh357]

See, the key word in John 1:1-5 is “en” which means “WAS.” (And this is where shiloh357 and I split.) I have absolutely no problem with the Logos being God. However, the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us! That made Him human! His “spirit” was His “breath!” His “soul” was His “breathing body!” When He “gave up the spirit” on the cross thirty-some years later, He "breathed His last” (as far as any other human being at that moment could tell).

Jesus claimed to be eternal life (John 14:6, 11:25-26)   And Jesus claimed to be the giver of eternal life (John 6: 47-58)   Only God is the source of eternal life and Jesus was able to grant eternal life while on earth. 

Any claim that Jesus was just  man and not God during his earthly ministry is heresy  and should be rejected by all true followers of Jesus.  If you deny the deity of Jesus, you are NOT Messianic.

[Retrobyter]

See, the key word in John 1:1-5 is “en” which means “WAS.” (And this is where shiloh357 and I split.) I have absolutely no problem with the Logos being God. However, the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us! That made Him human! His “spirit” was His “breath!” His “soul” was His “breathing body!” When He “gave up the spirit” on the cross thirty-some years later, He "breathed His last” (as far as any other human being at that moment could tell).

Jesus claimed to be eternal life (John 14:6, 11:25-26)   And Jesus claimed to be the giver of eternal life (John 6: 47-58)   Only God is the source of eternal life and Jesus was able to grant eternal life while on earth. 

Any claim that Jesus was just  man and not God during his earthly ministry is heresy  and should be rejected by all true followers of Jesus.  If you deny the deity of Jesus, you are NOT Messianic.

Shalom, shiloh357.

Yeshua` also claimed to be GIVEN the right to give eternal life by His Father!

John 5:16-24

16 And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day.

17 But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.

18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.

21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.

22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:

23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
KJV

So, you’re right that “only God is the source of eternal life"; however, that does NOT imply that Yeshua` is God! Furthermore, this being “equal with God” is in STANDING; that is, He is to be honored as the Judge of all the earth, just as God is to be so honored, since God, Yeshua`s Father, committed all judgment to the Son! And, when Yeshua` returns to this earth, He will first establish His own Kingdom in the Land of Israel, and then He shall GROW His Kingdom until it fills the earth and He becomes the King of kings and Master of masters! For He must reign until He has put all of His enemies under His feet!

[thereselittleflower]

I didn't say that Jesus was not a physical child of Mary.    My point is that Jesus' life didn't come from Mary.   Jesus was pre-existent of his birth.   Jesus simply took on human flesh.  Jesus was still God, the moment Mary conceived.     The irony is that the RCC calls Mary of the Mother of God.  It is God who brought Mary into the world.   Jesus was/is Mary's Creator and He is the one who gave her life.  

Is Jesus fully man?   Does he have a human nature?

Shilo, you again err not understanding the thing whereof you speak.

 

"Mother of God" is a title that points directly to WHO Jesus IS.    

You yourself said Jesus was pre-existant of his birth, that he simply took on human flesh.     

You said Jesus was still God, the moment Mary conceived.

I totally agree with you.

The Catholic Church totally agrees with you.

There is no argument here except the one you are making up.

 

Mary had the eternal God in her womb for 9 months.

The ETERNAL GOD DWELT in her womb!

 

The ETERNAL GOD who dwelt in her womb for 9 months was born into this world through her.

When someone enters this world through birth, the one through whom they entered this world through birth is called their MOTHER.

 

Mother of God simply means that Mary bore God in her womb for 9 months and through her He came into this world as a baby.

 

What "Mother of God" means is that JESUS IS GOD.

 

Theotokos.  Bearer of God.  Mother of God.  They all say the same thing.   This was a title the early christians used, before Constantine, to proclaim Christ's DIVINITY from the moment of his conception.   This is a title used to defeat heresies that said he was less than fully God.

 

They all say  JESUS IS GOD.

 

 

 

Shalom, thereselittleflower.

Actually, in this case, I’m going to have to side with shiloh357. (Shocker!) The Roman Catholic Church (not today but 1800 years or so ago) was the culprit! They got tired of the arguments with “heresies,” and DECLARED certain things to be “true” and outlawed all the rest! However, when one understands that “soul” means “one that breathes” and “spirit” is the “breath” of that individual, one begins to understand the importance of the body for human beings. For God, the Logos, to become flesh, He DID have to give up certain godly features (attributes), such as omnipresence and omniscience.

See, the key word in John 1:1-5 is “en” which means “WAS.” (And this is where shiloh357 and I split.) I have absolutely no problem with the Logos being God. However, the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us! That made Him human! His “spirit” was His “breath!” His “soul” was His “breathing body!” When He “gave up the spirit” on the cross thirty-some years later, He "breathed His last” (as far as any other human being at that moment could tell).

Retro, that's not quite what happened.  

The Catholic Church 1800 years ago did not make a decision to declare something that was not already doctrine.   They declared it dogmatically to protect the doctrine already taught as true.

All dogmatic declarations are simply already existing doctrines from the time of the Apostles that were strengthened so the believers would not be so easily led astray by false doctrines.

The Arian heresy was so subtle, but so powerful, it was splitting the Empire in half.  People were arguing in the streets about it.  Arguments had come to blows.  A clear dogmatic statement needed to be made.

 

 

Edited August 14, 2015 by thereselittleflower

[thereselittleflower]

Mary is not the mother of God.    Mary is the mother of the humanity of Jesus in his incarnation.   As God, Jesus has no mother, as Jesus was pre-existent.   God is Mary's Creator.  God is Mary's Father, but God has no mother  

Shilo,   when Catholics and Eastern Orthodox say Mother of God, you completely misunderstand them.

I have tried to explain it to you.

Yet you continue to persist in your misunderstanding.

So let me take a different approach.

 

What "Mother of God" DOES NOT mean:

 

"Mother of God" does not mean that Mary is the source of God.

"Mother of God" does not mean God cannot exist without Mary.

"Mother of God" does not mean Mary came before God.

 

As I said above, it simply means the child she bore was truly God as well as truly man from the moment of Jesus' conception.

 

That's ALL it means.

Use of the title, Theotokos was formally sanctioned by the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus in 431. The Church declared that both Divine and human natures were united in the person of Jesus, the son of Mary. Hence, Mary may be called Theotokos, since the son she bore according to the flesh, Jesus, is truly one of the Divine persons of the Trinity. This Marian title is really a Christological statement, which affirms that the second person of the Trinity, who was born into history as fully human, is really 'God with us'.

 

http://campus.udayton.edu/mary/questions/faq/faq19.html

 

Please take time to educate yourself, so you may stop misrepresenting the words of others.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 14, 2015 by thereselittleflower

[AllTheGoodNamesAreTaken]

Not that I have any interest in arguing ( as I do not ), but I do have a question.

Should some folks be revered above others, or should we simply revere God's purpose in them?

[enoob57]

waiting upon baited breath of the reply>>>>