Divinity of Jesus

Perhaps you could explain to me why there is so much labor and time devoted to debating the realness of Jesus more than debating the realness of Zues. If they are both roughly the same why is there so much more vehemence in denying Jesus ?Somehow, they don't seem equivalent figures though skeptics are fond of trying to lump them together. Okay. I wasn't born believing in the Divinity of Christ Huntard. Nor was I brought up in Sunday School all my life.I got subdued and persuaded one day in the privacy of my living room. It was the end of a long road of wrestling with the matter of what to do with God. I really had no thought of Jesus. But I spoke His name I suddenly felt like a flushed toilet. Years of crap in my heart and mind came flooding out and Jesus came rushing in.I haven't been the same since that day.Like you I did a lot of arguing with people about Jesus. One day in the cafeteria of the Phila College of Art, which was across the street from where I was in school, the Phila. Music Academy, I was debating again with my friend Randy, a Christian.I don't remember ANYTHING about the points we were arguing. I only remember one small snatch of conversation that went like this:"Jay, I don't know how many times I have to tell you. In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God. And the Word was God. Jesus is the living Word of God"That is all I remember. I didn't agree. I didn't even really understand what he meant. I didn't say "Yes sir." But something must have happened to me without me knowing it. Something like a curtain parted around my mind and something like light shown into my heart.Months latter whatever it was that he imparted to me rose up in me and claimed my heart. His presence was real. The mountain of speculation on one side of my being shrunk into a little hill. And on the other side of my being a little tiny hill of faith grew into a mountain.I got subdued Huntard. I never wanted to. I never intended it to happen. Jesus conquered me. When I called on Jesus God became real to me.Sorry to add my personal experience to this otherwise heady debate. But this was deeper than sentimentality. But because of this experience when I read words in the New Testament like:"Having been regenerated through the living and abiding word of God" I can now say. "I know what Peter means by that now. I understand that. Having been regenerated, reborn, born anew by the living and abiding word of God - Christ Himself.I have to discontinue here.

It is the purpose of God that He dispense His Spirit and His life into man. The revelation of Christ being God and man is for the purpose that God could convey His nature and His life into man.I am speaking of the moment that imparting of the life of God into me may have begun to take place. At least it was a notable moment when God imparted this divine life into me.That is what my personal experience has to do with the Divinity of Christ."In that day you shall know that I am in My Father and you in Me and I in you." I don't think I said, my experience was proof.I think it is important for me to compare my experience to what Jesus taught.For example, John wonderfully records certain tough questions posed to Jesus and His answers, just before He was going to the cross to accomplish redemption: I can now read this and know that I am on the right track. Jesus with the Father came to me to make an abode with me. Jesus came to manifest Himself to me while the world cannot see Him.Then I read Paul's words "... the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45) and now it makes sense to me. Jesus, the last Adam, has put Himself in a form in which He is available to me. He has come into my spirit as "a life giving Spirit" and I can say that I know Christ lives in me.So I know that I must be on the right track.It would be a mistake to think that the revelation of Christ's divinity is only that we may have objective knowledge of it. He incarnated, died, rose, ascended, and came to His lovers as "a life giving Spirit" that they may become "partakers of the divine nature"." ... He has granted us precious and exceedingly great promises that through these you might become partakers of the divine nature .." (2 Peter 1:4)The revelation of the Divinity of Christ is not merely that man may become onlookers, or observers, or spectators of the divine nature. It is given that we may become "partakers of the divine nature". That is participants.Perhaps God will not waste the revelation on those who do not want to become partakers of the divine nature.To borrow a popular song of my teenage years "To Know Him is the Love Him".To borrow this concept then, to know of Christ's divinity is meant to lead us to partake of Him as our spiritual life. He who has the son has the life. The soulish man thinks the things of the Spirit of God are foolishness. Nothing new there.The Gospel is veiled to those who are in the process of perishing. Nothing new there.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Baily, I don't think that because "Logos" talk was more common among Greeks than Jews means that the truth conveyed by the Apostle John's utterance was not true.This universal truth John simply chose in this instance express in some vocabulary most Greek than Hebrew. It doesn't change the nature of the Father and the Son.And the mysterious coinherance of the Word and God is not at all unsimilar to the relationship found in the Old Testament of the Angel of Jehovah and God (Jehovah). The two designations were at times used in such an interchangeable way as to cause us to understand the One lived in the Other, One the Messenger was with Jehovah and WAS Jehovah. See Exodus 3:2-7,11,13,14,15,18; Genesis 22:11,12; Judges 6:11-24; Exo.14:14-19; Zechariah 3:1-4; 2:8-11. That may be true. However, that does not detract from the central theme of John's Gospel that God was incarnated in the Son of God Jesus Christ. It is just that John's introduction expresses this timeless and universal revelation in a style somewhat friendly to the Greek philosophical way of speaking. As stated above, the Logos / God matter is so utterably like the Angel of Jehovah and Jehovah God. Let us take Zechariah for example: In verse 8 both "He" and "Me" refer to "Jehovah of hosts". This means that "Jehovah of hosts" is both the Sender (vv.9,11) and the send One. Jehovah is there the Triune God. In this verse One of the three in the Godhead sent, refered to as "He", sent another of the three, refered to as "Me". The Sender is surely the Father, and the sent One is the Son (John 5:36b; 6:57a; 8:16). Both the Sender and the sent One are Jehovah.And in the New Testament both the Logos and God are God, ie. the Word was with God and the Word was God.John uses Greek style vocabulary but the revelation is too similar to the mysterious relationship between the Sender and the One sent in Zechariah."For thus says Jehovah ... He has sent Me ... and you shall know that Jehovah of hosts has sent Me."

​

"I am coming ... declares Jehovah ... and you will know that Jehovah of hosts has sent Me to you." Jehovah is with Jehovah and sent by Jehovah and is Jehovah. So says Jehovah. It is not fair to take only John's introductory passages and charge that he has "failed to represent god and any specific way". By the time you get to the end of the Gospel of John, the Word who became flesh, who was with God and was God, has quite extensively expressed God. He has expressed God as the mingling of Divinity and humanity. His disciple Thomas acknowledges that the now resurrection Jesus is his Lord and his God (John 20:28)The Logos who was with God and was God, incarnated, lived, died, and rose from the dead. In such He declared God - God in a man, and was received as Lord and God by a once skeptical Thomas. John certainly meant to convey that God has been manifested in the incarnation, life, and death of Jesus. For this reason he emphatically makes the radical statement (especially in Jewish terms) - "No one has ever seen God; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared [Him]." (John 1:14)In spite of John's obvious recognition that God appeared to Abraham, Jacob, Isaiah, and other patriarchs in the Old Testament, this manifestation of the Logos becoming flesh has superceeded all those instances. Ultimately God has been seen, been manifested in the incarnation, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.This not a Jewish truth or a Greek truth. This is a universal truth transcending human culture. In his prologue to the Gospel of John, the writer has simply borrowed the style from the thoughtful Greek philosophical language to express that Jesus is God / Man. Jesus is the mingling of God and man. So by saying that He is God the NT does not want to convey that because of that He is NOT man. The Word became flesh and tabernacled among us.As a man like us and among us, He often spoke and acted genuinely as a typical man. And all men should be in submission to the heavenly Father.If the writer of John meant to convey that this MAN could not possibly be God He would have never written that the Logos Who was with God also WAS God.Since He became flesh and tabernacled among us as a genuine man often His utterance reflected the standing of a man. At the same time He did not discourage His disciple Thomas from recognizing that He was his Lord and God (John 20:28). Quite the contrary is true. Jesus added:"Because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and have believed." (v.29)That would included the blessedness upon such as accept that the Word was with God and that the Word was God. We believe what has been written, all things considered.Your other passages would come under the same kind of classification.
They show the MAN side of this God - man incarnation. Correct. If we are prepared to call Jesus good, we have to be prepared to call Him God.It may occur to you that when the Word became flesh He expressed not only perfect authority but also perfect submission TO authority. Correct. If we are really prepared to call Him good according to ultimate truth we have to be prepared to call Him God. There is none good but God.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Peg, Jesus told the man that no one was good except God.Did Jesus say that He Himself was not good ? No.Did Jesus correct the man for calling Him good ? No.Did Jesus ever say anywhere that He Himself was not good ? No.I will grant you that in this particular instance He is more standing on the ground of His humanity. You must never forget that when the New Testament teaches that Jesus Christ is God it is NOT saying that He is NOT a man.He is the union, the mingling, the incorporation, and the incarnation of God in man.Since you as a Jehovah's Witness believe that Christ is the archangle Michael, I ask you this:
Can you find me a verse which ever states that the archangle Michael lives in the Christians ? Where ?Yet I can point to many passages saying that Jesus Christ is living in the Christians and that the Father and the Holy Spirit are likewise in the believers in Christ. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

That is true. However Paul does inform the Christians that Christ is our peace - "For He Himself is our peace" (Eph.2:14) Do you think that David called an angel his Lord? I don't
Christ told the Pharisees thatthe son of David, is David's Lord."Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus questioned them, saying, What do you think concerning the Christ? Whose son is He? They said to Him, David.

​

He said to them, How then does David in spirit call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at My riught hand unti I put Your enemies underneath Your feet?

​

If then David calls Him Lord, how is He his son? And no one was able to answer Him a word ..." (Matt. 22:41-46)I mention this because like the passage where the man calls Jesus good. Jesus does not say he is wrong just as Jesus does not say to the Pharisees that they are incorrect to believe that He is David's son. But Jesus does expose the fact that their understanding is superficial and incomplete. If He is good He must be the good God. And if He is David's son then He is David's Lord.There is nothing in the OT about David calling Michael the angel his Lord. Yet He called Jehovah God His Lord continually. I am at the public library today and do not have the unlimited time to post. But latter we will revisit this matter in more detail. I am about to lose my alloted library time and will have to reply to this post latter. I would like to get you to see something about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This matter reveals God on a journey really. That is a journey INTO man to indwell man.The Father is God. The Son is God and Man united to accomplish redemption. And the Holy Spirit is the flow of this God-man into man to be his divine indwelling spiritual life.This Triune God's nature cannot be separated from His work and plan to dispense Himself into man.It is good that you have a good objective grasp of God outwardly and God's kingdom. What you have never been taught is the God Who is dispensing Himself into man. So I spoke of the indwelling of Christ and how absurd it is to think that is an angel. Rather it is the Father and the Son as the Divine "WE" who through the Holy Spirit, come to make an abode in the lovers of Christ.If God is in the believers in Christ there is absolutely no need for the indwelling of one of His angels.We will come back to this whole matter latter.

If it seems impossible to you that God could dwell in His redeemed people it is only because you underestimate the effectualness of His redemptive work. You vastly under appreciate His finished work of reconciliation on His cross to justify the sinner and set him in a righteous standing before God.And this unbelief on your part, I think, is related to your thinking Jesus is an angel and not God incarnate Himself.Low recognition of Christ's redemptive work leads to unbelief that God could indwell those whom He has redeemed.It is, however, a totally undeniable fact that the New Testament teaches that God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit indwell the believers. I am again at the Public Library and cannot take the time I would like to. But one passages now is enough to show that the Father is "in all" of the members of the mystical Body the church."One God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all" (Eph. 4:6)Did you get that Peg ? The Father is "in all" of the believers in Christ who constitute the new testament church.If you stagger in disbelief then you simply do not know to what a total degree God has justified sinners in Jesus Christ. I am again pressed for time. And I cannot think of one single exchange you and I have had that really needs going over a second time in the sense that your objection was not already thoroughly addressed, Greek or no.One thing is certain from the NT, God abides in those who believe into Christ:"Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him and he in God." (1 John 4:15)God abides in the Christian. And the Christian abides in God, period.Now I ask you this: If God Almighty, Jehovah abides in the Christian than what need is there for Michael the angel as Christ to ALSO abide in the Christian? What purpose would that have?To prove that Christ is in the believer, I submit "Test yourselves whether you are in the faith; prove yourselves. Or do you not realize about yourselves that Jesus Christ is in you, unless you are disapproved?" (2 Cor. 13:5)Can you tell us why in addition to God Almighty - Jehovah (being in all as the Father God "in all"), and as the God who abides in the Christian, is there the need for Michael the angel to also dwell in them?Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Concerning the first question, the entire Bible, especially the New Testament would testify that what God does cannot be separated from what God is.But to sum it up economically in one passage, I might submit John 16:13-15 particularly verse 15 which I will quote first. Then we can go back and see context: The unsearchable riches of what the Father has is the possession of the Son Jesus Christ. But what the Father has in Christ will be conveyed and declared to the believers in Christ by the Holy Spirit. These riches are riches of the life and nature of God.Now let's look at the verse in larger context as Jesus is speaking about the work of the Holy Spirit. You should be able to see that the First Person of the Triune God is channeling all His possessions through the Son and eventually flowing them into the believers by means of the Spirit of reality, the Holy Spirit.Please do not limit this to just information about prophecy. It includes, I think, the life of divine nature of God. For the believers in Christ are "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4). And it is through that divine nature of God the Christian must learn to live.The Spirit also transmits the life of God into the believers. For He is called "the Spirit of life" (Romans 8:2). And it is by the Spirit that the Christians know that God Himself abides in them. So the Spirit brings God into man (1 John 4:15; 3:24)It is by the indwelling Holy Spirit that the Father and the Son as the divine "WE" can come and make an abode with the believers in Christ (John 14:23).So the Holy Spirit is the final stage of the Triune God reaching man's inside being. Did you know we are created as vessels to contain God? Here Paul says that the apostles and all believers on Jesus are vessels:"But we have this treasure in earthen vessels that the excellency of the power may be of God and not out of us." (2 Cor. 4:7)We are enterable. And God desires to impart His life and nature into man. For this He redeemed man and justifies those who receive that gift. The Holy Spirit brings Christ into them. That is why Christ became the life giving Spirit:"the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45).What is more subjective to man than life? God imparts Christ as the life giving Spirit to be the living treasure in the earthen vessel of the saved man's being. The saved woman becomes the earthen vessel and Christ becomes the excellent treasure in the earthen vessel.Now please come back to John 16:13-15. This indwelling takes place by the Spirit. And the Spirit, the Third of the Trinity, imparts the vast riches of the Father which are now embodied in Christ, into the believers:"All that the Father has is Mine; for this reason I have said that He receives of Mine and will declare it to you."Can you see the Trinity at work here? He is triune for this dispensing of these riches of divine life out from God into man. What He is is intrinsically related to His operation of dispensing His life and nature into man.This does not mean that the saved become objects of worship. Nor does it mean the those non-communicable attributes becomes mans.The saved will never create universes. They will never be objects of worship. They will not be omnipresent, omnipotent, or omniscient. God remains the sole HEAD of this union of God and man.However, the saved receive all the riches of the Father that are embodied in Christ and trasnmitted by the Spirit into a great corporate and collective expression of the union of God and man. His non-communicable attributes remain His alone. But we have already proven that the believers are "partakerss of the divine nature".This is a matter of partaking. It is not to be merely spectators of that nature. It is not merely to be subjects to that nature. It is neither merely to be onlookers or worshippers of that divine nature. It is to be participants in that nature - "partakers of the divine nature".If you stagger at this then you simply do not realize to what degree God has justified the believers in Christ. And this hesitancy, I think, is due to your not realizing that Christ is God incarnate. Rather you deem Him to be the angel Michael. And you do not realize that God Himself in Christ has reconciled the world to Himself (2 Cor. 5:19).You will never learn about the indwelling of God from the Watchtower theologians. It is no wonder that you remain puzzled. They can only teach you about an outward kingdom ruled by an ourward King. But the fallen man was "alienated from the life of God" (Eph. 4:18)The Triune God therefore operates to redeem man so that He may dispense His very life into man.

Excuse me if I did not address this point.Do I think that the archangle and Jesus are used interchangeably in First Thess. 4:16? No.I do not understand that passage to indicate that the Lord Himself is the archangle who either shouts or sounds a trumpet."Because the Lord Himself, with a shout of command, with the voice of the archangle and with the trumpet of God, will descend ..."Why should I interpret this as using "the Lord Himself" and "the archangle" as interchangeable titles?In fact in Revelation 14 we read of the Harvest of the earth being reaped by the one as the Son of Man. This should correspond to the public rapture spoken of in First Thess 4:16. And there the angle speaks and the Son of Man reaps: I no more regard the voice of the archangle as being the voice of the Lord Himself in First Thessalonians 4:16 then I regard the voice of the angel informing the Son of Man to reap, as the voice of the Son of Man.The fact that an archangle may shout something does not at all mean to me that the resurrection and rapture spoken of are not through the Lord Jesus Himself. It simply means that these acts of Christ are accompanied by the voice and/or trumpeting of the archangle.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Peg, I have seen your points and am again limited in time to participate in the public library.However, the books of Hebrew makes is abundantly clear the Christ is not to be compared to ANY angel. Furthermore it states that the coming inhabited earth is not being subjected to angels, which would be the case if Michael the angel was the king during the millennium: To these questions and issues you incorrectly supply the name Michael, an angel. You are in error here.Hebrews makes specific points concerning Christ's being separate from angels. You are seeking to nullify this aspect of the Bible. Are you not?Concerning Revelation we are told that voices came out of the throne. So we should not be surprised that Christ's activity is accompanied by angelic voices. In chapter 14 an angel even preaches an eternal gospel to fear God the Creator.Don't be distracted from the God-man Jesus by any angels. And concerning the matter of the indwelling of God and Christ in First John and elsewhere, I am not going to let you slide by ignoring this matter. This is crucial.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Peg, I hope you do not want me to write an exhaustive treatise now on angels. I prefer not to write a long article covering all the aspects of angels in the Bible.I hope I can simply mentioned enough to underline the distiction between these creatures and the Son of God in Hebrews. I am not going to write a lot about angels. This should be sufficient that they are ministering spirits of God to serve the saved. And it should be enough to prove that the Firstborn Son Christ is emphatically not one of these angelic ministering spirits.Yes Christ ministers. Yet Christ serves the saved. Yes Christ is discribed as a messenger and even as The Angel of Jehovah or a few times in Revelation depicted as "Another Angel".But it would be going against the whole concept of Hebrews chapter one to teach that Christ was the angel Michael of the book of Daniel. "To WHICH of the angels ...?" is emphatically expecting the reply "To NONE of the angels can Christ compare!" Only TWO are mentioned by name (discounting the Daystar of Isaiah or the Anointed Cherub of Ezekiel). Gabriel and Michael are the only other angelic beings mentioned by name in the Bible. The Latin "Lucifer" refers to the Daystar of Isaiah.The main point here is that Christ is not any named or unnamed angel of Scripture. Jehvoah's Witnesses desperately need to defeat this revelation to serve their purpose of denying that Christ is God incarnate.Here is further light on the matter. In Revelation 4 we see twenty four elders around God's throne worshipping the Creator (Rev.4:10). These 24 elders are not the elders of the Christian church, otherwise John should certainly be among them since he was one of the original 12 disciples. They are also not elders of the nation of Israel.I submit that these elders represent the elders of the universe. They are the eldest created beings of God, ie. the most ancient angelic elders of God's creation. In chapter five they are seen worshipping God and the Lamb. The Lamb of course being the Redeemer Jesus Christ. Their number was not reduced from 24 to 23. In other words none of the eldest or most ancient creatures of God became Jesus or else their number would have shown being subtracted by 1. The important points here is that this is a chapter about the purpose of creation planned by Almighty God the Creator. And the oldest witnesses to God's creative act are these twenty-four elders of creation. They have authority, as seen by the crowns. They cast them down before the God-man Christ the Redeemer in chapter 5.In chapter five when the Redeemer Christ, symbolized by the Lamb freshly slain but standing, opens the seal of God's economy, these twenty-four ancient ones turn their worship to the Lamb as well.Hebrews says concerning the Firstborn Son's second coming to the earth "And let all the angels of God worship Him" (Heb. 1:6). Christ is not one of the ancient angels created by God. Christ is God incarnate as a man. Christ the Lamb is worshipped by all the angels in His second coming. And His throne is not just 1,000 years but "forever and ever". It is proved here: This Son has a kingdom. It is a kingdom which is forever and ever, not simply during the millennium. Notwistanding First Corinthians 15 He continues to have the kingdom and the "scepter of Your kingdom". The God, (O God) is eternal. The Son is therefore eternal. The kingdom is eternal. The throne of the Son, being the throne of that kingdom, is forever and ever. And the righteous scepter of that kingdom is as eternal as the kingdom itself.He is worshipped by the angels. He is not among the elders as the most ancient creatures of the universe. And He is not to be compared to ANY angel either by name or otherwise.This should be enough to convince you of the error of trying to make Michael a powerful angel Jesus Christ the Redeeming Lamb of God.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

No it would not be wrong to refer to Jesus as a messenger. I anticipated this point and thought I spoke to it. Perhaps I was not clear. But I did say that a few times the sign (Rev. 1:1) of Christ in the book of Revelation that of "another Angel".I follow J.N. Darby's New Translation and the Recovery Version to capitalize "Another Angel" in these places where it indicates Jesus Christ (Rev. 7:2; 8:3; 10:1; 18:1).The footnote of Revelation 7:2 in the Recovery Version is helpful, I think."This Angel, as well as the One in 8:3, 0:1, and 18:1, is Christ. In the Old Testament, Christ was called "the Angel of Jehovah"; that Angel was God Himself (Gen. 22:11-12; Exo. 3:2-6; Judg. 6:11-24; Zech. 1:11-12; 2:8-11; 3:1-7). Here in the New Testament He is again referred to as an Angel (a messenger). The expression [another Angel] indicates that Christ is not a common angel but a special Angel sent by God." That is true. And Adam, in Luke's geneology, is also refered to as the son of God (Luke 3:38), as I am sure you are aware.It would be a serious error to assume that the only begotten Son of God is a "son" of the same catagory as the angels. I think the Bible does not give room to that kind of misunderstanding.Explicitly, Hebrews chapter one proves that whatever kind of messenger the Son of God may be, He is not to be thought of as one of the typical angels."To which of the angels has God ever said, "You are My Son, this day I have begotten You"? (Heb. 1:5)Incidently, this begetting in this verse refers to Christ's resurrection from the dead. It does not refer to His conception. That is probably another discussion however. Above I indicated that the Angel of Jehovah is God Himself in these places in the Old Testament - (Gen. 22:11-12; Exo. 3:2-6; Judg. 5:11-24; Zech. 1:11-12; 2:8-11; 3:1-7). You could not say the Angel of Jehovah in these passages is of the same nature and rank as the "sons of God" in the book of Job. Neither could you say that the Angel of Jehovah in those passages is of the same nature and rank as Gabriel being a messenger in either Daniel or the Gospels.Rather this Jesus Christ is "our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ" (Titus 2:13). Please notice the similarity in contruction of Titus 2:13 with First Peter 1:11)" ... the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ ..." (1 Peter 1:11)

​

" ... the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ" (Titus 2:13)To us Christian disciples Jesus Christ is "our Lord and Savior" and Jesus Christ is "our great God and Savior".There are many utterances in the New Testament. At least you also have these included which prove that Jesus Christ is God incarnate for the confession of "our great God" as Jesus and "our Lord" as Jesus is combined in the confession of Thomoas - "Thomas answered and said to Him, My Lord and My God!" (John 20:28).Furthermore when the apostle John did make a mistake and worshipped an angel because of the abundance of revelation shown to him, he was rebuked and told to worship God only (Rev.19:10; 22:8,9).
No angel is to be worshipped. Yet men worshipped Jesus and we certainly should still.Jesus received worship from a healed leper (Matt. 8:2),
from a ruler whose son Jesus had healed (Matt.9:18),
from the disciples after a storm (Matt.14:33),
from a Canaanite woman (Matt. 15:25),
from the mother of James and John (Matt. 20:20),
from a Gerasene demoniac (Mark 5:6),
from a healed blind man (John 9:38),
from all the disciples (Matt. 28:17),
from Thomas, who said, "My Lord and my God" (John 20:28) I will have to speak to this latter. But first back to the indwelling of Christ.To have the Spirit of the Son of God is to have the Father and the Son (1 John 2:23,24)."In this we know that we abide in Him [God] and He [God] in us, that He has given to us of His Spirit ... Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in Him and he in God." (See First John 4:13-15)John here does not say that we think or hope. He says that we "know" that God abides in us because of the Spirit that He has given to us, His Spirit.Now His Spirit is the Spirit of His Son - " ... God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts ..." (Galatians 4:6)The Spirit that God dispenses into the believers in Christ is the Spirit of His Son. This Spirit is the life giving Spirit that the last Adam became - " ... the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)So we must receive the "life giving Spirit" who is Jesus Christ in His "pneumatic" form. This Spirit which is "His [God's] Spirit" assures us that we abide in God and God in us. And to have this Spirit is to have the Son. To have the Son is the have the Father also:"Everyone who denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who confesses the Son has the Father also... If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father." (See First John 2:23,24)It is possible to speak highly of Jesus Christ as an angel like Michael or one of the sons of God in the book of Job yet all the while really denying the Son of God. This is a tragedy. To make Jesus out to be only a great teacher or only a great prophet or even only one of the angels or messengers of God could be an excuse to deny the Father and the Son in the true New Testament sense.It is also possible to recognize God in and outward and purely objective way without having the indwelling of the Father. In this case one may not feel comfortable to call Him "Daddy - Abba Father" in the most intimate way. This Jehovah remains only an outward great King that has not come to abide within the believer's heart and spirit. For Paul says that the Spirit of His Son causes us to cry intimately that this Jehovah is now our Daddy and Abba, such intimate terms of "organic" relationship:"And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father!" (Gal. 4:6)Witness Lee & Watchman Nee teach regeneration Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

How God can do this I don't think anyone knows. And that question is far too difficult for me to answer.But the fact remains that this is what the Bible reveals and in the Christian experience we absolutely know it to be true.Perhaps for this reason the Gospel is a call to believe. To have faith in the matter of Jesus being God become a man is not only experiencial and enjoyable. It also leaves absolutely no room for human pride to boast in anything. This humbling and receiving faith is to receive what everything in our being reasons is impossible.Nevertheless, in Romans 8:9-11 and many many other passage on the experience of Christ prove that it is right to think of God, Christ, the Spirit of Christ as interchangeable titles for one Divine and mysterious Being - the Triune God. Biblically speaking I fully realize that we Christians are speaking of two distinct "persons". Though the Father and Son are distinct they cannot be seperated. So I would say that the Three of the Triune God are distinct but not seperate.Believing this and receiving Christ as God or even Son of God leaves absolutely nothing for the human intellect to boast in. Man prides himself in his knowledge and his ability to figure out this and that. We are very proud of this. But the nature of God is too mysterious.The Gospel message is to Whosoever believeth. It is not to "Whosoever can explaineth." I believe I may have written this before. The command of Christ is "Receive the Holy Spirit". It is not "Figure out the Holy Spirit".Do not waste your time trying to make me feel inadaquate because I cannot explain to you how the Word can be God and be with God and there be only ONE God. Do not waste your time trying to make me feel dumb. I can only help you by showing you what the Bible says. And I can tell you of how we experience that to receive the Son is to receive the Father.Jesus Christ said, and you should accept, that He and His Father as the Divine "WE" would come into the heart of those who lived Him. Let's look at this marvelous truth again: Jesus the Son of God said that He and His Father as "WE" will come to his lover and make an abode with them. I did not make up this passage. I did not insert it into the New Testament. This is the pure word of God. I have experienced it. And to know Jesus and accept Christ within is to know God.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Well, one of the Hebrew words used to discribe this incarnate God is pehleh, right here:"For a child is born to us, A son is given to us; And the government shall be upon His shoulder;

​

And His name shall be called Wonderful [pehleh] Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace ..." (See Isaiah 9:6)This word pehleh is translated in my English version as "Wonderful". I can understand anything that is "Wonderful" is something "Full of Wonder".Now what is Wonderful about this Person? Well, for one thing though He is a little child, born in from the womb of a human mother, He is nonetheless the Mighty God. The Mighty God created the universe and is called Jehovah. Yet this child who spent mine months in a woman's womb and was born "unto us" is called Mighty God. That is full of wonder. That is PEHLEH - "Wonderful".Another Wonderful thing about Him. He is a "son". He is a "son ... given". Yet this "son" is the Eternal Father. But how can the Eternal Father be a son ? This too is Wonderful.Now this word is used a a few other places which help understand the Hebrew thought here:"Why do you ask My name, seeing it is Wonderful" (Judg. 13:18)"Is there anything too wonderful for Jehovah" (Gen. 18:14)"Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it" (Psalm 139:6)This word pehleh is defined by such words as:

something unusual,
unheard of,
hard to understand,
beyond one's powers,
too difficult,
incomprehensible When you ask of Christ's death if Christ is God incarnate, I must respond by saying the this is "knowledge too high for me, I cannot attain to it".Nevertheless, notice that this child and this son is "unto us". He is for us though He is Wonderful. He is "given" to us. He is here for our experience and enjoyment and even more so to be our Governor. His being incomprehensible or embodying knowledge to which we cannot attain does not make Him impossible to enjoy and experience. He is the incarnate God who is unto us.We should not use His incomprehensibility as an excuse not to come under His Government. And we see from the New Testament that that government is to the Christian, primarily carried out by His indwelling and living within us as the Holy Spirit. It doesn't mean that Jesus could not have died. We should know that Jesus did die and rose from the dead.I think it means that God exists in a realm in which death itself cannot destroy Him. He became a man so that He could undergo death. But He passes through it. He conquers it. And I do not pretend to fully understand this.However, Acts 20:20 says that God purchased the church with His (God's) blood."Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among whom the Holy Spirit as placed you as overseers to shepherd the church of God which He obtained with His own blood." (Acts 20:28) God was incarnated as the man Jesus that He might suffer death. And because of Who He is, that significance of that death has eternal efficacy in what it accomplishes for man's redemption. We are called upon to believe the Gospel and trust Jesus Christ. You ask me if I believe whether Christ really died. You have read this, I assume: Yes, I believe that Jesus Christ "[/b]became dead[/b]". He died and rose from the dead. He has the authorith to lay down His life in death and to take it up again according to John 10:18.But I would draw your attention especially to what Jesus said to John Revelation: The title "the First and the Last" is equivalent to "the Alpha and the Omega". But Who says He is [b]"the Alpha and the Omega"{/b - the first letter of the greek alphabet and the last letter? It is [b]"the Almighty" (1:8) The title the First and the Last is also expressed in terms of the Alpha and the Omega. And it is God the Almighty Who both comes on the clouds to be seen by the tribes in the land of Israel and Who speaks that He is the Almighty. Jesus is the Almghty God incarnate.I would again draw your attention back to what this One who died and rose said: Yet it is Jehovah God Who identifies Himself as the First and the Last in the Old Testament: It is Jehovah the Almighty God Who is "the First ... also the Last." It is Jehovah God who stretched forth the heavens.Do you think that after "the Firstt" there is another "the First"? Do you think that before "the Last" there is another "the Last". Do you believe that there could be two Firsts and two Lasts? I do not. So the Son of Man Who says that He is the First and the Last in Revelation 1:17 must be Jehovah God incarnate. He is the child who is the Mighty God and the Son who is the Eternal Father.Now you also ask the very interesting question of why Jesus had to die. But this I would like to discuss in another post. But before this I would again emphaze that there is no First before the First and no other Last after the Last. And to make this point abundantly clear we read in Isaiah: If we truly wish to be witnesses for Jehovah then we must bear witness that NO GOD was formed after Him and no God was formed before Him and there is no Savior beside Him. So Jesus Christ Who died and rose and says He is the First and the Last must be Jehovah God incarnate as the Wonderful One. I understand. However, you are the one wanting to change the simple truths of the Bible.Is there another First besides Jehovah the First? If not then Jesus Christ, the First (Rev. 1:17) must be Jehovah God incarnate. Will you change this simple truth of the Bible? Will you teach that Jesus is the angel Michael in order to change this simple truth? Some of us will not buy your change.Is there another Last beside Jehovah God? Then Jesus "the Last" (Rev. 1:11) must be Jehovah God. We do not have to depend upon my theology. We are told in the prophecy of Isaiah that the Son given is called the Eternal Father and the child born is the Mighty God. It is really a matter of quotation rather than interpretation.It is Jesus Who speaks again in Revelation 22:12: The One who sits on the throne of God and speaks in Revelation 21:6 says: Whoever the Speaker is He is evidently the same Being as says He is the One who became dead and lives again and who is "the First and the Last" (Rev. 1:17).This is WONDERFUL! So by making Jesus Michael the angel you think you are helping people to understand the Bible? You are creating far more problems then you think you are solving by making two Gods where the Bible says that there is only Jehovah God the Savior.It is not the Bible that you are trying to make easier to understand. It is your teaching from Arius and Russell which you are trying to make easy to understand.But from here I wish to go on to your question about the death of Christ and the reasons for such. Perhaps we can plumb the depths of this profound truth some latter. I need a rest now.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

If you recall I mentioned that that Father and the Son are distinct but not separated.Now concerning Revelation 1:7 and 8:This two verses are definitely a reference to what was spoken in Zechariah the prophet: The speaker in this passage is Jehovah. And interestingly Jehovah God and the Angel of Jehovah are interchangeable in that chapter: Him whom the Israelites have pierced in Jesus Christ who was pierced with nails on His cross. It was the Israelites who called out for Him to be crucified. Jehovah God says that they will look upon "Me" Whom they have pierced and weep for Him.Jehovah as Jesus Christ is coming on the clouds in Revelation 1:7. And He is the One Who is speaking in verse 8. The "coming" is the link. And the obvious reference to Jehovah who was pierced in Zechariah 12 establishes that Christ coming on the clouds is Jehovah God who was incarnated in a human body and was pierced. They will recognize Him as their Messiah and weep over Him in that day when He comes on the clouds to the land of Israel.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Isn't it a matter of accepting all the the Scripture teaches? If you have a myopic view and only want to choose passages to believe, then you will not have a full view of the Bible's revelation.I think the Proverb passage we have discussed before. Most English translations I have checked said the God possessed this Wisdom. Of course God possessed wisdom from eternity as long as He has been God - forever.So that God produced wisdom at the beginning of His creation of the universe is not my understanding. Rather God possessed His wisdom at the beginning of His creation of the universe is my understanding.This is quite logical. For if God had no Wisdom to begin with how would He have had the wisdom to create wisdom ?Going on to speak of the redemptive death of Christ I believe that two parties are involved - God and man. Your view that an angel of God's creation died would make three parties.Do you see three parties involved in the act of eternal redemption ? How is it righteous for a third party to come and pay the dept for the offender to the offended ? That is unrighteous to the third party.Rather I see that the first party, God, the offended, has accepted the loss into Himself. He has done this by being God-man and incurring the penalty of man's sins. He has carried up our sins in His body onto the tree as Peter taught.That is all the time I have. I will come back to this. I will not be going over John 1:1 again.