Lorenzo Snow Couplet

[Traveler]

Jesus was a man--fully. We say he remained fully God because God does not stop being God. Nevertheless, during Jesus' sojourn on Earth He embraced limitation. As one example, when Jesus was touched by the woman with an issue of blood power left Jesus. He felt diminished, or weakened. He asked, "Who touched me?" Some would argue that the question was meant to illicit faith and confidence in the woman--that Jesus, as God, knew who the woman was. This is probably wrong. He was a man--truly. It is most likely that he did not know who the woman was. The miracles Jesus performed were such as we perform. We do them in Christ's name, but it is by the power of the Holy Spirit. Jesus relied on that same power. He did so because he was a man.

I perceive that you will draw some conclusions that you believe are logical, based upon my agreement that Jesus was man. I cannot promise that I will agree with those conclusions. If/then conclusions are sometimes flawed. To throw out the first qualifier, I would insist that Jesus did not cease being God, even though he willingly gave up infinite power, omnipresence, and omniscience during his time among us.

I am not sure where this is going to go. For now I am having a problem resolving that I have come to such an agreement with an Evangelical Minister and Trinitarian.

I was prepared to argue this point a while longer and now that we are in agreement I find myself quite surprised and not sure if I should declare you are me the winner.

Anyway I am quite pleased and now I am very interested to discuss more with you what this means. I appreciate your point of view and before we get into exchanges differences I kind of want to explorer the idea of man and that Jesus (G-d) became a man. I think we agree on why - and we may never agree on some things but for now I want to explorer what in your view is man that G-d would become one.

The Traveler

[Maureen]

...I understand we see their nature differntly (trinity vs seperate and distinct) but how do you feel lds believing we can literally become like him change what we are pursuing?

Just to be clear, the Trinity says that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are distinct from each other; so we agree there. But because Trinitarians believe that there is only one God, we do not believe that we can literally become God or a God, we do not pursue exaltation because we believe it is not possible for mankind to become Gods. We believe we can inherit God's glory, but that is not the same as becoming a God.

M.

[prisonchaplain]

So what is the difference to you between pursuing the attributes of Heavenly Father (becoming like him) and seeking to live with him?

We get the way, the truth and eternal life thru him. Is there a way without truth or life without a way?

I feel like I'm jumping into a conversation midway and not understanding all the pretext. I've read this thread but perhaps I'm misunderstanding something.

I understand we see their nature differntly (trinity vs seperate and distinct) but how do you feel lds believing we can literally become like him change what we are pursuing?

Day to day, their may not be much difference at all. We all seek greater responsibility in his Kingdom, spiritual growth, ever increasing likeness to Christ. To push the similarities further, we both expect to rule and reign with Christ, to judge angels and the world, to be the "5-talent" followers, who do so well for God that we get double the reward and double the duty. Indeed, we will be exalted.

But, catch what Traveler got from the Philippians passage. I saw a call to humility, a willingness to stoop lower, and help those in need. Traveler (who, I am certain would be quick to help those in need) saw a call to Godlyness--Exaltation with a capitol E.

Perhaps the bottom line is that I expect to becom a king in the eternal service of my KING. I perceive that you would seek to become KING in association with our KING.

[Traveler]

Just to be clear, the Trinity says that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are distinct from each other; so we agree there. But because Trinitarians believe that there is only one God, we do not believe that we can literally become God or a God, we do not pursue exaltation because we believe it is not possible for mankind to become Gods. We believe we can inherit God's glory, but that is not the same as becoming a God.

M.

I am not sure how far down this path we want to go but in John Chapter 10 this is exactly the point the the Pharisees made and the reason that Jesus was to be put to death. Note the exchange from verses 30 to 33. Then consider how Jesus answered that in verse 34.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

I think the next question that we must deal with is - Is Jesus a G-d? or should I ask is Jesus G-d?

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

I think the next question that we must deal with is - Is Jesus a G-d? or should I ask is Jesus G-d?

The Traveler

You answered this indirectly in the previous post--to Maureen:

John 10:30-34

King James Version (KJV)

30 I and my Father are one.

31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

Yes, Jesus, a mere man, was/is God. Woe to those who deny it. They would commit the same error as the Pharisees.

Traveler, do you suggest that trinitarians commit the same error as the Pharisees in saying that you cannot become G-d?

[mikbone]

This point of discussion is not going to be able to come to any conclusions unless we try to make more concrete definitions.

For example - Was the Messiah (Jesus Christ during his mortal ministry):

1) 50% Mortal & 50% Immortal (1/2 DNA from the Virgin Mary & half from God)

2) 100% Mortal & 100% Immortal (this is 200% which is impossible - but God is boundless...)

3) 100% Mortal physical body with a spirit and knowledge that was able to grant him immortality and the ability to self-resurrect.

4) Or was He actually a different species than us entirely?

[Traveler]

You answered this indirectly in the previous post--to Maureen:

Yes, Jesus, a mere man, was/is God. Woe to those who deny it. They would commit the same error as the Pharisees.

Traveler, do you suggest that trinitarians commit the same error as the Pharisees in saying that you cannot become G-d?

I would like to say I know the answer to your question. But at this point, I would like to explorer understandings and consider first what is man and what is G-d.

That is why I asked is Jesus a G-d. The Pharisees understood or at least thought that Jesus was saying that though he was a man that he claimed to be equal to G-d. Which was in the Pharisees - saying that he was G-d.

But for a Trinitarian - I am not sure and though first I must listen very carefully and perhaps ask some question to clear up confusion on my part. But for now I want to investigate this to see what I can learn.

If you are anyone else thinks I am setting you up for something - keep in mind there would be nothing for me to gain in that - except to make any future discussion perhaps more hostel. Not at all my intention. but it would be somewhat cool if we could discover dialog in which we could understand each other better.

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

This point of discussion is not going to be able to come to any conclusions unless we try to make more concrete definitions.

For example - Was the Messiah (Jesus Christ during his mortal ministry):

1) 50% Mortal & 50% Immortal (1/2 DNA from the Virgin Mary & half from God)

2) 100% Mortal & 100% Immortal (this is 200% which is impossible - but God is boundless...)

3) 100% Mortal physical body with a spirit and knowledge that was able to grant him immortality and the ability to self-resurrect.

4) Or was He actually a different species than us entirely?

#3. Off the cuff I do not recall the passage, but there are scriptures that suggest the Father resurrected Jesus, others that say Jesus self-resurrected, and still others that the Spirit raised him.

For Traveler, these conversations require intense listening and care in speech. We come from different perspectives and are trying to understand. At the same time, we want to represent our beliefs clearly and well. I do believe you want us to see your perspective so well that we come to agree with it. There's no harm or foul in that though. We all hope to win people to our viewpoint in any conversation. We play with respect, honesty, and openness, and let God anoint our thoughts as we carry on.

[Seminarysnoozer]

This point of discussion is not going to be able to come to any conclusions unless we try to make more concrete definitions.

For example - Was the Messiah (Jesus Christ during his mortal ministry):

1) 50% Mortal & 50% Immortal (1/2 DNA from the Virgin Mary & half from God)

2) 100% Mortal & 100% Immortal (this is 200% which is impossible - but God is boundless...)

3) 100% Mortal physical body with a spirit and knowledge that was able to grant him immortality and the ability to self-resurrect.

4) Or was He actually a different species than us entirely?

Why is it only 0%, 50% or 100%? It could be 99% and 1% or any other combination. His body was not like ours, at least to some degree.

[Windseeker]

Perhaps the bottom line is that I expect to becom a king in the eternal service of my KING. I perceive that you would seek to become KING in association with our KING.

Travelers response was clearly Travelers opinion and not LDS doctrine regarding his take on that scripture.

So when you say you perceive that I would seek to become KING, you ought to know I would be satisfied polishing angels wings or whatever menial job as long as it's in his presence.

[prisonchaplain]

I doubt there will be any wing polishers in the Celestial Kingdom--certainly not among those who achieve exaltation. Traveler certainly represents himself, but seeking exaltation, and ultimately joining in God's nature--that comports with LDS teaching, doesn't it?

[mikbone]

Why is it only 0%, 50% or 100%? It could be 99% and 1% or any other combination. His body was not like ours, at least to some degree.

I only listed 4 options. The list is limitless. But there is only one truth. Why don't you stick out your neck and take a position, instead of just being contrary. If you just wanna say it is a mystery that is acceptable as well.

Do you have proof that his mortal body was not like ours? To what degree was was his body not like ours.

I happen to agree with PC (surprisingly). I think Christ's body was 100% mortal, with knowledge and wisdom that gave Him the ability to do miracles, resurrect, etc...

Edited April 23, 2013 by mikbone

[mikbone]

but there are scriptures that suggest the Father resurrected Jesus, others that say Jesus self-resurrected, and still others that the Spirit raised him.

I like

John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.

[Traveler]

Why is it only 0%, 50% or 100%? It could be 99% and 1% or any other combination. His body was not like ours, at least to some degree.

His body was not like our???? What are you saying - that he was not really a man? How was his body not like ours? to what degree? I think I did not get that memo or scripture or what ever piece of information you got that I did not?

The Traveler

[Traveler]

Travelers response was clearly Travelers opinion and not LDS doctrine regarding his take on that scripture.

So when you say you perceive that I would seek to become KING, you ought to know I would be satisfied polishing angels wings or whatever menial job as long as it's in his presence.

I am not clear concerning what you are talking about. Would you clarify what you are talking about as being my opinion and not necessarily LDS doctrine? I did not think I gave much of an opinion yet but I am trying to clarify specifically what it is everybody else is saying. I am trying to keep up with what is going on - the last point - I think is that we all agree that Jesus was once a man. I think we agree that Jesus is currently G-d. Beyond that I have not intended to have given an opinion. So before things get two confusing please clarify what you are talking about and to what your are referencing as my opinion.

The Traveler

[mikbone]

I do believe you want us to see your perspective so well that we come to agree with it. There's no harm or foul in that though. We all hope to win people to our viewpoint in any conversation. We play with respect, honesty, and openness, and let God anoint our thoughts as we carry on.

I don't really care if you agree with my perspective. Sorry if that sounds flippant.

But I believe that we cannot have a reasonable conversation if we do not at least understand each others perspective.

[AnthonyB]

I think we had better define the period his body was the same as our current one, happy to be corrected if I haven't got something right... (Was going to include the TC perspective but as this is LDS Gospel Discussion don't want to offend although I personally think if people are going to fully understand LDS doctrine it might help to reference to the more commonly held views as a contrast)

Pre-incarnation

LDS Jesus - Spirit body (Same as our pre-birth spirit bodies)

Incarnation

LDS Jesus - Human body (This is the body I think your discussing the level to which it was human)

Post Glorification/Ascension

LDS Jesus -Celestial body

Then there is the period post ressurection till ascension, which some hold he had a partially glorified body.

Edited April 23, 2013 by AnthonyB

[mikbone]

I think we had better define the period his body was the same as our current one, happy to be corrected if I haven't got something right... (Was going to include the TC perspective but as this is LDS Gospel Discussion don't want to offend although I personally think if people are going to fully understand LDS doctrine it might help to reference to the more commonly held views as a contrast)

Pre-incarnation

LDS Jesus - Spirit body (Same as our pre-birth spirit bodies)

Incarnation

LDS Jesus - Human body (This is the body I think your discussing the level to which it was human)

Post Glorification/Ascension

LDS Jesus -Celestial body

Then there is the period post ressurection till ascension, which some hold he had a partially glorified body.

Yes, during the mortal ministry here on Earth. Between the birth via the Virgin Mary to the death on the Cross.

[Maureen]

I think the next question that we must deal with is - Is Jesus a G-d? or should I ask is Jesus G-d?...

My answer is Jesus is God, the one and only God.

For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily… (Colossians 2:9, KJV)

For in him all the fullness of deity lives in bodily form… (Colossians 2:9, NET Bible)

M.

[prisonchaplain]

I don't really care if you agree with my perspective. Sorry if that sounds flippant.

But I believe that we cannot have a reasonable conversation if we do not at least understand each others perspective.

I get what you are saying. Sometimes suspicions destroy any chance at even understanding one another. On the other hand, both of our churches are missionary.

[mikbone]

You would be quite the catch PC...

[Traveler]

My answer is Jesus is God, the one and only God.

For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily… (Colossians 2:9, KJV)

For in him all the fullness of deity lives in bodily form… (Colossians 2:9, NET Bible)

M.

Do you believe Jesus once was a man? Also since you brought it up is the Father G-d - the one and only G-d?

The Traveler

[Maureen]

I am not sure how far down this path we want to go but in John Chapter 10 this is exactly the point the the Pharisees made and the reason that Jesus was to be put to death. Note the exchange from verses 30 to 33. Then consider how Jesus answered that in verse 34.

I'm going to let the NET Bible (side notes) help me out here.

Jesus answered, 83 “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, you are gods’? 84 (John 10:34)

84 sn A quotation from Ps 82:6. Technically the Psalms are not part of the OT “law” (which usually referred to the five books of Moses), but occasionally the term “law” was applied to the entire OT, as here. The problem in this verse concerns the meaning of Jesus’ quotation from Ps 82:6. It is important to look at the OT context: The whole line reads “I say, you are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you.” Jesus will pick up on the term “sons of the Most High” in 10:36, where he refers to himself as the Son of God. The psalm was understood in rabbinic circles as an attack on unjust judges who, though they have been given the title “gods” because of their quasi-divine function of exercising judgment, are just as mortal as other men. What is the argument here? It is often thought to be as follows: If it was an OT practice to refer to men like the judges as gods, and not blasphemy, why did the Jewish authorities object when this term was applied to Jesus? This really doesn’t seem to fit the context, however, since if that were the case Jesus would not be making any claim for “divinity” for himself over and above any other human being – and therefore he would not be subject to the charge of blasphemy. Rather, this is evidently a case of arguing from the lesser to the greater, a common form of rabbinic argument. The reason the OT judges could be called gods is because they were vehicles of the word of God (cf. 10:35). But granting that premise, Jesus deserves much more than they to be called God. He is the Word incarnate, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world to save the world (10:36). In light of the prologue to the Gospel of John, it seems this interpretation would have been most natural for the author. If it is permissible to call men “gods” because they were the vehicles of the word of God, how much more permissible is it to use the word “God” of him who is the Word of God?

https://net.bible.org/#!bible/John+10:25

M.

[Maureen]

Do you believe Jesus once was a man?

I answered that in Post# 100

Yes I believe that Jesus was once a man.

But like PC mentioned, your conclusions based on my belief that Jesus was a man, may not seem reasonable to me. He was a man and at the same time we was God.

M.

Also since you brought it up is the Father G-d - the one and only G-d?

Yes, the Father is the one and only God.

M.