Interesting article in First Things by Peter J. Leithart.
Protestantism has had a good run. It remade Europe and made America. It inspired global missions, soup kitchens, church plants, and colleges in the four corners of the earth. But the world and the Church have changed, and Protestantism isn’t what the Church, including Protestants themselves, needs today. It’s time to turn the protest against Protestantism and to envision a new way of being heirs of the Reformation, a new way that happens to conform to the original Catholic vision of the Reformers.
Read the whole article and then come back here share you reactions.
Scott,
I’ve added to my Amazon wishlist. I’d already read reviews from different authors. Sounds like a trend church leaders need to be well aware of. From an Amazon review —
Note, the Dones are not the free-riders. They are the folks who showed up every week and gave regularly, and they are not leaving because of the apparent dominance of conservative theology or well-publicized sex scandals. Rather, Packard summarizes, “the story of the dechurched is a story of modern religious organizations and institutions stifling people’s ability to engage with each other and their community.”
That’s a challenging list — both because it contains a lot of truth and because it’s not easy to solve these problems. For example, “systemic issues of equality, poverty and unjust economics” are real but but the solutions offered by both political parties fall far short of actually solving these problems. Asking a preacher with a Bible degree to lead us to solving these problems is like asking me to do brain surgery. They just don’t have the training or knowledge base — or very few do. And most of the pop evangelical literature on these topics is worse than useless.
So thanks for the recommendation. Could be a fruitful study.
I found the article refreshing, but – as David Himes noted – over generalized. What I’m hoping to see in my lifetime (which, since I’m now 75, soon to be 76, will need to be soon) is a similar approach to reconciliation within the RM. That would be major progress for “US” in the Stone-Campbell Movement, aka the Restoration Movement.
The refugees book would be an interesting series. It very much applies to where I am finding myself
I the early day there was neither Catholic or protestant. There was only Christian, saint, brother, child of God, etc or those who belonged to Christ and not a system or sect. Maybe we should try that?
As Jerry pointed out, becoming Reformational Catholics would be a very long step for the CofC. We have not even become Reformational Restorationist yet.
I hear you, but it was worth it for the Start function back again.
The problem is that we use the “change for the sake of change” as a reason not to change, when we do not apply this to things in our life as if it is a scriptural concept. Change is often good if it is a good change and sometimes we won’t know until we change, after all we can always change back. We often argue that others should change, but not us, because we have seemingly reached perfection. Often change results in seeing and doing things differently and getting a different perspective.
Dwight says:
“So Laymond I guess you protest against John 1 that argues that Jesus was the word and the word was with God and the Word was God and the Word, who is Jesus came down in the flesh. Even those that believe Jesus is God, as that he has the nature of God in essence, as you and I have the nature of man in essence, still worship God and follow Jesus.’
Let’s look at Dwight’s statement that “Jesus” was the word, in the beginning with God. Where did this come from, it absolutely is not from John 1. As a matter of fact it contradicts what is said in John 1..
Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Where does this say Jesus was the word.?
And Dwight said, “and the Word, who is Jesus came down in the flesh.”
and this is what John said.
Jhn 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Dwight, what does it mean when parentheses used in scripture?
The newer versions do the same thing as Dwight is doing, they change scripture to fit their belief.
Jhn 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
NIV
No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.
( who is himself God,) I just don’t believe the KJ translators would have left out such important information if it were contained within the original manuscript.
Dwight, I don’t protest any thing in John 1, I do protest against changing scripture to fit your needs.
And believe me you are not the only one to do this.
John 1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. John bore witness of Him and cried out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is preferred before me, for He was before me.’” And of His fullness we have all received, and grace for grace. For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.”
The whole context is of Jesus. If the Word and the Light is not Jesus, then then who became flesh and then who was with God…in the beginning with God, who was also God?
This creates a schizophrenic God who is beside Himself if the Word and the Light is not Jesus.
The progression of thought is “someone” as the Word who was with God and was God, “someone” is the Light, then this Jesus Word came down as flesh…who is Jesus. Even John states that Jesus was before him, even though technically Jesus was born after him.
Dwight, none of the above described Jesus the man, until he had reached the age of 30 years and was baptized and the spirit of God rested upon him.
The first verse tells us from what Jesus will grow. and the next 4 verses tells us what he will become.
This is the planning stage.
Isa 11:1 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:
Isa 11:2 And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD;
Isa 11:3 And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears:
Isa 11:4 But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.
Isa 11:5 And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.
this is the propheted stage.
Isa 42:1 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
this is the stage of completion of the plan.
Mat 12:18 Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles.
The scene of Jesus’ baptism confirms all of the above.
So you are saying that God “came in the flesh” as Jesus, not when he was born, but 30 years later? Then why was he worshipped as Lord and savior by the wise men? And strange that John taught about Jesus and the Light, even before Jesus was baptized. Even while in the Temple Jesus stated that “He came to do His Father’s business.” It appears that others and Jesus knew who He was. The strange thing is that Jesus went about 15 years past the point of accountability to be God. John taught about Jesus “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is preferred before me, for He was before me.’”, even before Jesus was baptized. There is no indication that Jesus became God or more God at His baptism, even though it is possible he lacked the power of the HS. Jesus Christ means “anointed savior” from His birth.
” So you are saying that God “came in the flesh” as Jesus, not when he was born, but 30 years later?”
Dwight in no way am I saying that. The bible tells us that Jesus came from the womb of woman, in the flesh.The word of God came to us through the flesh of Jesus. The writer of Hebrews said earlier God also spoke to man through (human beings) the flesh of the prophets, then he spoke to man through the (flesh) man, Jesus. (his son)
As I recall John never said “God became flesh” John said “the word of God became flesh” which in my opinion means the word of God was spoken by man. Flesh represents man .
If that is all there is to that, then Jesus wasn’t really any different than the other prophets that came before who brought the word of God! This is really where this leads. How is Jesus the Son of God then, since he has no lineage with God?
Jesus is the Word and the Light. The Word was with God and was God. You are separating scriptures from each other trying to make the Word and the Light and Jesus different entities.
This doesn’t say, “the Word of God became Flesh”, but rather “And the Word became flesh.” the same “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.”
Denying that He is God denies that He is the Son of God, because you are destroying his lineage.
Dwight and David,
I find Windows 10 runs high-memory programs such as Logos much more efficiently than Windows 8.1. And I do like getting the Start button back. Also the networking seems better.
“If that is all there is to that, then Jesus wasn’t really any different than the other prophets that came before who brought the word of God! This is really where this leads. How is Jesus the Son of God then, since he has no lineage with God?”
Dwight, you try so hard to place words in my mouth that just weren’t ever there. I have never once said Jesus was no different than other people, I don’t know of another person in history that was the offspring of a woman/human as mother, and a Spirit as Father. I do remember a place in the bible which said “the son’s of God laid with the daughters of men, and their offspring was mighty men of old” I reached the conclusion that the son’s of God here was referring to angels. Just my opinion. I an not taking any glory from Jesus at all, I just don’t give the Son the Father’s glory.
Because God said he would not give his glory to anyone.
Amen! Yes, Sometimes a change with some inconvenience (a day of loading) brings good things. I wasn’t a fan of 8.1, so this is much better.
Dwight, When was it that God declared Jesus to be his son? at birth, at baptism, or when he raised him from death? You tell me.
Psa 2:6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
Psa 2:7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
Act 13:32 And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers,
Act 13:33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.
Mat 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
Mat 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
Heb.1 “God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; 3 who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself[a] purged our[b] sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.5 For to which of the angels did He ever say:
“You are My Son, Today I have begotten You”?[c]
And again:
“I will be to Him a Father,And He shall be to Me a Son”?[d]
6 But when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says:
“Let all the angels of God worship Him.”[e]
7 And of the angels He says:
“Who makes His angels spirits , And His ministers a flame of fire.”[f]
8 But to the Son He says:
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
9 You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”[g]
10 And:
“You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
11 They will perish, but You remain; And they will all grow old like a garment;
12 Like a cloak You will fold them up,
And they will be changed. But You are the same, And Your years will not fail.”[h]
13 But to which of the angels has He ever said: “Sit at My right hand,
Till I make Your enemies Your footstool”?[i]
14 Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who will inherit salvation?
In this God says to His Son , “Your throne, O God is forever and ever.”
Heb.1 ironically points to many things. It almost appears as though Jesus is a created being and it might be, but even so Jesus would be created with the qualities and nature of God.
But then as we move into who Jesus is as the Son of God…the angels can worship and are to worship Him, so where does that leave us, since Jesus is God…also able to worship Jesus.
Jesus is King of a Kingdom…Jesus is righteous…Jesus laid the foundation of the world, which jives with John 1 in which God created through the Word. Jesus, only Jesus is worthy as God and Son and righteous to sit at God’s side.
Does Heb.1 agree with 1Co 15
1Co 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
1Co 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
1Co 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.
1Co 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
1Co 15:25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
1Co 15:26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
1Co 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
can you tell me who wrote Hebrews, and please explain to me why these two statements do not conflict.
Heb 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
Was Jesus made “much better than angels” or “a little lower, than angels” ?
Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
Psa 45:6 Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre.
it is evident that Heb 1:8 came from Psa 45:6 read all of Psa 45 and tell me this describes Jesus of Nazeruth
Laymond,
I continued to prod you on purpose and the truth is now being exposed. By not submitting to Jesus as Lord and Savior you cannot be a member (an adopted son) of God who is added to the Kingdom which is the Bride of Christ. If Christ is not your Lord he cannot forgive you of your sins. It also appears to me as you attempt to show your perceived relationship with Jesus, that you are placing yourself on the same level as Jesus.
First you deny that Jesus has any higher status than you have after baptism. Any human that has been baptized is equal with Jesus in God’s sight.
“This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. this speaks of one of many sons who has obeyed God in baptism. And yes I believe God/your Father was pleased when you were raised from the waters of baptism.”
“Yes there is a difference in the statements I referenced. At baptism Jesus was one of many sons of which the Father was pleased.” Is your name also on this list. If yours is not can you name any who are on the list, I am not asking for all whom you could believe is there, just a sample.
Then you extend the concept further.
“At Jesus’ resurrection, Jesus became the “only begotten son” not one of many, the only one, to be born from death into everlasting life.
When you die and are raised, you will deny Jesus that title, He won’t be the “only begotten son” any longer. There will be Dwight along side Jesus.”
Stating that when Christ followers are raised from the dead (we) will be equal to Jesus. This concept totally denies Jesus sacrifice on the cross and his power to forgive our sins.
It really sets a new standard, live a life like Jesus (follow his example), as I think about much of your communications this is exactly what you have been promoting, and when God raises you from the dead, you will be a child of God just like Jesus is now.
Laymond,
Since you have called upon Edward Fudge to support your concepts, and directed me to his sermon on the four Psalms, it identity is, “A SERMON BUILT ON FOUR PSALMS”, it is found under the Title, “HEBREWS: ANCIENT ENCOURAGEMENT FOR BELIEVERS TODAY”. I have read the complete sermon and do not see your concepts being verified. But, while there on Edward Fudge’s site I also found a companion book of his, I believe that it was noted that it was no longer in print. It can be read on his site, Title is, “Our Man In Heaven”. I suggest that you read carefully the; Exposition of the Text – Chapter One, in that you will find that Edward portrays Jesus in a very different manner than you have, I believe it could even be said that he refutes your portrayal of Jesus. Go read it and give us a report.
Dwight, 1Co 15 says; “. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; ”
Heb 1:8 “But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
Paul said the kingdom will be delivered to God, The Hebrews writer says nope the kingdom belongs to Jesus and always will.
Or what am I missing here?
Psa 45:6 “Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre.
when who ever ,tries to apply psalms 45 to Jesus, it just does not fit the New Testament Jesus. the pretty boy image, the woman chaser nature, seems to me to fit one of Jesus ancestors better. King David.
Laymond, The problem is that you give scriptures, but don’t offer how they fit in your theological scenario.
Heb.1 is referring to the Son, why, because it says so. Then there is the fact that all through the gospels and beyond Jesus is referred to as the King and it being His kingdom.
I Cor.15 says, “then cometh the end” and I don’t believe we have reached the end and when we do the Kingdom that Jesus is over will be returned to the one who gave it to Him, God the Father.
The problem with time in the scriptures is that they are subjective no to us, but to God and His sense of time. Jesus kingdom will last forever, until it is given over. Many times the translators translate “eon” or in Grk.-“aion” sections of time into “indefinite” since they don’t know the end of the period.
There are many times in the scriptures where the concept of forever are related on human terms and mean until the end of humanity or some long period of time and other times it means forever
Since scripture doesn’t contradict itself, the “for ever and ever” in Heb.1 will be until Jesus delivers the Kingdom back to God.
John 8:35 “And a slave does not abide in the house forever, but a son abides forever.”
There seems to be a contradiction here as a son will not literally abide in the house forever any more than the slave does, after all they will both die eventually, but the son will definitely be there for a much longer time as opposed to the limited nature of the slave. The Son has permanent rights to the house, while the slave doesn’t have any.
Dwight how come “for ever and ever” means eternity in Hebrew, and Means for just a while in Greek. and it is speaking of the same thing.
1Ch 29:10 Wherefore David blessed the LORD before all the congregation: and David said, Blessed be thou, LORD God of Israel our father, for ever and ever.
1Ch 29:11 Thine, O LORD, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty: for all that is in the heaven and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O LORD, and thou art exalted as head above all.
I must have missed where God “gave” his kingdom to Jesus. If he did Jesus must not have heard him, because Jesus always referred to “The Kingdom” as “The kingdom of God”
Jhn 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do
Why would Jesus need to retain kingship over God’s kingdom if he had finished the Job given him by the king.
I don’t know that Jesus ever referred to himself as king. He did say he was a friend and a brother.
From the website Got Questions: “Paul makes the point that Jesus was humbled in His earthly ministry and that His humiliation will result in glorification. In Philippians 2:5–11, Paul discusses the extent to which Jesus went to atone for sinners; Jesus’ perfect obedience is the reason that “God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (vv. 9–11). The Suffering Servant becomes the King of kings (see Isaiah 53:10–12).
Finally, in the book of Revelation we see the Kingship of Jesus made manifest. In chapter 5, the Lamb (Jesus) is the only one in all creation found worthy to open the scroll containing the judgments of God (vv. 2–5). In chapter 11, we hear voices in heaven proclaiming that the kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of Christ and that He will reign forever and ever (v. 15). In chapter 12, we read that the authority of Christ is what causes Satan to be thrown down to earth (vv. 9–10). In Revelation 17:12–14, the Lamb conquers all those arrayed against Him, and John stresses that He conquers because He is King of kings and Lord of lords. Finally, in chapter 19, we read of Jesus’ triumphant coming to strike the nations and tread the winepress of the wrath of God, having the authority to do so because He is King of kings and Lord of lords (vv. 11–16).
Fundamentally, the idea of Jesus being King of kings and Lord of lords means that there is no higher authority. His reign over all things is absolute and inviolable. God raised Him from the dead and placed Him over all things, “far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all” (Ephesians 1:21–23).”
“And he shall reign forever and ever” Does that mean forever Laymond?
Laymond, Do you consider anything before you argue a point. If your argument is true, then in John 8:35 “And a slave does not abide in the house forever, but a son abides forever.” the son lives forever and the slave dies. Again this was to show that the word “aieon” reflects a time period that is undetermined, but not necessarily open ended and eternal.
The word for “forever” is a different word in Hebrew than Greek. But even so the Hebrew “owlam” is defined as “long duration”
Gen.13:15 “for all the land which you see I give to you and your descendants forever (owlam).”
So what happened when Israel and Judah was conquered by Assyria and Babaloyn and the Meds-Persians? Well they took the land and it wasn’t Israels any longer. In fact the land mass that Israel had at one time they don’t have today.
Jesus will then in this context reign forever until Jesus comes again and then returns the Kingdom back to God, the Father.
Jesus returns the kingdom to the Father doesn’t mean he(Jesus) stops reigning. It is a symbolic gesture as a means of accomplishing his purpose. Everything God determined will be fulfilled in Christ Jesus. Jesus(the Son) and God (the Father) both, will reign forever and ever.
Monty, that is a possibility, even though I never have thought that the return would be symbolic, but in a sense when Jesus reigns, it is the Father reigning, because Jesus does the will of His Father. The ownership might be different, but the management style is the same, except now the manager (Jesus) has a personal connection with those of the flesh (us) since He lived as one us. The NT does bring in a new style, even though it is part of the Father’s will.
Dwight, and Monty, If you are interested, on December 2, 2015 at 10:13 am, I left the address to a sermon preached by Brother Fudge, in my opinion he does a great job on this very subject. just backtrack and click on the address if you are interested in hearing a good sermon.
Just remember they are the One God(head) instead of a two or a three individual gods. It really is hard to even talk about these things because of our individual identities that are separate from anyone else. It’s that earthly human individual concept that Laymond can’t get past IMHO. The heavenly concept is of 3 distinct persons who comprise a One. We simply don’t have any examples of it in our world. The closest we can come perhaps is our family unit which is composed of a father, mother and children who all share very similar DNA. They are the Smiths or the Jones. The Smiths and Jones are comprised of individual persons but they have so much in common they are a family of Smiths. The husband and wife God unites into a one. Let not man separate. Two distinct persons but referred to as one flesh. It’s a mystery(Godhead) for sure but the complexity of the mystery and whether we comprehend it properly doesn’t affect the reality of it.
Laymond, I don’t like fudge and I am not a follower of Fudge either.
We do have examples of more than one being one. In the case of man and wife, they “cleave and become one”. This is a physical connection and a spiritual connection (or should be). The two shall be as one…meaning that they are no longer individuals in purpose, even though they are individual people. The Israelites were one people when they came before God in covenant, even though made up of many people. We are of mankind, even though individuals. There are plenty of instances of the concept of “one” encapsulating the concept that many can be of one nature or purpose or thought. God is one, but God can be God, Jesus and the HS in thought and purpose and nature.
Laymond,
I see that you found a video of Mr. Fudge’s sermon. Since you are so convinced that we should listen to it and that by doing so we will be convinced that his sermon will confirm your beliefs, can we assume that you have listened to the sermon?
Guys,
I’ve decided to stay out the debate on whether Jesus is God the Son. But I thought I’d pitch this in —
References to the begottenness of Jesus are references to Psalm 2 — a Messianic psalm — but it’s also a coronation psalm. This is speaking of the moment that God’s anointed one becomes king.
All Israelites were “sons of God.”
So Jesus was God’s son when he was born a Jew. And literally conceived by God. But the scriptures also speak of the king of Israel as God’s son —
Cooler still is John 3:5 which speaks of all Christians being “born again,” but the Greek for “born” is the same word as “begotten” — the translation depending on whether you’re speaking of the mother or father. So Christians are to be begotten again — just as Jesus was begotten by God the Spirit in Mary and just as David was begotten again as king of Israel. And just as Gentiles are reborn/rebegotten as part of Israel — God’s chosen people.
Lot’s of strands come together.
When God announced that Jesus is his only-begotten Son, well, he’s announcing that he’s the Messiah and King. But the word was used idiomatically of a ‘special” or “unique” son. In Hebrews, Isaac is called Abraham’s “only begotten” even though Abraham fathered other sons. The reference is to his place in Abraham’s covenant destiny — something like that.
It’s bad Greek and bad exegesis to imagine that Jesus had no pre-existence because he was begotten. David existed before he was begotten of God. So did we.
Rather, it’s a METAPHOR for a culture in which there was no adoption for becoming a son to a father in a new way or in a new relationship.
Laymond,
I would guess that now that I have shown you that Edward Fudge does not subscribe to your concepts, you will not read what he has written. It really would be an exercise of proving your beliefs even if only for yourself if you could put his examples to the test. Of course if you succeeded maybe it would become your duty as a Christian to contact Edward to explain to him the proper concept of Jesus. Isn’t that what all discussions are supposed to create, a better understanding of The Word of God?
These are the majors that hold the concept that Jesus is not deity according to Wiki.
“Christadelphians, Christian Scientists, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Dawn Bible Students, Friends General Conference, Iglesia ni Cristo, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Living Church of God, Oneness Pentecostals, Members Church of God International, Unitarian Universalist Christians, The Way International, The Church of God International and the United Church of God.
Also Judaism and Islam.
The Jews during Christ time condemned Jesus to death because of his claims of Godhood or deity. Only God could forgive sin…which Jesus did. Only Jesus was called the Son of God and accepted that term. He talked of His Kingdom that was in heaven, which would make Him a King of that Kingdom. The Jews considered this blasphemy.
.
Hebrews 2:9 — “…by God’s grace He might taste death for everyone.”
Does this mean that Jesus paid the price of sin for all men , did Jesus die for us, or in our place.
Heb 2:10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.
(Dwight, does this mean, that Jesus was deity , just not perfect deity. )
OK back to my original question. “did Jesus die for us, or in our place.”
Rom 5:6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.
for = hyper = 1.in behalf of, for the sake of
you can die on behalf of someone, without taking their own responsibility away.
The word “for” in Hebrews 2:9 is the same as in Rom 5:6 .It does not mean “in place of”. Solders die every day “on our behalf” but that does not say we will never die.
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
So as Heb 2:10 says, did God see it as necessary for Jesus to suffer and die, so we could have a perfect leader, In that he would experience life and death as we must, or so we wouldn’t have to pay for our own sins. If “a god” could have led men back to The Father, Jehovah would have done it himself.
Gen 3:3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
Those who argue they are saved by faith alone use Hebrews 2:9 as proof that Jesus had already paid the price for their sins, He took their place. therefore they are absolved of their responsibilities , nothing required of them.
As the bible says; Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
When we say we will not be judged by our works, we are contradicting the written word.
The sin ye do by two and two
ye must pay for one by one.
Rudyard Kipling (1865-1936)
Laymond,
You simply can’t “become” God. You either are, or you’re not. Jesus was God(that’s the point of John 1:1) he is God, and will always be God. If there was ever a time when he wasn’t(God) then he never will “be” God. I hope this helps. God however can and did become man. A God/Man if you will with a dual nature. You and I have only one nature-man. God, in the person of Jesus, took on a dual nature. God humbled himself and took on human nature, and God became a servant. He was not a servant, not initially, but “became” one in order to come to earth and become the suffering servant(God’s Son). So yes, there is the sense in which the Messiah would become the servant of God(because of the condescending act of putting on humanity and fulfilling the desires of God(the father). That is how he(God the Son) could die(in the flesh). He allowed himself to die, “no man takes my life from me. But I lay it down. And if I lay it down I(he didn’t say the Father) but I have the power to take it back up again.” When man fell in the garden, God(the Godhead) already had a plan to redeem mankind. Man couldn’t rise to God’s level, so God came down to ours. Not some angelic created servant, but HE HIMSELF. It’s an incredible amazing story, an unthinkable one.
Laymond,
Check out this song on youtube. It explains it all in song. https://youtu.be/iS0QOYsoGOU
Larry, I am not a follower of Mr. Fudge I was only referencing his description of Jesus as a man and brother, at the right hand of God.
I try to follow Jesus Christ.
Monty said, “That is how he(God the Son) could die(in the flesh). He allowed himself to die, “no man takes my life from me. But I lay it down. And if I lay it down I(he didn’t say the Father) but I have the power to take it back up again”
“Man couldn’t rise to God’s level, so God came down to ours. Not some angelic created servant, but HE HIMSELF. It’s an incredible amazing story, an unthinkable one.”
Not only unthinkable, but just as impossible as God lying, What does dead mean to you, just lying very still with the ability to sit up if you so desire, or without life and unable to do anything.
Jesus could have only been speaking of his faith in the Father’s promise that he would be raised in three days. As we see in scripture faith , true faith is a powerful thing. Jesus didn’t think he would be raised again, he knew he would. Why because God said he would. The only power Jesus had to raise himself from death, was the power of faith. The same power we have to know we too will be raised from death, faith in God’s word.
Dwight said, “We don’t have that kind of power or authority.
True God did raise Jesus, but that is because Jesus allowed himself into a position of submission”
If this in indicating that Jesus, even when he was dead, retained the power to raise himself from the dead We need to be careful of what we say, just to win an argument. I hope you are not saying Jesus gave power to God.
I don’t see anywhere in scripture where God sat down with his son, and discussed the plan of Isaiah – Chapter 11 , If you know something I don’t, I sure would appreciate knowing.
Jhn 17:1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:
Jhn 17:2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
Jhn 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. ( the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. ) I would think this let’s us know who had, authority and power.
Rom 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
1Co 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
Laymond,
Before I showed you that Mr. Fudge did not teach the doctrine that you do have credited to him, you left us with the impression that he did. Now that you understand that he does not, you now just state that, “I am not a follower of Mr. Fudge I was only referencing his description of Jesus as a man and brother, at the right hand of God.” Whopide do, you have taken the liberty to distort a man’s sermon into something that suites yourself, and don’t have the decency to at least admit that you misunderstood and misrepresented Mr. Fudge. I really did not expect you to be a follower of Mr. Fudge, because you had already explained that you are following Jesus, no one is to be a follower of a teacher or preacher. What you really meant is you don’t believe Mr. Fudge has presented truth, as he was explaining what Jesus had taught. In the same manner you won’t believe the messages that we quote from Jesus, God, The Apostles, and inspired Word of God.
You have the opinion that God is alright with man picking some of his Word and pitting it against other portions of his Words to create your own message. God’s Word will never oppose itself, all interlocks with all other messages to portray the message that God expects us to get.
God and Jesus did not tell different stories, if they did one must have been lying. God cannot lie, are we to believe that Jesus could?
So why are we continually pressing you so hard? Because no man can come to God unless he comes with Jesus representing him, and if anyone refuses to submit to Jesus as his Lord and Savior, God will not accept as one of his children. It may be more easily understood if we looked at it in terms spelled out in scripture as, Jesus is the only begotten Son everyone else is an adopted son of God. God adopts his children through his adoption agency (Jesus), there is no other way.
Joh 14:6 ESV Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
Joh 10:7-11 ESV So Jesus again said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. (8) All who came before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. (9) I am the door. If anyone enters by me, he will be saved and will go in and out and find pasture. (10) The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly. (11) I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.
Joh 10:24-30 ESV So the Jews gathered around him and said to him, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.” (25) Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me, (26) but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep. (27) My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. (28) I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. (29) My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. (30) I and the Father are one.”
If you refuse to believe the instructions of the adoption agency, you will never have a connection with the Father.
Anyone who claims differently has been labeled as a thief and robber. According to what you have expressed on this blog, you have refused the adoption agency?