The Absolute Equality of Jesus and The Father

[Yeshua1]

Are you saying that Jesus saying "my Father is greater than I" is just a respectful saying?. It's not that I believe they are not equal in power. I believe the three are actually one God just different facets of the same God. Although while still on earth before the crucifixion, Christ may have been lower in power than the Father since He was living in a lower existence.
MB

Jesus while here on earth had accepted limitations of being in Human Flesh, so the Father was greater at that time, but now back to his former glory in heaven...

And by different facets of God, are they 3 Persons, or One Person called 3 different names?

 

[Yeshua1]

take Isaiah 43:11, "I, I am the LORD, and besides Me there is no Savior", with Luke 2:11, "For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord"

He was the Lord, Yahweh. but not called Jesus as of yet...

 

[MB]

take Isaiah 43:11, "I, I am the LORD, and besides Me there is no Savior", with Luke 2:11, "For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord"

Jesus while here on earth had accepted limitations of being in Human Flesh, so the Father was greater at that time, but now back to his former glory in heaven...

And by different facets of God, are they 3 Persons, or One Person called 3 different names?

The three are one God. Like a diamond with three facets. The Father the Son and the Holy Spirit They are always together except when Christ became flesh. Even then the three were the same God. All work together as they always have.
MB

 

[Reformed1689]

David, PLEASE don't keep on posting for the sake of arguing with me, as it is very clear that you really don't understand what the Bible very plainly teaches!

I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. I firmly believe you are adding to Scripture something that is not written there.

WHEN the Second Person of the Trinity "took upon Himself the form of a man", as you yourself say, it is at THIS time, that He was called JESUS. I have already shown this from the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, but you still insist on your folly!

Yes, but it does not say that he was never called Jesus before that time. At that time, He was introduced to humanity in a more tangible way and humanity was instructed to call Him Jesus. That does not say His name all of a sudden became Jesus and that it was not before.

 

[Reformed1689]

David, PLEASE don't keep on posting for the sake of arguing with me, as it is very clear that you really don't understand what the Bible very plainly teaches!

Also don't tell me what I am doing when you don't know. You clearly don't understand what I am saying. I am not saying that he was called Jesus prior to incarnation, but I AM saying that it does not say that He was not.

 

[Yeshua1]

I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. I firmly believe you are adding to Scripture something that is not written there.

Yes, but it does not say that he was never called Jesus before that time. At that time, He was introduced to humanity in a more tangible way and humanity was instructed to call Him Jesus. That does not say His name all of a sudden became Jesus and that it was not before.

he was Jesus in His Humanity, not while Just in His Deity!

 

[Reformed1689]

he was Jesus in His Humanity, not while Just in His Deity!

He was Jesus because He is Jesus. Has nothing to do with the human vs divine nature.

 

[Yeshua1]

He was Jesus because He is Jesus. Has nothing to do with the human vs divine nature.

same person, but renamed when he came as a man!

 

[Reformed1689]

same person, but renamed when he came as a man!

And that is what I am saying we do not have ample evidence for. All we know, from Scripture, is that we were told as humans to call Him Jesus. We do not know that he was not referenced as such before. I'm not saying that he was, I'm saying we don't know.

 

[MB]

I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. I firmly believe you are adding to Scripture something that is not written there.

Yes, but it does not say that he was never called Jesus before that time. At that time, He was introduced to humanity in a more tangible way and humanity was instructed to call Him Jesus. That does not say His name all of a sudden became Jesus and that it was not before.

He was called the son but the name Jesus does not appear in the old testiment. Jesus was first named Jesus to Mary in;
Mat_1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
Not calling Him Jesus is a negative that cannot be proven so why even go there? Just like you always do you never add anything to the thread but your imagination. It is obvious that Jesus was never named Jesus in the Old Testament.
MB

 

[Reformed1689]

He was called the son but tje name Jesus does not appear in the old testiment. Jesus was first named Jesus to Mary in;
Mat_1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
Not calling Him Jesus is a negative that cannot be proven so why even go there? Just like you always do you never add anything to the thread but your imagination. It is obvious that Jesus was never named Jesus in the Old Testament.
MB

I'm not the one adding things. I am saying we don't know. All we know is humanity did not call Him Jesus until the NT. We don't know what they called Him in Heaven.

 

[MB]

I'm not the one adding things. I am saying we don't know. All we know is humanity did not call Him Jesus until the NT. We don't know what they called Him in Heaven.

Scripture doesn't say how ever it is understandable. We all call Him Jesus after he was introduced 99% of what you claim isn't in scripture either. Not only this but if God never changes as you have claimed in the past and now for the sake of argument are saying he called Him something else. Then God would have changed His mind on His name.
MB

 

[Reformed1689]

99% of what you claim isn't in scripture either.

Name one thing I claim that isn't in Scripture. 99% of what I claim isn't in Scripture? You have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[MB]

Name one thing I claim that isn't in Scripture. 99% of what I claim isn't in Scripture? You have no idea what you are talking about.

Sure I do you just think you're better than everyone else and when an argument isn't hot enough you come in and stir the pot. Your a Calvinist most of what you post is philosophy. That in short is your ideas your interpretations which do not mean squat.
2Pe_1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
MB

 

[Reformed1689]

Sure I do you just think you're better than everyone else and when an argument isn't hot enough you come in and stir the pot. Your a Calvinist most of what you post is philosophy. That in short is your ideas your interpretations which do not mean squat.
MB

You don't know anything about me. I don't think I'm better than others. I have never once said that on here. Do I think there are issues where I am right and others are wrong, dead wrong, based on Scripture? Absolutely. But that is not the same thing as saying I am better than everyone else. That is bearing false witness against me.

I'm sorry if hearing truth upsets you and "stirs the pot" as you say. I don't apologize for speaking truth even if others, like yourself, don't like it.

 

[Reformed1689]

our a Calvinist most of what you post is philosophy.

This is ridiculous. Most of what I post is straight Scripture that you somehow try to twist into vain philosophy because you do not accept what Scripture plainly says.

 

[MB]

Name one thing I claim that isn't in Scripture. 99% of what I claim isn't in Scripture? You have no idea what you are talking about.

I do not claim to know all there is but I can tell when someone wants an argument.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
You have denied that this verse is speaking of the world and not just the elect. You have claimed it's speaking of the elect only.
MB

 

[Reformed1689]

I do not claim to know all there is but I can tell when someone wants an argument.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
You have denied that this verse is speaking of the world and not just the elect. You have claimed it's speaking of the elect only.
MB

Technically my position is that it means a general sense of world and not every individual because Christ did not die for every individual but only those that believe in Him. That being said, this is off topic.

 

[MB]

This is ridiculous. Most of what I post is straight Scripture that you somehow try to twist into vain philosophy because you do not accept what Scripture plainly says.

This makes me laugh What you said here just is not true. I do not twist scripture. This is your ploy.
MB

 

[MB]

Technically my position is that it means a general sense of world and not every individual because Christ did not die for every individual but only those that believe in Him. That being said, this is off topic.

That is not in scripture this is your philosophy. Thank you for proving my claims.
MB