More on the Attributes of God the Father and Jesus

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

KUWN

Active Member
Sep 13, 2024
634
206
43
69
Southeast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
This is a continuation of the deity of Christ (see the other articles on this topic)


In our discussion of Christ's divine attributes, we have seen that he is described in general terms as having the nature of God. Indeed, Scripture states that he is exactly like God (or the Father) and that the "fullness" of what it means to be God dwells in him (John 14:9-10; Col. 1:15,19; 2:9; Heb. 1:3). We also have seen that these statements do not refer to Jesus merely as a man through whom we learn what God "is really like"; rather they refer to someone who existed as a heavenly, divine being before coming to earth as a human being. We saw that Christ, in fact, has always existed, even “before” creation (Matt. 20:28; 23:34, 37; John 1:1-3; 8:56-59; 12:39-41; 16:28; 17:5; Rom. 8:3; 1 Cor. 8:6; 10:4, 9; Gal. 4:4-6; Phil. 2:6; Col. 1:16-17; Heb. 1:2, 10-12; Jude 5). Next, I will show that the Son of God possesses a wide array of specific attributes of God the Father.

Perhaps the most fundamental specific attribute of God that separates him from everything that is not God is that he is uncreated. If this attribute is true of Christ, and he is a real, existent being, then he is by definition God. On the other hand, if Christ were by nature a created being, then it would not make much sense to speak of him as God. The very fact that Christ has always existed implies, of course, that he is uncreated. His being uncreated has even more direct support from Scripture. In the previous chapter we drew attention to various biblical statements affirming that creation came into existence in and through the Son (John 1:3, 10; 1 Cor. 8:6; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:2, 10-12). Some of these statements emphasize in the strongest terms that not just part, but the totality of creation owes its existence to him. "For in him all things in heaven and on earth were created, things visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or powers-all things have been created through him and for him" (Col. 1:16,). Here, the apostle Paul states explicitly that the totality of all created things, including both heavenly, invisible beings and earthly, visible beings, was created through the Son.

It should be added here that it is a rational absurdity to exist before he existed. If Jesus created himself, he would have to exist before he created himself in order to create himself.

Speaking of the preexistent Son under the designation of the Word (Logos), the apostle John asserts, "All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being" (John 1:3). The second clause states explicitly and emphatically that there is no exception to the universal statement of the first clause: not so much as one thing came into being except through Christ, the Word. No more sweeping, explicit statements can be imagined. Absolutely everything that was created, that "came into being," did so in and through Christ. If every created thing owes its existence to the Son, then the Son himself cannot be a created being.

Although the Arian interpretation of "the firstborn of all creation" has some surface plausibility if one takes it out of context, the evidence of the context is decisively against it. First, as we have already pointed out, verse 16 asserts in the strongest and most explicit terms possible that all created things were created in, through, and for the Son. If verse 15 were to mean that the Son was the first thing created, Paul would be flatly contradicting himself from one sentence to the next. He would be saying, "The Son is the first thing created, because everything was created in, through, and for him."

Jesus is omnipresent

His promise to be present in their midst implies his omnipresence, since only an omnipresent spirit could be in the midst of every gathering of believers. "The tiniest possible assembly, united in prayer, gains divine ratification of their decisions because they gather in the divine presence of the Son."' That Jesus is claiming divine omnipresence is clear when we consider a rabbinical saying preserved in the Mishnah (a collection of rabbinical material that later formed the nucleus of the Talmud). The Mishnah quotes a rabbi named Hananiah as saying, "Two that sit together without words of Torah are a session of scorners, for it is said, `Nor sits in the seat of the scornful' [Ps. 1:1]; but two that sit together and are occupied in words of Torah have the Shekinah among them"' The Shekinah is the manifest presence of God-his special, glorious presence to guide, bless, and (if necessary) judge. The rabbi's point was that God would be especially, graciously present wherever even two persons sat together to study the Torah, God's Law. In his similar saying, Jesus was claiming that he would be especially present whenever two or more gather in his name. "Here Jesus himself fills the role of the Shekinah, God's presence, in the traditional Jewish saying."' Such a claim implies that Jesus is omnipresent and amounts to a strong claim to deity.

Jesus also displayed knowledge of past events of which he could not (humanly speaking) have any knowledge, as well as knowledge of future actions of human beings. He knew that the woman at the well in Samaria, whom he had not previously met (physically), had been married to five different men and that the man she was with at the time was not her husband (John 4:16-18). He knew that Lazarus had died before they received any word of his passing (John 11:11-15). He knew that Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples, would betray him, even before Judas tipped his hand-probably even before Judas knew it (Matt. 26:20-25; Mark 14:17-21; Luke 22:21-23; John 6:70-71; 13:10-11, 21-29). He warned Peter that he would betray him three times, and despite protesting his loyalty, Peter did exactly that (Matt. 26:31-35; Mark 14:27-31; Luke 22:31-34; John 13:36-38). Jesus knew that when he went to Jerusalem he would be arrested, tortured, and killed, and he also knew that he would rise from the dead on the third day (Matt. 16:21; 17:9-12, 22-23; 20:18-19; 26:1-2; Mark 8:31-32; etc.).

He knew that the Romans were going to destroy the temple before a generation had passed (Matt. 23:36-39; 24:2, 34; Mark 13:1-2, 30; Luke 21:20-24, 32). No more than forty years later, Jesus' warning proved true, as the Romans destroyed the temple in A.D. 70. Jesus also foretold that his disciples would proclaim the gospel and make new disciples from people of all nations (Matt. 24:14; 28:19), an audacious claim in the early first century, considering how parochial and insignificant Judaism (let alone Jesus' small following) seemed at the time.

Following his resurrection and ascension, in Christ "are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.... For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily”
 

Pierac

Active Member
Nov 15, 2021
921
235
43
62
Phoenix
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Wow.... The Holy Spirit is the redheaded Step Child of orthodox beliefs... So when was the Holy Spirit begotten?

325 AD - Constantine convenes the Council of Nicaea in order to develop a statement of faith that can unify the church. The Nicene Creed is written, declaring that "the Father and the Son are of the same substance" (homoousios). Emperor Constantine who was also the high priest of the pagan religion of the Unconquered Sun presided over this council. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica:

I mean you can't have a TRINITY WITHOUT THE HOLY SPIRIT!!! it took over 50 plus years to add the Holy Spirit to this doctrine!

Yet It would have to wait until the Council of Constantinople in 381 AD to include the Holy Spirit in their formula and thus complete the Trinity.

Time to learn about your Spirit of God... BOY!!!

I came upon the phrase "the finger of God." I was aware that the same phrase was used in the book of Luke regarding the method Jesus uses to cast out demons. I decided to do a phrase study using e-Sword. The following information is from my latest research.

Exo 8:19 Then the magicians said to Pharaoh, "This is the finger of God." But Pharaoh's heart was hardened, and he would not listen to them, as the LORD had said.
Exo 31:18 And he gave to Moses, when he had finished speaking with him on Mount Sinai, the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written with the finger of God.


Luk 11:14 Now he was casting out a demon that was mute. When the demon had gone out, the mute man spoke, and the people marveled. 15 But some of them said, "He casts out demons by Beelzebul, the prince of demons," 16 while others, to test him, kept seeking from him a sign from heaven…
Luk 11:20 But if it is by the finger of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.
I had also come upon Scriptures that says Jesus cast out demons by the Spirit of God. This would strongly lead to the conclusion that the finger of God is the Spirit of God the Father.


Mat 12:22 Then a demon-oppressed man who was blind and mute was brought to him, and he healed him, so that the man spoke and saw. 23 And all the people were amazed, and said, "Can this be the Son of David?" 24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, "It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this man casts out demons."
Mat 12:28 But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.


When you connect Luke 11:20 with Matthew 12:28 then you get the understanding of what the finger of God is.
Luk 11:20 But if it is by the finger of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.
Mat 12:28 But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.


Now the same is true with the Holy Spirit. We also have in the Bible two parallel teachings of the same subject one Matthew and one in Luke.

Luk 12:11
And when they bring you before the synagogues and the rulers and the authorities, do not be anxious about how you should defend yourself or what you should say, 12 for the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say."

Mat 10:19 When they deliver you over, do not be anxious how you are to speak or what you are to say, for what you are to say will be given to you in that hour. 20 For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.


Likewise, when you connect to Matthew 10:20 with Luke 12:12 you get an understanding of what the Holy Spirit is. It is the Spirit of the Father. There is no separate being called the Holy Spirit. Again that's why the Holy Spirit is never worshiped, prayed to, or has a seat on a throne!

Do.... You even beginning to see what is even posted here? I think not silly child!!!

NASB Mar 4:11 And he said to them, "To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables, 12 so that indeed see but not perceive, and may indeed hear but not understand, lest they should turn and be forgiven."

NASB Act 13:48 When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.

There is a lot at play here my friend... Be on the right side of Mark 4:11
 

KUWN

Active Member
Sep 13, 2024
634
206
43
69
Southeast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Jesus as God in John 1:18

The final occurrence of theos in John's prologue also refers to Christ: "No one has ever seen God [theon]. It is God [theos] the only Son, who is close to the Father's heart, who has made him known." In this verse, the first occurrence of "God" (theon) refers to the Father.

The second occurrence of "God" (theos) refers to the Son. We should point out that the Greek manuscripts do not all read the same way here. In fact, the majority of Greek manuscripts say "unique Son" (monogenes huios), which is why the King James Version reads "the only begotten Son." There is significant early manuscript support, however, for the reading "unique [Son], God" (monogenes theos). Two very old papyri, p66 and P75, have been discovered in which Jesus is called theos in John 1:18, and which shift the weight of evidence decidedly over to that reading as most likely to be original."

It is interesting to note that both theon and theos in verse 18 occur without the article." In verse 1, ton theon (with the article) refers to the Father and theos refers to the Son (called the Word). If it were true that John used the article with theon but not with theos in verse 1 in order to indicate that the Son was a lesser type of deity than the Father, it is very strange that he did not maintain this same distinction in verse 18. The affirmation that the "only Son" is himself "God" is a fitting conclusion to the prologue to the Gospel of John. It makes it clear that the one who was God before creation (1:1) was still God when he came to make God the Father known to us through the Incarnation. It has been observed, "Inasmuch as the only Son is God by nature and intimately acquainted with the Father by experience, he is uniquely qualified to reveal the nature and character of God."

Jesus as "My God" is the Climax of John's Gospel (John 20:28). Although the Gospel of John has 21 chapters, the climax of the Gospel comes at the end of chapter 20, when the apostle Thomas confesses Jesus as his Lord and God (v. 28) and John states that the purpose of his Gospel is that people might have life through believing in Jesus as the Son of God (vv. 30-31). We see here the same pattern of thought as in the prologue: Jesus is the Son of God the Father (1:14,18) and yet he is also himself God (1:1,18).

There is essentially no controversy among biblical scholars that in John 20:28 Thomas is referring to and addressing Jesus when he says, "My Lord and my God!" I have read a guy who in his lengthy study on Jesus as God in the New Testament said something like, "This view prevails among grammarians, lexicographers, commentators, and English versions." Indeed, it is difficult to find any contemporary exegetical commentary or academic study that argues that Thomas's words in John 20:28 apply in context to the Father rather than to Jesus. The reason is simple: John prefaces what Thomas said with the words, "Thomas answered and said to Him" (v. 28a). This seemingly redundant wording reflects a Hebrew idiomatic way of introducing someone's response to the previous speaker. John uses it especially frequently, always with the speaker's words directed to the person or persons who have just spoken previously in the narrative. It is therefore certain that Thomas was directing his words to Jesus, not to the Father. No one, of course, would ever have questioned this obvious conclusion if Thomas had said simply "My Lord!" It is the addition of the words "and my God" that have sparked some creative but untenable interpretations of the text.

Thomas's words echo statements addressed in the Psalms to the Lord (Jehovah), especially the following: "Wake up! Bestir yourself for my defense, for my cause, my God and my Lord [ho theos mou kai ho kurios mou]!" (Ps. 35:23). These words parallel those in John 20:28 exactly except for reversing "God" and "Lord." More broadly, in biblical language "my God" (on the lips of a faithful believer) can refer only to the Lord God of Israel. The language is as definite as it could be and identifies Jesus Christ as God himself. In identifying Jesus as God, Thomas, of course, was not identifying him as the Father. Earlier in the same passage, Jesus had referred to the Father as his God. It is interesting to compare Jesus' wording with the wording of Thomas. Jesus told Mary Magdalene, "I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God" (theon mou kai theon humon, John 20:17).

As in John 1:1 and John 1:18, the Father is called "God" in close proximity to a statement affirming that Jesus is also "God." Here again, as in John 1:18, we do not see the apostle John distinguishing between the Father as "the God" (ho theos) and Jesus the Son as only "God" (theos without the article). In fact, whereas Jesus calls the Father "my God" without the article (theon mou, 20:17), Thomas calls Jesus "my God" with the article (ho theos mou, 20:28)! One could not ask for any clearer evidence that the use or nonuse of the article is irrelevant to the meaning of the word theos. What matters is how the word is used in context. In John 20:28, the apostle reports the most skeptical of disciples making the most exalted of confessions about Jesus.

John expects his readers to view Thomas's confession as a model for them to follow. Recognizing Jesus as the One who has conquered death itself for us, we too are to respond to Jesus and confess that he is our Lord and our God. John's conclusion, at which he wants his readers also to arrive, that Jesus is the Son of God (20:30-31) is not at odds with understanding Thomas's statement in John 20:28 as a model confession of Jesus as Lord and God. In the prologue as well, John insists that Jesus is both God (1:1, 18) and the Son of God (1:14,18).

Dr. D.A. Carson has observed, "This tension between unqualified statements affirming the full deity of the Word or of the Son, and those which distinguish the Word or the Son from the Father, are typical of the Fourth Gospel from the very first verse 1:1. Those who find these descriptions of Jesus impossible to reconcile without denying or diminishing one in favor of the other are laboring under the assumption or presupposition of a unitarian view of God (i.e., the view that God can only be a solitary person, such as in Islam).

To summarize, the Gospel of John explicitly refers to Jesus Christ as "God" three times: at the beginning and end of the prologue (1:1,18) and at the climax of the book (20:28). These three strategically placed affirmations make it clear that Jesus is and always has been God. To say it another way, "In his preincarnate state (1:1), in his incarnate state (1:18), and in his postresurrection state (20:28), Jesus is God. For John, recognition of Christ's deity is the hallmark of the Christian.
 

Pierac

Active Member
Nov 15, 2021
921
235
43
62
Phoenix
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Jesus as God in John 1:18

The final occurrence of theos in John's prologue also refers to Christ: "No one has ever seen God [theon]. It is God [theos] the only Son, who is close to the Father's heart, who has made him known." In this verse, the first occurrence of "God" (theon) refers to the Father.

The second occurrence of "God" (theos) refers to the Son. We should point out that the Greek manuscripts do not all read the same way here. In fact, the majority of Greek manuscripts say "unique Son" (monogenes huios), which is why the King James Version reads "the only begotten Son." There is significant early manuscript support, however, for the reading "unique [Son], God" (monogenes theos). Two very old papyri, p66 and P75, have been discovered in which Jesus is called theos in John 1:18, and which shift the weight of evidence decidedly over to that reading as most likely to be original."

It is interesting to note that both theon and theos in verse 18 occur without the article." In verse 1, ton theon (with the article) refers to the Father and theos refers to the Son (called the Word). If it were true that John used the article with theon but not with theos in verse 1 in order to indicate that the Son was a lesser type of deity than the Father, it is very strange that he did not maintain this same distinction in verse 18. The affirmation that the "only Son" is himself "God" is a fitting conclusion to the prologue to the Gospel of John. It makes it clear that the one who was God before creation (1:1) was still God when he came to make God the Father known to us through the Incarnation. It has been observed, "Inasmuch as the only Son is God by nature and intimately acquainted with the Father by experience, he is uniquely qualified to reveal the nature and character of God."

Jesus as "My God" is the Climax of John's Gospel (John 20:28). Although the Gospel of John has 21 chapters, the climax of the Gospel comes at the end of chapter 20, when the apostle Thomas confesses Jesus as his Lord and God (v. 28) and John states that the purpose of his Gospel is that people might have life through believing in Jesus as the Son of God (vv. 30-31). We see here the same pattern of thought as in the prologue: Jesus is the Son of God the Father (1:14,18) and yet he is also himself God (1:1,18).

There is essentially no controversy among biblical scholars that in John 20:28 Thomas is referring to and addressing Jesus when he says, "My Lord and my God!" I have read a guy who in his lengthy study on Jesus as God in the New Testament said something like, "This view prevails among grammarians, lexicographers, commentators, and English versions." Indeed, it is difficult to find any contemporary exegetical commentary or academic study that argues that Thomas's words in John 20:28 apply in context to the Father rather than to Jesus. The reason is simple: John prefaces what Thomas said with the words, "Thomas answered and said to Him" (v. 28a). This seemingly redundant wording reflects a Hebrew idiomatic way of introducing someone's response to the previous speaker. John uses it especially frequently, always with the speaker's words directed to the person or persons who have just spoken previously in the narrative. It is therefore certain that Thomas was directing his words to Jesus, not to the Father. No one, of course, would ever have questioned this obvious conclusion if Thomas had said simply "My Lord!" It is the addition of the words "and my God" that have sparked some creative but untenable interpretations of the text.

Thomas's words echo statements addressed in the Psalms to the Lord (Jehovah), especially the following: "Wake up! Bestir yourself for my defense, for my cause, my God and my Lord [ho theos mou kai ho kurios mou]!" (Ps. 35:23). These words parallel those in John 20:28 exactly except for reversing "God" and "Lord." More broadly, in biblical language "my God" (on the lips of a faithful believer) can refer only to the Lord God of Israel. The language is as definite as it could be and identifies Jesus Christ as God himself. In identifying Jesus as God, Thomas, of course, was not identifying him as the Father. Earlier in the same passage, Jesus had referred to the Father as his God. It is interesting to compare Jesus' wording with the wording of Thomas. Jesus told Mary Magdalene, "I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God" (theon mou kai theon humon, John 20:17).

As in John 1:1 and John 1:18, the Father is called "God" in close proximity to a statement affirming that Jesus is also "God." Here again, as in John 1:18, we do not see the apostle John distinguishing between the Father as "the God" (ho theos) and Jesus the Son as only "God" (theos without the article). In fact, whereas Jesus calls the Father "my God" without the article (theon mou, 20:17), Thomas calls Jesus "my God" with the article (ho theos mou, 20:28)! One could not ask for any clearer evidence that the use or nonuse of the article is irrelevant to the meaning of the word theos. What matters is how the word is used in context. In John 20:28, the apostle reports the most skeptical of disciples making the most exalted of confessions about Jesus.

John expects his readers to view Thomas's confession as a model for them to follow. Recognizing Jesus as the One who has conquered death itself for us, we too are to respond to Jesus and confess that he is our Lord and our God. John's conclusion, at which he wants his readers also to arrive, that Jesus is the Son of God (20:30-31) is not at odds with understanding Thomas's statement in John 20:28 as a model confession of Jesus as Lord and God. In the prologue as well, John insists that Jesus is both God (1:1, 18) and the Son of God (1:14,18).

Dr. D.A. Carson has observed, "This tension between unqualified statements affirming the full deity of the Word or of the Son, and those which distinguish the Word or the Son from the Father, are typical of the Fourth Gospel from the very first verse 1:1. Those who find these descriptions of Jesus impossible to reconcile without denying or diminishing one in favor of the other are laboring under the assumption or presupposition of a unitarian view of God (i.e., the view that God can only be a solitary person, such as in Islam).

To summarize, the Gospel of John explicitly refers to Jesus Christ as "God" three times: at the beginning and end of the prologue (1:1,18) and at the climax of the book (20:28). These three strategically placed affirmations make it clear that Jesus is and always has been God. To say it another way, "In his preincarnate state (1:1), in his incarnate state (1:18), and in his postresurrection state (20:28), Jesus is God. For John, recognition of Christ's deity is the hallmark of the Christian.
Your not on the right side of... Mark 4:11..... I'm trying to help you Boy!!!

John 17:3 "This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.

Webster:
And
AND, conj.

And is a conjunction, connective or conjoining word. It signifies that a word or part of a sentence is to be added to what precedes. Thus, give me an apple and an orange; that is, give me an apple, add or give in addition to that, an orange. John and Peter and James rode to New York, that is, John rode to New York; add or further, Peter rode to New York; add James rode to New York.

Teaching on the first day of the Church of Jesus the Christ/Messiah... The day the Holy Spirit arrived to his Church/Body...

Act 2:22 "Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know--

Now.... Let's go back to John....

Joh 9:4 "We must work the works of Him who sent Me as long as it is day; night is coming when no one can work.

Joh 8:40 "But as it is, you are seeking to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God; this Abraham did not do.

Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him

What does Paul have to say.... many many years after JESUS rose from the dead...

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

Webster:
And
AND, conj.

And is a conjunction, connective or conjoining word. It signifies that a word or part of a sentence is to be added to what precedes. Thus, give me an apple and an orange; that is, give me an apple, add or give in addition to that, an orange. John and Peter and James rode to New York, that is, John rode to New York; add or further, Peter rode to New York; add James rode to New York.

Gal 3:20 Now a mediator is not for one party only; whereas God is only one.

Remember .... Mark 4:11..... I'm trying to help you Boy!!!
 
Last edited: