Not so.
John 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.
God actually became man. Jesus was truly a man just like us except he never sinned. To deny Jesus came in the flesh is the spirit of antichrist.
1 John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
Be careful here. Jesus didn't simply not use his abilities. He was made flesh. He got tired, he hungered, he was tempted in all points as we are without sin.
God's knowledge debate
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Van, Jul 21, 2011.
Page 5 of 11
-
Perfect example of folks simply dismissing scripture because it does not agree with their presuppositions.
This was explained. No man has seen God in his glory, because he would die. I already explained this from Exodus 33:20. -
jbh28 never once alluded to nor claimed that Jesus never came in the flesh, nor is he "the spirit of antichrist".
How do you conclude these illogical absurdities?
This is never ending what you resort to, adding and misrepping others in things they have never said nor implied even once. I take it you're losing again, thus these tactics.
Get off your rabbit tail and get to the facts winman.
Then you hunt out passages on your false assumptions? They prove nothing.
Strawman. -
More error on your part.
Why? Because you proof-text and misinterpet.
The whole counsel of God on this proves you to be in error. Again
No man has ever seen God. Including Moses. It's also in John chapter 1. This means you, are yet again, incorrect. -
Look stop arguing with me every time I speak. You said you didn't understand so I'm trying to help you understand.
Still my point stands, his limits are his not using. It's NOT that he doesn't possess the power. That would deny deity from God and Jesus. -
-
Exo 33:11 And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.
Jacob also saw God's face. Are you telling me you can wrestle with someone all night long and not see their face?
Gen 32:30 And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.
Jacob said, "for I have SEEN God face to face"
Like Moses, Jacob saw God in a limited form, he did not see God in his glory. -
-
There is no more reason for me to attempt to help you with your errors.
You are calling John 1:18, 1 John 4:12, and 1 Timothy 6:16 [snip - inflammatory] passages in order to hold to your view. Which is why I say you know what the Bible says, not what it means, nor can you interpret Scripture with Scripture. -
Abraham also saw God.
Gen 18:1 And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;
2 And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground,
3 And said, My Lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant:
Look at the words used, APPEARED, LIFT UP HIS EYES AND LOOKED, AND WHEN HE SAW THEM.
You have to twist a lot of scripture here to say Abraham did not literally see God.
You simply do not understand that men saw God in a limited form, not in his glory.
You find yourself arguing against God's word, not I. -
Wow. God said no one could see Him face to face and live. (dogma)
Yet, Jacob said he saw Him face to face. (subjective) Merely record of Jacobs assessment. God's "Word?" Yep. But you need to think here on what is meant, as it cannot contradict God.
Now, I wonder who is correct? God or Jacob? :confused:
Or, is there a complete misunderstanding of what Jacob said, and meant? Yep.
I vote for the latter.
When a dogmatic truth seems to be blurred by another passage, the dogma still stands, and our understanding of the obscure passage is in error, i.e. one knows what it says, but not what it means. -
-
Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am [he], and [that] I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me. -
-
There is no such thing as fully or partially being God. He either was or was not. I believe He was and is God and I do not hold that He had to have all the abilities of the Father to be God while here in the flesh. He was no less God then when He was with the Father. He simply gave up, for the time in the flesh, His power and totally relied on the Father to show him and lead Him as He needed. -
Jesus ALWAYS was God, added also a sinless Human nature
Lived out in power of the HS relying on His Father to enable Him to stay without sin.... just as we are to today...
What he limited was use of His divine attributes, NOT no longer had them!
Like us, being in Human flesh, NOT exactly like us, as He had both a Divine and a sinless human nature within Him! -
Bible CLEARLY states that NO MAN has ever seen God in His fullness, except that the Son of God came to earth to reveal Him unto us...
Moses saw God in sense of seeing residual glory as he passed By, NOT "looking God in face""
Moses "saw" God and talked to Him in burning bush
people in OT times meet Angel of Lord. Jacob and samson parents, Joshua etc
Christ in a bodily form, so they saw "GOD face to Face"
Again, NOT in His real essense/fullness though, NONE could stand that this side of heaven! -
jbh28 asks:
Let's just say that one can't be "partly God." Either He is, or He is not.
To say otherwise is to make Him a creature.
- Peace -
To summarize the last few pages of this thread, we have the side that denies the Bible means what it said resorting to name calling (rot, blasphemy, no understanding) and in every way trying to disparage those that accept Biblical truth.
No verse, not one, contextually considered, supports the premise that God cannot limit His knowledge as demonstrated by verse after verse where He does just that.
At its core, the argument against inherent omniscience, is philosophy not scripture. Here were the arguments:
1) It goes against the historical view. Well you do not have to go back very many years to find out when Omniscience came into the vocabulary.
2) It relies on the Greek philosophy view of an "existent" future (i.e. its written in the stars) except they green-wash it by saying its in the mind of God. -
Reply to Skandelon,
There is nothing illogical or unstudied about my view, it happens to be more modern than the view you hold but that does not make it not more biblical.
I respect your integrity, but I have not seen, or perhaps recall, how you addressed that Peter said Jesus was all knowing, yet Jesus did not know the time of His return. I say this demonstrates that when we see the phrase, all knowing, it does not mean everything imaginable, it simply means what the author had in view, such as here Jesus knowing everything about Peter's heart, or perhaps everything about the hearts of those He encountered.
I do not understand how anyone can hold to the historical view in light of the scriptures I have cited.
Page 5 of 11