Revelation 1.17 Jesus divinity? Or just "the first" raised from the dead"? (page 10)

ellderwho

mondo1: The form of God seems to refer to Christ's outward appearance as God, as his agent.

Would you agree thats who Isaiah saw on the throne? (Christ)

Well let me first say that no, I do not agree that Isaiah saw Christ on the throne. I will not rule it out, for it is possible that Christ mediated that event as God's agent, but Scripture does not explicitly tell us that.

For Phil. 2:6-7, he was in the form of God as the Logos. He was God's agent, he appeared as God in representation of him. As Jewish tradition tells us, a man's agent is as himself. So for Jesus, as the Logos, to appear, would be as God appearing, legally, though not physically God. He gave up that position though, taking for himself the position of a servant, and coming to be as a man.

The Bible is very clear in that what Christ had he "emptied himself" of, so no I do not believe he had a dual nature. Not in the Trinitarian sense of it anyway.

Mondo

ellderwho

The Bible is very clear in that what Christ had he "emptied himself" of, so no I do not believe he had a dual nature. Not in the Trinitarian sense of it anyway.

So here you have Christ no longer residing in heaven, and now residing in a human form. So what will you say came down from heaven and took residence in Marys womb?

Deputy Dog

Mondo

He was the same person because he was still himself, his form just changed.

Ok! Well when Jesus said

John 6:38

For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

What came down?

LittleToe

I'm wondering; if he was in God's form, legally God, representing God, worshiped as God, a God; what's the gripe with calling him God in an ontological sense?

Clearly he's not the "Father". That's not being disputed here, I believe. Is the hinderence merely some form of superstitious concern that to philosophically elevate him would be tantamount to blasphemy? He didn't seem to take issue with that, himself...

Deputy Dog

He was the same person because he was still himself, his form just changed.

If we are to understand that Jesus was an angel coming down in the form of a man. He is still an angel with a human form, that would give him a dual nature.

Deputy Dog

LT

Many of us, missed you last weekend! Hope things went well with school?

Clearly he's not the "Father". That's not being disputed here, I believe. Is the hinderence merely some form of superstitious concern that to philosophically elevate him would be tantamount to blasphemy? He didn't seem to take issue with that, himself...

Good point!

ellderwho

Many of us, missed you last weekend!

Ditto, Ross, what about ' 07?

Mondo1

His person. His consciousness. His life. This is what came down. The means of existence within which this existed changed.

Deputy Dog

ellderwho

If LT comes next year, would he still be a human even though he comes in the form of an EX-JW? I just couldn't help but ask!

Revelation 1.17 Jesus divinity? Or just "the first" raised from the dead"?

Share this