Godhead Question

[Maximilian]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Max I don't get it. IM trying to work with you. I suggested something so in the future this won't happen, that rather than react with pejorative comments about me you simply ask me what I meant or something.. your reaction to what I just said "you make it hard to do"....

And with your advice, I would propose that rather than throw a tantrum and claim a "pick on me" conspiracy when someone says something negative, you should clarify as well what the problem is.

I'm ready to close this. The timing for your tips to me was poor. That's why the "you're making it hard." But it sounds like you want to even argue over that.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Maximilian

And with your advice, I would propose that rather than throw a tantrum and claim a "pick on me" conspiracy when someone says something negative, you should clarify as well what the problem is.

I'm ready to close this. The timing for your tips to me was poor. That's why the "you're making it hard." But it sounds like you want to even argue over that.

sigh. I give up.

[Maximilian]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

sigh. I give up.

I do too

[Hoovie]

Good Godhead!

[Maximilian]

Originally Posted by TheLegalist

He is limited in his weakness of human capacity. He though is not limited in access to the divine should he need. As Jesus said to us. IF you ask anything in my name I will do it. Jesus would have asked accordingto the will of God. As John said

3Jn 1:2 Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.

in some sense this would be true with humanity as he grew in knowledge and strength he prospered. So his will and the Father's will where in harmony. As I explained.... depends on what you are calling fully God. All the fulness of the deity dwelled in him bodily. Yet he was still a limited man. If you are saying. HEre is the son limited and here is the Father divine and they make up the man JEsus. That makes him not fully God. In part this is true ONLY in the sense that being Jesus is more than just God but man as well. That does not mean he is less as a "being" in his total than God. As the Father resides in that being.


Well in two ways... obedience and his role in God's plan have set him apart. Thus that is "divine" in nature but not necessarily make him God. He has aspects of Godliness by his submission to God's perfection. The footsteps of a righteous man are ordered by the Lord. Thus his walk is divine as obedience is absolute holiness and godliness but still does not make him God but puts him in perfection with God. So in part the flesh was divine but not in the same sense of eternal aspects of being and overall existance.

Gotcha....

Still leaves that gap of mysterium in describing a God fully one thing, while also fully another. Especially when "humanity" is limited in its powers to have simultaneous roles.

If the fullness of the godhead lived in him, and he was still limited, how can it still be fullness?

[TheLegalist]

thank God.... now back to poor sherri :-)

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Maximilian

Gotcha....

Still leaves that gap of mysterium in describing a God fully one thing, while also fully another. Especially when "humanity" is limited in its powers to have simultaneous roles.

If the fullness of the godhead lived in him, and he was still limited, how can it still be fullness?

How does the Philippians passage not answer these questions?

6Though he was God,
he did not think of equality with God
as something to cling to.

7Instead, he gave up his divine privileges;
he took the humble position of a slave

Christ willingly emptied himself of some divine attributes to accomplish that which was set before Him.

[Praxeas]

The Son, being the Person of God, with a Human nature was limited BY the human nature. Part of that was His "self limiting" to the human attributes. He did not, as the Son, function as a person with both Divine and Human natures, though he possessed or owned both. He willingly limited Himself to just the human nature/attributes. The Mind,will etc

Php 2:6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
Php 2:7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
Php 2:8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

Oneness does not believe he separated himself FROM the Divine nature, but that He limited Himself, as the Son, to the human nature

[DAII]

Originally Posted by Maximilian

Avatars were not mentioned. But let's be clear that avatars aren't the deciding line of safe-guarding the id of other posters.

Prax has info that he is trusted with. To use it in a provocative manner is bullying.

He apologized. I accepted. I thought his remarks were rude and condescending, and it all clashed from there. Sounds like he and I are going to have to work on avoiding each other more. It's too bad.

Glad you guys are calling a truce ... Prax and I used to have some drag outs when one of my buds used to post here ... in 2007 ... Mizzy too for good measure.

We'd get into the octagon with him and BOOM.

But he grows on you ...

I do realize that a lot is lost in electronic text ... and when I sat across from Prax at Denny's about 2 years I realized he's a class guy.

He's still a knucklehead, though.

[Maximilian]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

How does the Philippians passage not answer these questions?

6Though he was God,
he did not think of equality with God
as something to cling to.

7Instead, he gave up his divine privileges;
he took the humble position of a slave

Christ willingly emptied himself of some divine attributes to accomplish that which was set before Him.

Well a Trinny would say that the eternal Son humbled himself as a man here... that he trusted the Father with all things.

I guess the passage puts it togeter with scriptural backing, but it leaves the question: how does the first part begin to make sense? He was God, but didn't think his equal standing WITH God as something he should keep, but rather he gave it up for the humble position as a human.

Interesting the text says SOME divine attributes. Like what was left and what is taken? I get that God humbled himself to become a man. But we don't believe God became a man (like God morphed into a man). We believe (we as in Oneness community) the child was begotten... created in the womb, conceived as an embryo. Helpless. Vulnerable. What baffles us is how that embryo can be the humble servant simultaneous of being God yet being so weak. See what I'm saying?