|
I will respond in black.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, December 24, 2004 7:50
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Mind of
Christ
Bill you have overlooked and
completely negate the fact that Jesus as God's Son was begotten on a certain
day:
No, Judy, I have not overlooked this, nor do I
negate it. To begin this conversation I will simply agree with MacArthur: "the
begetting spoken of in Psalm 2 and Hebrews 1 is not an event that takes
place in time. Even though at first glance Scripture seems to employ
terminology with temporal overtones ("this day have I begotten thee"),
the context of Psalm 2:7 seems clearly to be a reference to the eternal
decree of God. It is reasonable to conclude that the begetting spoken of
there is also something that pertains to eternity rather than a point in
time. The temporal language should therefore be understood as
figurative, not literal" (emphasis added).
Phil 2:5-11 and Isa 7:14,
9:6 refer to the incarnation when God the Word, the second person of the
Divine Trinity emptied Himself to take on a human body and redeem
mankind. <snip>
Philipians 2.5-11. You misunderstand the
kenosis, the question being What does it mean that the Son "empied"
himself? (I use the term "Son" interchangeably with Jesus Christ here because
as we see in verse 11 he did this -- the kenosis -- to the "glory of
God the Father." Just as the Son is the eternal Son of the Father, the Father
is the eternal Father of the Son. If there were a time when the Son was not,
then there must also have been a time when the Father was not: Are you willing
to go this far, Judy?) We read in verse 5 that Paul's desire is that the mind
of his readers be that of Jesus Christ. What does it mean that we have the
mind in us that is in Christ? We look to the following verses to receive our
answer. When Paul states that Jesus "emptied" himself, he is not saying that
the Son divested himself of deity or that he gave up his divine nature. To the
contrary, this could not be what Paul meant to convey. Jesus interpreted
himself as divine: "He who has seen me has seen the Father" (see Joh 6.46).
The Son could not empty himself of divinity, "the very morphe of
God," and at the same time claim to be the visible _expression_ of God,
"God with us." The Jews understood this quite well. In their culture to
call yourself the Son of God was to equate yourself with G-d; it was to
claim the status that only he enjoyed; it was to declare yourself divine.
There is no missing this point. Again I quote MacArthur: "The son was,
after all, of the very same essence as his father, heir to all the
father's rights and privileges--and therefore equal in every significant
regard. So when Jesus was called 'Son of God,' it was understood
categorically by all as a title of deity, making Him equal with God and
(more significantly) of the same essence
as the Father. That is precisely why the Jewish leaders
regarded the title 'Son of God' as high blasphemy." Indeed to know
Jesus was to know his Father, that is, to know exactly what God was like
through the visible earthly witness of his Son -- Emmanuel.
No, it was not his divinity that the Son -- or as
you choose to call him, "the Word" -- divested himself of. What was the
kenosis? In taking on the form of a slave the Son emptied himself of
the glory, the honor, the equality that he deserved and had share with his
Father from eternity. The key word to understand the meaning of this passage
is arpagmos. It is found in verse 6. Our English translations render
it as "robbery" or "something to be grasped"; however, these translations do
not do service to the thrust of this word. Arpagmos appears only this
one time in the New Testament; it is not used in the Septuagint and it is
rarely used in contemporaneous extra-biblical writings; hence the difficulty
in translating it. Yet Paul was astute in his scholarship, acute in his
wording. On those ocassion where the word was used, it meant something on
the order of exploitation or taking advantage of a situation.
Paul writes in verse 6 that the Son did not regard
his equality with God something to be used for his own advantage. With this
definition in tow we can now begin to grasp the meaning of both the
kenosis and how it is that we too might employ the mind of Christ. In
becoming Emmanuel, the Son of God came to bear and disclose the heart of God,
to the Jews first and then to all humanity (Joh 10.38). In all he did he
came to show the world what God was really like. He did this not in
overwhelming power and blinding glory, as the Jews expected. No, his was not
to overwhelm his creation. The heart of God is humble. Ours is the only God in
the universe who stoops. Every other "God" demands that humans climb their way
to him. Our God stoops to meet us where we are. When he came to show us who he
was, our God looked up to us from a position of servitude. Our God is a
humble God.
In this passage we see that the Son did not
consider his equality with God something to be exploited. This one who, before
becoming human, possessed divine equality did not regard that status as
something to take advantage of; instead he emptied himself of the glory he had
shared with his Father and interpreted his status as a vocation to
obedient humiliation and death. At any point of his earthly ministry he
could have grasped at, or taken advantage of, or exploited his glory, his
power, his equality, the honor he deserved, but in so doing he would not
have been demonstrating the heart of his Father: "He who has seen me
has seen the Father." No, the Son did not divest himself of divinity in
the kenosis; instead he maintained and demonstrated divinity via the
path of humbling service, even unto death. We read in verse 11 that this
pleased the Father, who exalted this Godman, his Son Christ Jesus to the
glory that had previously only been excercised in divinity. Thus it was in the
exaltation that Christ extablished his Lordship, indeed a human being becoming
equal with God the Father, over humanity.
As Christian we dare not rule over people
with power and glory and prestige; for when we do so we fail to employ
the mind of Christ. The mind of Christ is not given to exploitation. And so in
answer to Paul's desire, how do we let this mind be in us which is in Jesus
Christ ? By living godly lives -- lives like the Son lived, when God was
here on earth. To have the mind of Christ we must humble ourselves, take the
form of servants, and look up to people from the heart of God.
As God the person we now know of as Jesus Christ had no beginning, was
not begotten, was not a Son, and did not come into being. He always existed as
God (Psalm 90:2, Micah 5:2, John 1:1-2, Hebrews 1:8); but as a man and as
God�s Son He was not eternal, He did have a beginning. He was begotten - this
being at the same time Mary had a Son. Therefore
the doctrine of eternal sonship of Jesus
Christ is irreconcilable to reason, is unscriptural
and is contradictory to itself.
Eternity has no
beginning, so if He has been God from eternity, then He could not have a
beginning as God. Eternity has no reference to
time, so if He was begotten �THIS DAY,� then it was done in time and not in
eternity. The word Son supposes time, generation,
father, mother, beginning, and conception - unless one is a son by creation as Adam (Luke 3:38)
and angels (Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7; Genesis 6:1-4.
Time, created, beginning,
are opposites to God and eternity and are absolutely impossible to reconcile
with them. If Sonship refers to deity, not to humanity, then this person of
the Deity had a beginning in time and not in eternity. It is plainly stated in
Psalm 2:7, Acts 13:33, Hebrews 1:5, 5:5 that God
had a Son �THIS DAY� and not in eternity. It is
stated in Hebrews 1:5-7, Luke 1:36, Matthew 1:18-25 when this took place. It
was something over 1900 years ago. It had been predicted that God would have a
Son (Isaiah 7:14, 9:6, Hebrews 1:5, Matthew 1:18-25, Luke 1:32-35). When the
Virgin conceived of the Holy Ghost (Matthew 1:20), this was fulfilled, and not
at any other time.
Please read John MacArthur; on this issue he is
clear and on the mark. No, he does not go into great detail, but such was
not his intent. One can read his words and be confident that he did not
come to this conclusion lightly. If after reading him you are not persuaded,
do what he did, inquire further. There is two thousand years worth of
orthodoxy waiting to teach you. Please do not let this opportunity pass
you bye.
To say that God had an
eternal Son would mean He had two; but it is plainly stated that Jesus was �THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF THE
FATHER� (John 1:14, 18; 3:16-18; 1 John 4:9.
No, Judy, it means that the Son now had two natures -- one fully
human, one fully, eternally divine: one person, two natures, Jesus Christ our
Lord.
Bill
jt: He was the Word
of God from the foundation of the world. He
became a son at the incarnation when God provided Him a body. He was begotten, not made and His blood was/is the eternal
blood of the New Covenant which is non sectarian
in spite of the fact that
He was born under the law of
Moses to a young Jewish girl -
To the contrary, Judy:
As far back as God goes, the Word was God --
- "In beginning was the Word, and the Word was
with the God, and God was the Word." (John 1.1 -- wooden literal
translation)
The Word "became flesh." (see John
1.14)
But he was always the Son; i.e., he is the
eternal Son --
- "Jesus answered, 'If I honor Myself, My honor
is nothing. It is My Father who honors Me, of whom you say that He is your
God.' ... Jesus said to them, 'Most assuredly, I say to you, before
Abraham was, I AM.'" (John 8.54,58)
- "And now, O Father, glorify Me together with
Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world
was." (John 17.5)
- "Father, I desire that they also whom You gave
Me may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have
given Me; for You loved Me before the foundation of the world." (John
17.24)
He was a Jew from the Seed (sperma --
Literally "sperm") of Abraham --
- "Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises
made. He does not say, 'And to seeds,' as of many, but as of one, 'And to
your Seed,' who is Christ." (Galatians 3.16)
He was a Jew from the fruit of David's
body (karpou tes osphuos autou -- Literally the "fruit of his
genitals") --
-
"Men and brethren, let me speak
freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and
his tomb is with us to this day. Therefore, being a prophet, and
knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit
of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ
to sit on his throne, he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the
resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did
His flesh see corruption. This Jesus God has raised up, of which we
are all witnesses. Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God,
and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He
poured out this which you now see and hear. For David did not ascend
into the heavens, but he says himself: 'The LORD said to my Lord, "Sit at
My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your
footstool."' Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly
that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and
Christ." (Acts 2.29-36)
Judy, in all sincerity may I suggest
that you not push this one. You are treading on sacred ground. At the same
time you are bordering on denying both the full divinity of Christ and
his human heritage. Jesus Christ is the eternal Son of the Father, the Word
of God; he is also fully human, born of a Jewish woman of the line of
David, Jacob, Isaac, and Abraham. Please reconsider what you are saying.
This one is too important to deny.
Sincerely, your brother,
Bill
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004
9:30 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Mind of
Christ
jt: He was the Word of God from
the foundation of the world.
He became a son at the
incarnation when God provided Him a body.
He was begotten, not made and
His blood was/is the eternal blood
of the New Covenant which is
non sectarian in spite of the fact that
He was born under the law of
Moses to a young Jewish girl -
He was the Son of the Father, the Word who
was with God and was God "in beginning," and when he appeared in a flesh
body, he had Jewish blood running through his veins.
Bill
jt: Actually He was
the Word of the Father, who, in the fullness of time, appeared among
us in a flesh body.
I AM attempting to
get rooted in That Mind! Was Messiah a Greek or Hebrew?
-
slade
jt: Slade and Lance, is
there any good reason why we can not forget about both Greek
and Hebrew
mindsets and begin to
focus upon and discuss "the mind of Christ"?
jht
|
