Greetings,

I many at times wonder; and suddenly enough I today came across something on another discussion forum, which I feel like sharing. And ask the same question on this board. Hope I'll get good answers . . . and without much derailment of the thread. Much, I repeat, for I know it’s definitely going to be derailed, polluted, hijacked and what have you by folks like . . . don’t have to mention names. They'll do it. Sure.

Question: If Jesus is both fully human and fully God, do not you think that you worship human along with God when you worship him? Other wise you have to separate Jesus as Jesus the human and Jesus the God.

In addition to above question, can Christians produce a single verse from the Bible where Jesus ever claimed to have two natures, or where he claimed to have a divine and human nature all in one, being fully man, and fully God, and where he made such a distinction?

Ah again . . . the muslim fascination with all things christian. You'd think they'd spend more time studying the quran.

As you said "Jesus is fully man and fully God" doesn't that make them one?

The cross worshippers are blind people

uplawal:

The cross worshippers are blind people

this coming from a muslim? hilarious! 

Anyone of you figured out which are satanic verses, or authentic hadiths yet? Figured out if ostriches existed in arabia in the old days? Found allah's lost copies of his torah and injeel?

you know even as blind as we are we sure can still find our books.

Answer the OP. Period.

Or can't you? Eh?

muhsin:

Answer the OP. Period.

Or can't you? Eh?

When has the OP ever answered us? and why is the OP forever on the christian section? Has he finished reading his quran?

[size=13pt]OBVIOUS dear i feel you but dont worry. . .remember we read to learn, we all are here to learn and share and this must surely go along with arguements ,debate and so on. all you need is to read and solve what you've read with your brain and see if the improvement is not clear. . .[/size]

davidylan:

When has the OP ever answered us? and why is the OP forever on the christian section? H[i]as he finished reading his quran?[/i]

Ogaga4Luv:

[size=13pt]OBVIOUS i feel you but dont worry. . .remember we read to learn, we all are here to learn and share and this must surely go along with arguements ,debate and so on. all you need is to read and solve what you've read with your brain and see if the improvement is not clear. . .[/size]

Did posakosa contact you, I think she's been banned.

[size=13pt]posakosa did not contact me. . .I've been hoping to see her (((On))) couple of days ego but i really cant tell why the strange silent oo. . . i just have feelings if she's alright. [/size]

She's been banned----

[size=13pt]Really. . .?, but when? and come come. . . ?.[/size]

i wish I knew.

[size=13pt]so you were just guesting. . . .[/size]

Jesus is a Ghost. Christians are Ghosts and Cross worshipers.

Ogaga4Luv:

[size=13pt]so you were just guesting. . . .[/size]

No she's really been banned--- thats why u don't see her posting.

[size=13pt]but what really caused it. . . . why is she banned?, i she must have break some RULE'S of Nairaland. ooo i felt it in heart.i miss her [/size]

davidylan:

When has the OP ever answered us? and why is the OP forever on the christian section? Has he finished reading his quran?

Where were you when other Christians opened threads, asking Muslims of their faith? You are very, very unfair and unjust and shameless. Tell them the same thing if you are telling the truth. Mst.

Of course the divine Jesus, The Spirit residing in Him.

sleek29:

Of course the divine Jesus, The Spirit residing in Him.

If you really comprehend the OP, you certainly would have said more than that to answer the challenge therein. Could you please re-read it? Thanks

vanitty:

As you said "Jesus is fully man and fully God" doesn't that make them one?

Unless you explain.

There really is no point explaining because if one is determined never to know, the person will never besides there are lots of posts on this very website explaining the holy trinity dig them out and read - one recently by mavenbox

Is everything about Jesus trinity?

@Davidylan; « #4 on: Yesterday at 05:58:37 PM »

Quote from: uplawal on Yesterday at 05:56:13 PM
The cross worshippers are blind people

this coming from a muslim? hilarious!

Anyone of you figured out which are satanic verses, or authentic hadiths yet? Figured out if ostriches existed in arabia in the old days? Found allah's lost copies of his torah and injeel?

you know even as blind as we are we sure can still find our books.

iwas going to let david have his fun, until i read the bolded! here is my problem with you, david; are you saying that ostrich was not in arabia then, but there now? you may argue that it his now imported, but can you say for sure that that was not the case before and or just about the time that the verse was revealed, considering the makkans used to go to ethiopia, familiar with the eastern part of africa, the home range of ostrich?

even if you could argue that it was not popular, but can you argue that it was unknown, even as a foreign thing that the travellers, when they see it would have said 'muhammad (as) must have known something, a foreign thing to us, yet this man who has never come to the land where it is abundant can describe it to a T? finally, are all eggs not s[herical? you do know that they know about birds, even trained some preditors among them to hunt animals, including even desert birds like quails?

Your trying to ridicle the egg issue reminds me of one of your earlier gaffes; i remember saying something about the followers of Muhammad (as), the sahaba (ra) arrived at a wilderness, saying to the inhabitant beasts to vacate it for their usage. i said, all of the beasts and their youngs left. you laughed at my statement that it was not possible that there was a lion among them, because i said in the sentence something about lion. well david, since that time, the national geographic have shown that there are lions, elephants, and other big animals in the deserts. finally just to punch you below the belt, the OT support the fact that there was desert lions, cats; Afterall, there was a biblical personality that killed a lion, and in time was able to harvest honey from the honey bees that made a home of it, though my knowledge of bees now could not allow me to agree that the bees will feed on a dead cat to prduce honey, but i cant at the same time that it could not have been a miracle on the personality. i think from the top of my head he has to be gideon or samson. i lean towards samson, because the story as i remember was about strength.

satanic verses: The muslims say there is none. And there is no proof of any from the Quran. Will you know more than the whole muslim world body, while you know less about the Ijebu Ode that you are from? This is diifferent from the case of the Bible, you know since God did not revealed the Bible, but revealed the Torah, Sabur and Gospel and not the acts and revelation and the epistles we know are from Saul who became Paul!

And authentic ahadith must agree with the Quran, and must have truly came from the prophet, or said and not instructed against its future utterance by Muhammad (AS), for anything different is not! Can you restrict the truth of the Gospel to Jesus? And the Torah, Sabur and Injil of Allah is already incorporated in the Quran and hadith of the prophet (AS), while you Davidylan stated with your own fingers that you know that the KJV is ridduled with errors (The Bible to Undergo revision thread is where you finallt confessed), so show us an authntic zero errored Bible, then, maybe we can compare it with the sayings of Isa bin Maryam (AS) the authentic injil in the Quran, to see how correct what you have is!

Can any one rationalize God Almighty in human form not being capable of the virtue of courage, which many mere mortals have shown in abundance even at the point of death in battle?

I gave David this in a recent debate, and he took to his heels -

The most spectacular of all his prayers, for me, is the statement in Gethsemane – “Nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt”

This statement shows something cardinal: if Jesus were God, as you lot like to claim, his will, and the will of the Father would be absolutely inseparable! This prayer shows clearly that the Father’s will could be different from Jesus’ will, when he says – “not as I will, but as thou wilt”. For me this is the most damning verse against the idea that Jesus is himself God. Because it shows a clear dichotomy of WILL between the father and the so called “son.” But I expect that in your usual fashion you will disregard Jesus’ own words in favour of your dogma.

In defending this, don’t you even dare bring up the lame line that it was his “human fear” that was speaking. Even mere mortals have shown great courage at the point of execution, or in battle, and you want to convince me that ALMIGHTY GOD, in human form, was not capable of stout hearted courage (especially when he was divine, and knew the purpose of his mission on the cross, and how sacred it was). Mere men have laid down their lives for their countries, happily and without asking for the cup to be removed from them. Gallantly! Now GOD himself, in human form, is not capable of such courage, to save his creatures?

Howdy, Deep Sight. Quite an age that we both rubbed minds on a few topics/subjects. This one as regards your concern about the Deity of Christ is one that I hope to discuss someday with you. .  if for nothing else than to show that your inferences are misplaced and strained. Let's see your quote here:

Deep Sight:

Can any one rationalize God Almighty in human form not being capable of the virtue of courage, which many mere mortals have shown in abundance even at the point of death in battle?

There are a whole lot of things askew in your summations, Deep Sight. For one, I wonder how you of all people proceed to talk about God Almighty when you have not been able to articulate just Who He is to you in your worldview. If others are speaking about God Almighty, you may hold your silence and observe without trying to define for them what they should believe, especially where you're not inclined to holding the very axioms about the Almighty that you might grant unto others.

Second, there is no need to "rationalize" God Almighty in any form. To have a need to do so is to open up many doors to box Him up in certain ways that may be polarised towards your own ideology as distinct from the persuasions of other people. In this case, you're hoping to set constraints and limitations for the Almighty such that you tend to react to whatever goes beyond the perimeters of your own assumptions concerning those constraints. It's okay to "rationalize" if that helps you - but the results of such would best serve your own constraints and limitations, where nothing else could be possible.

Following the second point above, the third thing is to begin to make undeserving, unfactored and unnecessary inferences to twist certain assertions to your zone. That is not enlightening or balanced. If one has to arrive at the busstop you led them to, the question would be whether or not the Almighty was "capable of the virtue of courage". Capable? Dear Deep Sight, it is disappointing to read that from you! You drew hasty conclusions there that completely evaded the question of His actual death - that is where you see the "courage" you are seeking, and not in the that utterance of prayer. His demeanour at the Trial; the excoriation He endured; His demonstration of forgiveness to His accusers. . these are all points of reference to ponder for yourself and come to ask simply: can you, Deep Sight, envisage any "capabilities" of the same "courage" if put in His place?

It's easy to put others on spotlight and trail off about what we have no clues. You seem to have drawn quite queer conclusions and are glorying too loosely on how you have used that idea to discombobulate davidylan. For starters, the Christian faith does not rest on davidylan's ability or inability (should I rather say 'willingness' or the lack thereof) to answer any queries; nor does it stand or fall on viaro's or anyone else's declarations.

Bro, the God of Whom we speak does not need human "rationalizing" - not yours, not mine, not anyone else's. Yet, I shall someday invite a discussion to help you see something about the Deity of Jesus Christ beyond this rationalizations you're holding forth.

@Viaro: « #28 on: Today at 09:42:31 PM »

Second, there is no need to "rationalize" God Almighty in any form. To have a need to do so is to open up many doors to box Him up in certain ways that may be polarised towards your own ideology as distinct from the persuasions of other people. In this case, you're hoping to set constraints and limitations for the Almighty such that you tend to react to whatever goes beyond the perimeters of your own assumptions concerning those constraints. It's okay to "rationalize" if that helps you - but the results of such would best serve your own constraints and limitations, where nothing else could be possible.

And this is your best argument about God, and then the Trinity, making Jesus more important than what he really was? Who would know Jesus better, you or Jesus? You need to look into the overwhelming statements from Jesus pointing away him being more than just what he is, a human being! Who will know more about God, you or God? God should know about Himself and the 10 commandments and the declaration of previous prophets saying that God is Unseen, while Jesus was not more unseen that the little children playing Hide and seek, or the peek a boo or Boju Boju in Yorubaland! If God is not going to restrict Himself, and He has not forbidden anything for Himself, would He chose to become human and allow ordinary creatured to hang him, while at the same time not going all the way to play the human thing, not married, not having children. and yet there are still evildoers alive, waiting till the day of Judgement before he punishes?

Your statement that God if not made human is therefore like restricting him, boxing Him away from His full Power, is a statement that pays no attention to what He said of Himself and what His human Messengers and Prophets said about Him, even if we only use Torah, and what Jesus of the Gospel said! Does multiplication of persons or personalities difference is a good enough argument about the uniqueness of your God, while the many reasons from the different view point inferior?

While I say that God is Unique in every respect, no eyes have ever seen Him and live, whole and does not die, have no need to behave like human (eating, sleeping, drinking, toileting, etc), He is able to forgive whomsoever He wants without having to kill somebody to have another saved, etc, having no partner and not capable of doing all things He wants, etc and those not have the multiple personalities, you only said that your God has to be a schrizophrenic and you think that is enough?

It's easy to put others on spotlight and trail off about what we have no clues. You seem to have drawn quite queer conclusions and are glorying too loosely on how you have used that idea to discombobulate davidylan. For starters, the Christian faith does not rest on davidylan's ability or inability (should I rather say 'willingness' or the lack thereof) to answer any queries; nor does it stand or fall on viaro's or anyone else's declarations.

I hope you keep the bolded in mind in the future, though you seemed to have never paid any attention to it in the past!

Bro, the God of Whom we speak does not need human "rationalizing" - not yours, not mine, not anyone else's. Yet, I shall someday invite a discussion to help you see something about the Deity of Jesus Christ beyond this rationalizations you're holding forth.

Viaro all by himself argues for and against his own point; human rationalization! He will rationalize Jesus into a diety, while the overwhelming evidence of Jesus activities on earth is very humanlike, and not more than what another human prophet (Job, Jonah, Moses,Elijah, Elisha, etc) did! And when you read what Jesus said about himself, is there any point arguing that he is not human?

OBVIOUS:

Did posakosa contact you, I think she's been banned. 

She has been released.

viaro:


There are a whole lot of things askew in your summations, Deep Sight. For one, I wonder how you of all people proceed to talk about God Almighty when you have not been able to articulate just Who He is to you in your worldview. If others are speaking about God Almighty, you may hold your silence and observe without trying to define for them what they should believe, especially where you're not inclined to holding the very axioms about the Almighty that you might grant unto others.

I am certain that this does not require a response at all; but for the excess of my restlessness let me say this: Christians, Muslims, and indeed myself, all ascribe to the idea of the perfection of God - yes? So that is agreed.

But let us assume that it is not agreed. One thing which is per force agreed among all persons and institutions who sucscibe to the idea of God, is that He is very great indeed - certainly much greater than human beings in all respects - yes? So don't worry about my articulation of God: as far as this discussion is concerned, we may limit ourselves to the foregoing: namely that he is perfect; but if that is disputed; then let us at least say he is great: much greater in every respect than any human being. Happy? We proceed!

viaro:


Second, there is no need to "rationalize" God Almighty in any form. To have a need to do so is to open up many doors to box Him up in certain ways that may be polarised towards your own ideology as distinct from the persuasions of other people.

Don't worry about the word "rationalize." You seem to be placing too much emphasis on that word. I simply meant in general terms that which seems to approach common sense, or the obvious. For example, if Mr. X were to state: "that goat in my yard is almighty-God in goat-form" - i might reply - "can anybody rationalize the almighty as an animal - less than a human being?". There would be no need to fly down on the word - "rationalize" here, because the hardened anti-rationalist can easily argue: God is omni-potent - accordingly he may take the form of a goat if he pleases."

So please leave off on the word 'rationalize" - as an aside i can tell you that my perception of God is via intuition and the Spiritual: i "rationalize" only for the purpose of discussion and philosophy.

viaro:

Dear Deep Sight, it is disappointing to read that from you! You drew hasty conclusions there that completely evaded the question of His actual death - that is where you see the "courage" you are seeking, and not in the that utterance of prayer. His demeanour at the Trial; the excoriation He endured; His demonstration of forgiveness to His accusers. . these are all points of reference to ponder for yourself and come to ask simply: can you, Deep Sight, envisage any "capabilities" of the same "courage" if put in His place?

I have no idea if i can endure such. However I know very well that throughout history men have endured even worse forms of barbaric and inhumane torture when trying to protect their families or loved ones, without asking anyone to "let the cup pass" over their heads. If you will study in particular the mental aspects of the oriental marshall arts, you will find that it has long been considered a thing of honour to endure pain and death for an honorable cause. There have been many hundreds of thousands of human beings throughout history who have endured such unflinchingly; certain of their cause, and the purpose for which they fight. There have been others who have volunteerd outright for such, as opposed to seeking for a "cup to pass over" their heads.

Let us in this briefly and sincerely return to the first point i made - namely that God is perfect, or very great indeed.

Viaro, i apologize in advance for this remark: but it seems you are employing unpardonable double standards here.

Here is my reason. Under Christian doctrine, Jesus was unblemished: without sin - and therefore perfect. This perfection streams from his very divinity - the fact that he is God HIMSELF in human form. God is not capable of sin; and accordingly Jesus could not sin.

The above sentence shows one thing: namely that the attributes of Jesus spring from his nature as God - his divinity, which is perfect. Thus he does not sin because he is God.

I hope you can already see where i am going with this. You accept the above proposition: but when it comes to other patterns of his bahaviour you conveniently flip the table. You are happy to ascribe the prayer in Gethsemane to his "human" fear - hello - why can we not also conclude that since he was "human" then he could sin? The truth is this: your line of reasoning, if followed, should also apply to such attributes as fear: namely - he is God, and as such can know no fear. He is perfect, and as such will be stout hearted in facing the sacrifice necessary to redeem his creatures. And if not perfect, he is at least greater than all men, and as such, would not make a request which mere mortals have in many instances risen above.

This is all the more central when you consider the following (christian doctrine) -

  1. He knew the purpose and reason for the sacrifice even before coming into the world

  2. He loved his creatures and wanted to redeem them accordingly

Viaro, if Jesus knew the purpose of the sacrifice, it would be grossly irresponsible and cowardly of him to request that it should not take place. And given the fact that he is supposed to be almighty God himself, such a request becomes both paradoxical and demeaning of his inner nature.

The above regardless, most shocking is that you missed the core element of my post:

This statement shows something cardinal: if Jesus were God, as you lot like to claim, his will, and the will of the Father would be absolutely inseparable! This prayer shows clearly that the Father’s will could be different from Jesus’ will, when he says – “not as I will, but as thou wilt”.

There it is: the core element of my surmise is not even the fear and courage element: it is the evident dichotomy of will.

If Jesus is truly God, or part of a trinity as you claim, then his oneness with God will cardinally be a oneness of will, even before a oneness in any other respect. It is inconceivable, that we should speak of a divine being who is God, that could have a will different from the will of God. Haba, let's try to be sincere please: i cannot see how his appearance in human form would suddenly destroy his divine will, or the oneness of his will with God.

"Nevertheless not as i will, but as thou wilt."

Recall that he says this in prayer, to a being he considered greater than himself (Jn 14:28). A being he severally addressed as "my God." (Jn 20:17).

This is the damning part: his revelation that his will could be different from, but subordinated to the will of God, hammers down the coffin on any suggestion that he is himself God. You know this to be true, Viaro - please do not descend into a whirlpool of "we cannot rationalize" in an attempt to evade this glaring fact.

I know you will have no choice but to revert to the age-old defence. . . "he was only human. . . it was his human-part speaking. . ."

To that i say - give me a break! Almighty God in human form must per force be a cut above ordinary humans! - As is the case with the fact of his being without sin!