Can Someone be "Apostolic" and Deny Christ is God?

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Let's assume the correct translation is "justified by his own Spirit", you still have not said what is the problem with that. Three different posts so far and they all pretty much add up to "I don't the sound of that", without any statement actually explaining what is wrong with that .
Is the I AM Just? Is the I AM Righteous? How do we know? We know because we know He is God and HE says so? Well that is pretty much God (a Spirit) showing Himself to be Just or Righteous by His own word. We also know by His actions, He has proven Himself to the world Righteous, and you have a problem with that?

But why would that alone be a problem? Do you also have a problem with the idea of God being manifested in flesh? God being seen of angels? God being preached to the world or God being received up into glory?

This thread WAS supposed to be a poll, but I see Im going to have to move it to the debate area. BTW If anyone wants to debate their position that Jesus is not God, we have made a way for you to debate one other person in a one on one debate, uninterrupted and with a definite beginning and ending so it won't just be a rambling flame war back and forth, then the rest of us can judge. Anyone UP for the challenge'? If so visit the sub forum and offer a challenge

Being just is not the same thing as being justified. That is the essence of my question prax. Just and justified are not interchangeable terms. How exactly was Jesus or God justified in the Spirit? Can you elaborate?

This brings me back to one of my continual points. We should not use scripture to support any doctrine when we do not totally understand that scripture. I think any reasonable person can understand why doing such a thing is a bad idea. What do you think?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Being just is not the same thing as being justified. That is the essence of my question prax. Just and justified are not interchangeable terms. How exactly was Jesus or God justified in the Spirit? Can you elaborate?

This brings me back to one of my continual points. We should not use scripture to support any doctrine when we do not totally understand that scripture. I think any reasonable person can understand why doing such a thing is a bad idea. What do you think?

Being justified does not having to mean being wrong or thought wrong then declared justified by someone else. As I pointed out the term means "vindicated or shown to be righteous"

He, as a man, did not follow the immoral path of a man. He obeyed God in all respects even to the point of dying on the cross

For example
Luk 1:6 And they were both righteous before God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and statutes of the Lord.

Jesus had faith like no other man, in God, by the deeds He did. He obeyed God like no other even when it came to His own life.

As for this verse, what is not to understand?

God was....God was what? manifest or revealed in the flesh. God was seen of angels. God was taken up into glory. Even if you don't understand the justified part, if this is about God it is clearly speaking of the incarnation. Who was taken up into glory? Jesus in Acts 1

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Being justified does not having to mean being wrong or thought wrong then declared justified by someone else. As I pointed out the term means "vindicated or shown to be righteous"

He, as a man, did not follow the immoral path of a man. He obeyed God in all respects even to the point of dying on the cross

For example
Luk 1:6 And they were both righteous before God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and statutes of the Lord.

Jesus had faith like no other man, in God, by the deeds He did. He obeyed God like no other even when it came to His own life.

As for this verse, what is not to understand?

God was....God was what? manifest or revealed in the flesh. God was seen of angels. God was taken up into glory. Even if you don't understand the justified part, if this is about God it is clearly speaking of the incarnation. Who was taken up into glory? Jesus in Acts 1

I think that as long as you continue to use the verse without proper understanding of part of it then you never will understand all of it. I've seen no one that can answer how God or even Jesus was ever justified in the Spirit. You've not even offered speculation on how this could happen.

Explaining how God or Jesus was justified in the Spirit could change the whole meaning of that verse and possibly even make it no longer suitable for a prooftext that Jesus is God. The thing is, until we understand that whole verse then we cannot say how its meaning might change when we fully understand it.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I think that as long as you continue to use the verse without proper understanding of part of it then you never will understand all of it. I've seen no one that can answer how God or even Jesus was ever justified in the Spirit. You've not even offered speculation on how this could happen.

Explaining how God or Jesus was justified in the Spirit could change the whole meaning of that verse and possibly even make it no longer suitable for a prooftext that Jesus is God. The thing is, until we understand that whole verse then we cannot say how its meaning might change when we fully understand it.

I did offer what this means "justified in the Spirit", by pointing out first of all it means "declared righteous". I then pointed out it was by His works.

Second you've offered no logical reason why if we don't understand for sure what "justified in the Spirit" means we can't understand the rest, despite actually understanding it and explaining it

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I did offer what this means "justified in the Spirit", by pointing out first of all it means "declared righteous". I then pointed out it was by His works.

Second you've offered no logical reason why if we don't understand for sure what "justified in the Spirit" means we can't understand the rest, despite actually understanding it and explaining it

So you are saying that God was justified by his works?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by jfrog

So you are saying that God was justified by his works?

Proven to be righteous, yes. His works are self evident
I have a quick question though, nobody has offered why this is a problem for God...one person brought it up and just kept saying how disagreeable it sounded to him, but never why.

So let me ask, if this was just about a man, what does it mean for that man to be justified in the Spirit?

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Proven to be righteous, yes. His works are self evident
I have a quick question though, nobody has offered why this is a problem for God...one person brought it up and just kept saying how disagreeable it sounded to him, but never why.

So let me ask, if this was just about a man, what does it mean for that man to be justified in the Spirit?

I honestly don't know.

By the way, which works proved God to be righteous. Can you give me a few examples?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I honestly don't know.

By the way, which works proved God to be righteous. Can you give me a few examples?

I did. I pointed out He was obedient to God, even to the point of obeying all the way to the cross and dying

Peter says He was a man approved by God according to the signs and wonders he did.

Here is another
at 3:14 But John restrained Him, saying, I have need to be baptized by You, and do You come to me?
Mat 3:15 And answering Jesus said to him, Allow it now, for it is becoming to us to fulfill all righteousness. Then he allowed Him.
Mat 3:16 And Jesus, when He had been baptized, went up immediately out of the water. And lo, the heavens were opened to Him, and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting upon Him.
Mat 3:17 And lo, a voice from Heaven, saying, This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

oh 8:28 Then Jesus said to them, When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you shall know that I AM, and that I do nothing of Myself, but as My Father has taught Me, I speak these things.
Joh 8:29 And He who sent Me is with Me. The Father has not left Me alone, for I always do those things which please Him.

The bible says He was without spot
Heb 9:14 how much more shall the blood of Christ (who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God) purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

1Pe 1:18 knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, silver or gold, from your vain manner of life handed down from your fathers,
1Pe 1:19 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot;

Joh 16:9 Concerning sin, because they do not believe on Me;
Joh 16:10 concerning righteousness, because I go to My Father and you see Me no more;

Joh 2:11 This beginning of miracles Jesus did in Cana of Galilee. And it revealed His glory. And His disciples believed on Him.

Joh 3:2 He came to Jesus by night and said to Him, Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God; for no man can do these miracles which you do unless God is with him.

One more note, this thought just occured to me but this could reflect the resurrection. Whereas they ridiculed him and his claims to being Messiah and that if he died he would rise again. In being raised from the grave He is vindicated that what he said is true. That even his works, the miraculous works attested to His being who and what he claimed to be

[Timmy]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Proven to be righteous, yes. His works are self evident
. . .

[Nina]

From Strong's:

dikaioō

1) to render righteous or such he ought to be

2) to show, exhibit, evince, one to be righteous, such as he is and wishes himself to be considered

3) to declare, pronounce, one to be just, righteous, or such as he ought to be