Godhead Question

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Timmy

If the Son is God incarnate, then the Son is God. Sherri is wondering how God (incarnated as the Son) can be the mediator between Himself and man. Normally, a mediator is not one of the two parties in mediation!

I think we should not see this as JC cutting a deal with his daddy...

The mediation was achieved by representation of the human race (Christ was one of us - our kinsman) to divinity, and was accomplished in full on the cross. It is the single event of the cross that continues mediation on our behalf - not two beings sitting at a negotiating table.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by TheLegalist

I don't see it as difficult to understand. Think of you being one with God in which you and him are in perfect interaction and he is the very part of your being. God had a Son who was the very expression of himself his nature/image into flesh. This child who's being is the result of this was like us but with perfect relationship in which he breathed the Father as part of this very being and the Father was one and Jesus could truly say I and my Father are ONE. Sorry not difficult at all.

If I am "one with God" (I take that to mean in unity?), then we are still two separate people. Like a husband and wife, joined together and are "one flesh." This is a metaphor for their unity?

How does God have a Son? If God has a Son, it's "from him," "out of Him," "begotten of Him," meaning it is NOT Him. It is distinct. There may be unity, but there's quite a distinction.

Your description is quite difficult. Maybe simple to you. But to say the Godhead is simple... just baffles me.

It's no wonder Divine Flesh is popular. Some Oneness renderings of the Incarnation have God wearing a flesh costume, with working nerves, emotions, etc, but behind the costume, he is still GOD. My friend, that's not being FULLY man. That's God wearing a special costume that he designed.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

I think we should not see this as JC cutting a deal with his daddy...

The mediation was achieved by representation of the human race (Christ was one of us a kinsman) to divinity, and was accomplished in full on the cross.

But what does that mean in reality. We know what it means in representation, in type, in symbolism. But what does that mean. How does that look?

Were Christ and the Father distinct?

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

But what does that mean in reality. We know what it means in representation, in type, in symbolism. But what does that mean. How does that look?

Were Christ and the Father distinct?

Indeed, there are distinctions between Christ, and the Father in heaven to whom He prayed. Those distinctions arise primarily from the incarnation. Nevertheless these distinctions do not necessitate the existence of multiple beings in the Godhead.

A key is the willingness of Christ to take upon himself these limitations of humanity. Hence we have God within and God without the incarnation.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Sherri

This is good, Hoovie, but it's still confusing. If it's confusing for me, I totally understand how it can be confusing for those who've never been taught "oneness". It still sounds like two beings.

I guess the part that makes me go "hmmmm" is that it sounds like they have two different thought patterns, which I don't believe they do. It sounds like Jesus is thinking one thing and trying to persuade the Father (God) to think like Him. I know that is convoluted, but that's how this scripture sounds.

I just don't think we'll ever understand the godhead, so maybe I should quit trying and just love the Lord and live for Him.
[/b]

Well, you sort of do have 2 "beings"...in that Christ here on earth was a genuine human being in that he had a complete human nature, human will and mind

[TheLegalist]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

If I am "one with God" (I take that to mean in unity?), then we are still two separate people. Like a husband and wife, joined together and are "one flesh." This is a metaphor for their unity?

How does God have a Son? If God has a Son, it's "from him," "out of Him," "begotten of Him," meaning it is NOT Him. It is distinct. There may be unity, but there's quite a distinction.

Your description is quite difficult. Maybe simple to you. But to say the Godhead is simple... just baffles me.

It's no wonder Divine Flesh is popular. Some Oneness renderings of the Incarnation have God wearing a flesh costume, with working nerves, emotions, etc, but behind the costume, he is still GOD. My friend, that's not being FULLY man. That's God wearing a special costume that he designed.

What I just described is not Divine flesh LOL! Yes the son is distinct in part. Yet he is also the divine Father expressed by the Son. The Son is a real man. LOL! I said HE HAD A SON! Think about that and recompute! God is still one and he is Father but the Son partakes of his nature do to him being his Word expressed. The Son learned obedience and grew in stature etc... The Father was apart of him. Is this two Gods? No! You have one God expressed and realized in a man who was a his Son. In him we know the Father and only will know the Father. As the Father goes so does the Son. He could speak as limited in time, space and understanding but also as him who Abraham saw and existed from the beginning. Why because the Father was apart of him. As the Father moved him to speak he would speak and yet he would cry out to the Father that was in him and was created by him.

[TheLegalist]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Well, you sort of do have 2 "beings"...in that Christ here on earth was a genuine human being in that he had a complete human nature, human will and mind

As Sabin would say. It's not do we have two.... it's two what.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Well, you sort of do have 2 "beings"...in that Christ here on earth was a genuine human being in that he had a complete human nature, human will and mind

This only works if we are defining God as a human "being".

Seems we can say it two ways...

One Human being who was also God, though God also existed beyond this mode.

Or

One God defined as a "being" who existed in simultaneous modes.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

Indeed, there are distinctions between Christ, and the Father in heaven to whom He prayed. Those distinctions arise primarily from the incarnation. Nevertheless these distinctions do not necessitate the existence of multiple beings in the Godhead.

A key is the willingness of Christ to take upon himself these limitations of humanity. Hence we have God within and God without the incarnation.

Who is Christ apart from the incarnation? The Father? So did you mean "the willingness of the Father to take upon himself these limitations of humanity?"

How was the Logos involved with Creation prior to the incarnation?

If Christ is fully God, did he truly have the full limitations of humanity??

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by TheLegalist

What I just described is not Divine flesh LOL! Yes the son is distinct in part. Yet he is also the divine Father expressed by the Son. The Son is a real man. LOL! I said HE HAD A SON! Think about that and recompute! God is still one and he is Father but the Son partakes of his nature do to him being his Word expressed. The Son learned obedience and grew in stature etc... The Father was apart of him. Is this two Gods? No! You have one God expressed and realized in a man who was a his Son. In him we know the Father and only will know the Father. As the Father goes so does the Son. He could speak as limited in time, space and understanding but also as him who Abraham saw and existed from the beginning. Why because the Father was apart of him. As the Father moved him to speak he would speak and yet he would cry out to the Father that was in him and was created by him.

I didn't say you described Divine Flesh (at least not your intent), but based on your response, I can understand how people make that logical leap.

The son is a real man. But you also believe the Son is fully God.

This fleshly birth in Bethlehem, the expression of God, he is not spatially apart from God? He is "sent?" How is the Father "a part of him" when it sounds like he is "apart from him?"

The Father moved him to speak? So Jesus was a man moved on by God? I thought Jesus was also fully God?

I'm not suggesting you or anyone believe in two gods, divine flesh, etc... I'm asking questions. Godhead in one sense is beautiful, and in another, is messy and confusing.