CCAM #4: If Jesus was praying to the divine side of Himself, .....

[John Atkinson]

If Jesus was praying to the divine side of Himself, then isn't He still praying to Himself?

[mfblume]

Yes.

[Hnovilla]

His NAME is JEsus!

Is God OMNISCIENT? YES.
Is God OMNIPRESENT? YES.
Is God OMNIPOTENT? YES.

Then God did not pray to God. The humanity which is the SON prayed to God.

Brother Villa

[drummerboy_dave]

Yes! That is correct, sir!

[intheblood]

Yes, who else would such an awsome all knowing being such as Himself hold an intellegent conversation with? me? LOL I can't even figure out Bro. John's math! LOL
Who heard God say let there be light? It just had to be said in order to happen! What He prayed, happened!
Bro. Jimmie

[BroRutledge]

It all keeps coming back to flesh and Spirit.

The Created praying to the Creator...

Either way you look at it... it is JESUS JESUS

[apostle]

I believe the created prayed to the creator.

I do not believe Jesus was talking to himself.
I believe the son had and has a father.
And I believe the son is forever with the father.

The bible also says the son and the father will make their abode in them that love him and keep his words.

Joh 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and WE WILL COME UNTO HIM, and make our abode with him.

I believe this happened on the day of Pentecost, and I do not believe Jesus comes any other way then by birth. The new birth.

In Jesus name

[Adoniyah]

Question:
If Jesus was praying to the divine side of Himself, then isn't He still praying to Himself?

Answer:
Absurd. Jesus the man prayed to his father.

[mfblume]

If God is one person then prayer is made by one person to the same person.

And this is only nonsensical if God was human. Humans cannot do that without being mad. But God's personal attributes transcend those of man to the extent they cannot be compared!

[Adoniyah]

It could be said that Jesus prayed to his Father before he was glorified as the distinctions there are clear. NOW, the distinctions are no longer there. The distinctions between Jesus the man and the Spirit, the father are no longer there.

Jesus the man, being made a little lower than the angels in his humiliation prayed to the Father of whom he said, "...is greater than I."

The idea of Jesus praying to himself is so absurd as to justly generate a great deal of amusement among the Trinitarians.

[mfblume]

If self is the single person, then what would you say? It only givesw fun to trinitarains because they nonsensically compare God's single person to a man's single person, and work from there by putting the limits man has upon God. So their entire basis for their fun is something we should not cater to by avoiding the facts.

[Adoniyah]

I agree entirely.

That is why I propose that we stay away from such absurdity to begin with, which can be done by a good understanding of the differences in the distinctions before his glorification.

I would readily agree with any Trinitarian that Jesus the man was not praying to HIMSELF.

[barbara]

when you pray are you praying to yourself?no.neither was jesus he was praying to god

[Faithchild]

Asked and answered in Questions #2 & #3.

Ephesians 1:11-- " . . . he worketh all things after the counsel of his OWN will." Like we consult our memories, Jesus talked to Himself. He wrestled with the task that he had set for himself. Jesus was the Father Incarnate. When he prayed; he was just thinking out loud.

[krazeeboi]

Adoniyah:

"The distinctions between Jesus the man and the Spirit, the father are no longer there."

Then why do we continue to see distinctions AFTER Jesus' resurrection and ascension (sermons in Acts, apostolic salutations, symbols in Revelation, etc.)?

[ddc101]

I see nothing strange with that.I talk to myself all the time..lol...lv sis.c

[Hnovilla]

His NAME is Jesus!

"Then why do we continue to see distinctions AFTER Jesus' resurrection and ascension (sermons in Acts, apostolic salutations, symbols in Revelation, etc.)?"
Beloved, the Ministry of the Son has not yet been exhausted. While the need for salvation still exists (men repenting, getting baptized in the NAME of the Lord Jesus, and receiving the Holy Spirit), the Ministry of the Son will also be in effect. The Kingdom of the son will NEVER cease, because WE have been called into the kingdom as sons and daughters. Mind you, there will be a time when those who are saved, will be saved; while those who are lost, will be lost. Then, just as surely as the Word "...made himself of no reputation..." by being clothed in a body of flesh, so will the Word be disrobed of its earthly tabernacle and be [clothed upon] "...with the glory which I had with you before the world was."
"For this corruptible must put on incorrupton, and this mortal must put on immortality." This speaks not only of that which WILL transpire at the end of this (Church) age, but which the Lord Jesus has already fulfilled for the Church, in Himself.

Brother Villa

[krazeeboi]

Brother Villa, I agree with you 100%. That question was directed towards Adoniyah, who said that the distinctions between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit vanished after the resurrection and ascension of Christ, so I directed that question towards her (I think it's her) to point out the fact that the Bible DOES make distinctions between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, even after Jesus' resurrection and ascension.

[mfblume]

Good point, Krazeeboi. I agree.

[The teacher]

If God is one person then prayer is made by one person to the same person.

And this is only nonsensical if God was human. Humans cannot do that without being mad. But God's personal attributes transcend those of man to the extent they cannot be compared!

mfblume,
Sorry, I don't follow your comments. I've always understood Jesus' prayer to be the human nature praying to the divine nature. I also see "not my will but thine be done" which would imply a difference of wills not possible in one person. So I'm led to believe that there is a man Christ Jesus who submitted his will completely to the divine nature.

Your comment of "prayer is made by one person to the same person" seems to say something different. I would appreciate your elaboration on the dual nature idea: was there a man Christ Jesus with a will?

Looking forward to your reply.

[mfblume]

mfblume,
Sorry, I don't follow your comments. I've always understood Jesus' prayer to be the human nature praying to the divine nature. I also see "not my will but thine be done" which would imply a difference of wills not possible in one person. So I'm led to believe that there is a man Christ Jesus who submitted his will completely to the divine nature.

Your comment of "prayer is made by one person to the same person" seems to say something different. I would appreciate your elaboration on the dual nature idea: was there a man Christ Jesus with a will?

Looking forward to your reply.

Hi Teacher,

VERY GOOD SUBJECT.

Whether or not Jesus acted in divinity or humanity (both of which He did), it was sitll one person. The humanity was not another person apart from the divinity. You and I are each a single person. There are two human persons involved when we speak of two human beings such as yourself and me. And God is a person. So if it's Christ's humanity or divinity, or both, it's still all the same person.

So I'm led to believe that there is a man Christ Jesus who submitted his will completely to the divine nature.

But do you not agree that the man is the same person as the divinity in Christ? The humanity is not a different "person" than the divinity?

There was a human will that was submitted to the divine will. But this is much different than saying two human wills or two divine wills. Because there is a human will and a divine will, the idea of a single person is not incorrect.

I think it wil ever be a conundrum for us to understand how God can assume the office of a human so fully that the human had to pray to deity, when there is no other deity in existence other than in the God who was manifested in flesh as that human.

[The teacher]

Hi Teacher,

VERY GOOD SUBJECT.

Whether or not Jesus acted in divinity or humanity (both of which He did), it was sitll one person. The humanity was not another person apart from the divinity. You and I are each a single person. There are two human persons involved when we speak of two human beings such as yourself and me. And God is a person. So if it's Christ's humanity or divinity, or both, it's still all the same person.

But do you not agree that the man is the same person as the divinity in Christ? The humanity is not a different "person" than the divinity?

There was a human will that was submitted to the divine will. But this is much different than saying two human wills or two divine wills. Because there is a human will and a divine will, the idea of a single person is not incorrect.

I think it wil ever be a conundrum for us to understand how God can assume the office of a human so fully that the human had to pray to deity, when there is no other deity in existence other than in the God who was manifested in flesh as that human.

Mfblume,
Definitely a conundrum. I understand why I pray and why my will needs subjection, because I am not the same person as God. It is difficult to understand why there would be competing wills within the same individual. Perhaps one of the reasons for the difficulty is the comparison of Adam to Jesus, as pertaining to the flesh:

Romans 5
14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

1 Corinthians 15
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

Now is the first man Adam referring to our own human nature and the last Adam to our spiritual nature, or does it refer to the man Adam and the man Jesus Christ?

God bless.

[The teacher]

mfblume,
Are you there? The reference in Corinthians to the 2nd Adam must be a reference to Christ and not our spiritual nature:

1 Corinthians 15
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.

So again, the difficulty comes in the comparison of Adam to Christ. Adam had his own will, separate from that of God. If the man Christ Jesus' had no separate will, why did he need to pray not my will, but thine be done? Why is he referred to as the last Adam?

God bless.

[ddc101]

I see nothing strange with that.I talk to myself all the time..lol...lv sis.c


see here I go again....
How are you there sister Cooper? Hope you are okay.Just keep talking to yourself and then answering yourself and sooner or later things will work out.Encourage yourself in the Lord like David did at Ziglag....He picked himself up by his bootstraps and went on and did Gods will and you can too.


see it works.I have Jesus for my example.It wasn't hard for him to talk to God all he had to do was look deep within himself...amen.

[mfblume]

So again, the difficulty comes in the comparison of Adam to Christ. Adam had his own will, separate from that of God. If the man Christ Jesus' had no separate will, why did he need to pray not my will, but thine be done? Why is he referred to as the last Adam?


Hi all,

I, too, think, too, that Adam is the man Adam who married Eve, and not really our human nature.

But the man indeed had a separate will. I agree totally. But that woudl not necessitate two persons. It is still one person.

An old analogy I made about such a question was as follows. Say you land on mars and find a martian who has two mouths. Each mouth actually speaks independently from the other. And in order to survive, for whatever reason, each mouth converses to the other and reponds to the other. In OUR standards, that would require two human persons. But in this martian species, it is one person.

What I tried to say was that God is anotehr "species" in contrast to man. I do not want to insult God by saying that. It's just the best way I can make my point. We cannto throw our limitations of human persons onto God and say that God must be more than one person if there is the humanity of Christ speaking and convesring with the deity, just becuase it requires two human persons to accomplish the same thing.

In other words, we cannot put limits of any kind upon God. He is GOD! His ways are past finding out! And the conundrum always occurs when we unconsciously throw our limitations upon Him.

I think Jesus is referred to as the last Adam since He is the beginning of a new creation race, as Adam was the start of the old creation race of mankind. SInce we are taken out of Adam and put into Christ, Chirst is the federal head of the new human race. And since a MAN must be such a head and sit on a throne, as Adam was supposed to seeing that God gave him dominion, Christ fills that position. And that is the reason I have stated before that the glorified MAN Christ is now still on that throne. And I disagree with Bro Strange's idea that the distinction between the MAN and the DEITY is no longer in existence. I think it is! We need a MAN in the place of old Adam over us. THAT was God's will all along fpor whatever reason.

[The teacher]

I agree that there were two wills within Jesus Christ, one human and one divine. I agree that this mystery is difficult to understand by human faculty, and believe that there was only one person involved.

However, there are those who hold that there was a man who was a separate person from the divine, and the man submitted his will completely to the will of the Father, thus becoming the perfect sacrifice. Having submitted completely to the Father and accomplished Calvary, the identity of the man is completely gone and God is now all in all.

The above thought does not seem to violate monotheism, because it still holds that God is one spirit: God manifest in the flesh still holds true; God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself still holds true;

The only place where I can see the breakdown of the idea is in the blood:

Acts 20
28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

Since it is the blood of God, it is not possible to have a distinct identity as a man. But the return argument states that this is part of the mystery, it was God's blood within the man Christ Jesus.

Any thoughts or comments from anyone?

[Hnovilla]

His NAME is Jesus!

"Having submitted completely to the Father and accomplished Calvary, the identity of the man is completely gone and God is now all in all."

Yes, Beloved, although the Father is speaking to us still through the Son. "...this same Jesus whom you have crucified, God has made both Lord and Christ."


"Since it is the blood of God, it is not possible to have a distinct identity as a man. But the return argument states that this is part of the mystery, it was God's blood within the man Christ Jesus."

It is the blood ACCEPTED of God, since it is without sin. God created man and gave man a body, with the life of the body in the blood. The ministry of the Lord Jesus is a mystery only in those who perish.

Brother Villa

[The teacher]

His NAME is Jesus!

"Having submitted completely to the Father and accomplished Calvary, the identity of the man is completely gone and God is now all in all."

Yes, Beloved, although the Father is speaking to us still through the Son. "...this same Jesus whom you have crucified, God has made both Lord and Christ."


"Since it is the blood of God, it is not possible to have a distinct identity as a man. But the return argument states that this is part of the mystery, it was God's blood within the man Christ Jesus."

It is the blood ACCEPTED of God, since it is without sin. God created man and gave man a body, with the life of the body in the blood. The ministry of the Lord Jesus is a mystery only in those who perish.

Brother Villa

Hnovilla,
Thanks so much for the reply. So please clarify for me, are you saying there was or was not a man who was a separate person from the divine? That is, if God did not inhabit the flesh, would there have lived a man with his own human identity?

Thanks,

PS - Happy Birthday!

[Hnovilla]

His NAME is Jesus!

"That is, if God did not inhabit the flesh, would there have lived a man with his own human identity?"

Of course not! The purpose for the body was the cross: "Behold the Lamb of God which takes away the sin of the world." Again: "No man COMES to the Father but by me." We go to, and know the Father only by believing and receiving the sacrifice (the Lamb) for sin prepared for us. All men live with their own human identity, through the identity of their [earthly] fathers; even as the Lord Jesus is identified in his heavenly identity by HIS heavenly Father. However, it pleased the Lord Jesus to be identified with man through his earthly mother.
Had there been an identification with an earthly father, then Jesus would also have inherited sin, which would have nullified his body as THE Lamb of God!

"Thanks so much for the reply. So please clarify for me, are you saying there was or was not a man who was a separate person from the divine?"

There is certainly a separate PERSON from the divine. Do the scriptures not state that "...there is ONE intercessor between God and man; the MAN Christ Jesus."? The Lord Jesus IS a person, while God IS NOT a person: God is Spirit. Now God was "...in Christ Jesus, reconciling the world unto HIMSELF..."; just as surely as God is in His Church, reconciling the world unto Himself. It is now the Church which has received the ministry of reconciliation through the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus.

It is the Gospel, Church.
Brother Villa

[The teacher]

His NAME is Jesus!

"That is, if God did not inhabit the flesh, would there have lived a man with his own human identity?"

Of course not! The purpose for the body was the cross: "Behold the Lamb of God which takes away the sin of the world." Again: "No man COMES to the Father but by me." We go to, and know the Father only by believing and receiving the sacrifice (the Lamb) for sin prepared for us. All men live with their own human identity, through the identity of their [earthly] fathers; even as the Lord Jesus is identified in his heavenly identity by HIS heavenly Father. However, it pleased the Lord Jesus to be identified with man through his earthly mother.
Had there been an identification with an earthly father, then Jesus would also have inherited sin, which would have nullified his body as THE Lamb of God!

"Thanks so much for the reply. So please clarify for me, are you saying there was or was not a man who was a separate person from the divine?"

There is certainly a separate PERSON from the divine. Do the scriptures not state that "...there is ONE intercessor between God and man; the MAN Christ Jesus."? The Lord Jesus IS a person, while God IS NOT a person: God is Spirit. Now God was "...in Christ Jesus, reconciling the world unto HIMSELF..."; just as surely as God is in His Church, reconciling the world unto Himself. It is now the Church which has received the ministry of reconciliation through the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus.

It is the Gospel, Church.
Brother Villa

Hnovilla,
Thanks for the reply. It is quite a difficult concept to grasp that a separate man with his own identity would not have lived, yet the man was a separate person from the divine. I'm trying to understand where the distinction between the two is, but I'm finding that it is quite difficult to pinpoint.

God bless.