Questions about God(s) in the flesh:

[Chuangtzu]

Do fully human, fully divine god figures experience the full panoply of human emotions?
Do fully human, fully divine God figure experience embarrassment? Shame? Guilt?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience attraction to members of the opposite gender? The same gender?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience other forms of excitement or arousal? Emotional ecstasy? Erotic ecstasy?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience anticipation? Trepidation? Worry?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures wish to avoid death?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures conform to the Standard Model of God?

[hillplus]

No one can answer these questions.

[Chuangtzu]

No one can answer these questions.

Then how can you know if a fully human, fully divine God figure is in fact "fully human"?

What of religious accounts of fully human, fully divine God figures feeling fear, joy, compassion?

[Chuangtzu]

No one can answer these questions.

This was a "hit and run" comment?

[hillplus]

This was a "hit and run" comment?

I can't answer your questions. I don't know. Ask me in about 60 years, surely I will be dead by then. That way I can ask the 'Big Guy' for you.

[Chuangtzu]

I can't answer your questions. I don't know. Ask me in about 60 years, surely I will be dead by then. That way I can ask the 'Big Guy' for you.

Do you accept religious doctrine that a person or persons is both God and human, simultaneously?

If so, how do you know this doctrine is true?

If it is true, how do you define human, such that a God-Human can be understood?

Also, if so, how can this doctrine be taught or demonstrated, if there's no way to answer questions about it?

[hillplus]

I don't have time for a lengthy conversation right now. have to attend to my real life. I would say that I spend no time thinking about Jesus being fully God and fully human. My beliefs are outside the mainstream so maybe someone else could shed some light on their thoughts.
I do believe that God and man are the same species. God is the literal Father of our spirits. We can become like Him. Don't have a clear understanding of what that means. Don't think we will be eternally playing a harp on cloud nine or kneeling eternally before God on His throne. We will be continually learning and progressing.

[Marleysdaddy]

I don't have time for a lengthy conversation right now. have to attend to my real life.
become a philosopher - then you'll be able to do both simultaneously ;)

I do believe that God and man are the same species.
Very interesting
God is the literal Father of our spirits. We can become like Him.
Also very interesting, and very Eastern...so your conception of god is that god is not holy (meaning other, separate)
Don't think we will be eternally playing a harp on cloud nine or kneeling eternally before God on His throne. We will be continually learning and progressing.
If there is a god, and if there is an "afterlife", I agree with you 100% on this.

[Thank you Troops]

I can't speek about other gods but I can about Jesus because I know him from the Bible. He was flesh and blood. He hungered and thirsted, he got tired and rested, he felt pain on the cross. He didn't want to die but did for his fathers will. He sweated blood in agony about the crucifixion, he grieved, he wept. He was born of a woman. He bled. He was tempted but did not sin. He could be killed, he had a real body, of flesh and blood.

Hebrews 2:17 - Therefore, it was necessary for him to be made in every respect like us, his brothers and sisters, so that he could be our merciful and faithful High Priest before God. Then he could offer a sacrifice that would take away the sins of the people.

[Chuangtzu]

I can't speek about other gods but I can about Jesus because I know him from the Bible. He was flesh and blood. He hungered and thirsted, he got tired and rested, he felt pain on the cross. He didn't want to die but did for his fathers will. He sweated blood in agony about the crucifixion, he grieved, he wept. He was born of a woman. He bled. He was tempted but did not sin. He could be killed, he had a real body, of flesh and blood.

Hebrews 2:17 - Therefore, it was necessary for him to be made in every respect like us, his brothers and sisters, so that he could be our merciful and faithful High Priest before God. Then he could offer a sacrifice that would take away the sins of the people.

Was this God-Human to whom you refer fully human?

[Marleysdaddy]

I can't speek about other gods but I can about Jesus because I know him from the Bible. He was flesh and blood. He hungered and thirsted, he got tired and rested, he felt pain on the cross. He didn't want to die but did for his fathers will. He sweated blood in agony about the crucifixion, he grieved, he wept. He was born of a woman. He bled. He was tempted but did not sin. He could be killed, he had a real body, of flesh and blood.

Hebrews 2:17 - Therefore, it was necessary for him to be made in every respect like us, his brothers and sisters, so that he could be our merciful and faithful High Priest before God. Then he could offer a sacrifice that would take away the sins of the people.

Do you think that Jesus possessed human sexuality? If so, did he ever act on it? If not, how could he be considered fully human?

[Chucky]

....
I do believe that God and man are the same species. God is the literal Father of our spirits. We can become like Him. ....Sounds like basic LDS teaching - yes?

[Thank you Troops]

Was this God-Human to whom you refer fully human?


That is what my faith is, but it is a mystery beyond my understanding.

[Thank you Troops]

Do you think that Jesus possessed human sexuality? If so, did he ever act on it? If not, how could he be considered fully human?

All humans do not act on every impulse or temptation. At the same time God was his father because he was born of a virgin so he was a God-man so that is one thing different than normal humans.

[Marleysdaddy]

All humans do not act on every impulse or temptation.

Yes, but that doesn't answer my question.

Edit - I see know how my initial questions may have been vague - i did not mean to imply that if he didn't act on it, then he couldn't be human.

Do you think that Jesus possessed human sexuality?

If your answer is yes - did he ever act on it?
If your answer is no - how could he be considered fully human?

[5thIDSoldier]

Do you accept religious doctrine that a person or persons is both God and human, simultaneously?

If so, how do you know this doctrine is true?

If it is true, how do you define human, such that a God-Human can be understood?

Also, if so, how can this doctrine be taught or demonstrated, if there's no way to answer questions about it?

It has been quite reasonably demonstrated in the New Testament. The book of John adresses this issue readily, but it still requires some faith on your part to accept it.

[5thIDSoldier]

Yes, but that doesn't answer my question.

Edit - I see know how my initial questions may have been vague - i did not mean to imply that if he didn't act on it, then he couldn't be human.

Do you think that Jesus possessed human sexuality?

If your answer is yes - did he ever act on it?
If your answer is no - how could he be considered fully human?

From my limited understanding:

Yes, but he never acted on it. He was tempted in all point as we are, yet he never sinned.

[Marleysdaddy]

From my limited understanding:

Yes, but he never acted on it. He was tempted in all point as we are, yet he never sinned.

Thank you for the answer...my next question is not intended to be heretical :D

Do you think Jesus was married?

If yes - why do we not hear about it in the Gospels?
If no - Why didn't he marry?

[Thank you Troops]

Yes, but that doesn't answer my question.

Edit - I see know how my initial questions may have been vague - i did not mean to imply that if he didn't act on it, then he couldn't be human.

Do you think that Jesus possessed human sexuality?

If your answer is yes - did he ever act on it?
If your answer is no - how could he be considered fully human?

The Word says that he was made in every aspect like us so I assume he did posses human sexuality, however it is not mentioned that I am aware of. I do not believe that he acted on it because he was without sin and fornication is a sin to God.

[Thank you Troops]

Thank you for the answer...my next question is not intended to be heretical :D

Do you think Jesus was married?

If yes - why do we not hear about it in the Gospels?
If no - Why didn't he marry?

I don't believe Jesus was married or else why wouldn't his wife come to see him crucified, buried and resurrected? No wife was mentioned. The Bible says it is better to not know a woman.

[Chuangtzu]

It has been quite reasonably demonstrated in the New Testament. The book of John adresses this issue readily, but it still requires some faith on your part to accept it.

I'm going to ask you to think about your assertions, and their implications, before I respond.

[Chuangtzu]

That is what my faith is, but it is a mystery beyond my understanding.

If this God-Human was fully human, but also Fully God - how could He experience fear, since God has absolute knowledge and command of events, in advance of their occurence?

How can God be afraid of an event which can do him no harm, which he set in motion, which unfolds according to His plan, and which he had millions (or, assuming the smallest threshold - thousands) of years during which He could prepare for, and which would cause a Not-God-Human to experience fear?

[Marleysdaddy]

I don't believe Jesus was married or else why wouldn't his wife come to see him crucified, buried and resurrected?
1) We don't know that she didn't
2) If my wife were to be executed, I don't think I would attend.
No wife was mentioned.
That doesn't mean he wasn't married.
The Bible says it is better to not know a woman.
Really? Where? If so, that's a bit ridiculous, considering the whole "become one flesh" thing...I mean, didn't god create marriage? Isn't it the foundation of modern society?

[gpd®]

If this God-Human was fully human, but also Fully God - how could He experience fear, since God has absolute knowledge and command of events, in advance of their occurence?

How can God be afraid of an event which can do him no harm, which he set in motion, which unfolds according to His plan, and which he had millions (or, assuming the smallest threshold - thousands) of years during which He could prepare for, and which would cause a Not-God-Human to experience fear?

Jesus's *faith* that He would be raised was more important than knowing He would be raised.

He gave us a perfect example of His faith in God so that we could strive for a God-like faith.

Just my thoughts, can't really expound.

[optrader]

I don't think people really understand what Christ did!

If all he did was come down to earth for a few years, die on the cross (even though it was an agonizing death), and then go right back to Heaven exactly as He was before He came down, where is the sacrifice?
When He came to earth, He suspended His "Godness". Nothing He did on earth was done of any power of His own. He did everything through the Holy Spirit by faith in His father. He took our nature as His own, fully understanding by experience the emotions and temptations and weaknesses of humanity. Only by doing this could He demonstrate satan's claim that man is incapable of freely doing God's will is a lie.
When Jesus was at Gethsemane, His fear was not just for the death of His physical body. He feared the second death, i.e., the wages of sin falling upon Him, He couldn't see beyond the grave! Such is the magnitude of sin, and his love for us that He died anyway.
He sacrificed for eternity part of His Godness, he chose to forever be as one of us.
He did not marry, (though there are those that believe He did) marriage would have distracted or perhaps prevented him from fulfilling His mission.
That we aspire to be like Jesus, is not just a Christian cliche. We should hold this desire dearly and fully understand what we seek.

[Chuangtzu]

Jesus's *faith* that He would be raised was more important than knowing He would be raised.

He gave us a perfect example of His faith in God so that we could strive for a God-like faith.

Just my thoughts, can't really expound.

How can perfect knowledge be compatible with perfect faith, please?

[Tim]

How can perfect knowledge be compatible with perfect faith, please?

Ahhh... a dichotomy that I've not considered before. Very interesting and thought provoking!

[smyrna]

Do you think that Jesus possessed human sexuality? If so, did he ever act on it? If not, how could he be considered fully human?

Jesus was without sin. Jesus was never married. We are left to draw our own conclusions.

[smyrna]

Thank you for the answer...my next question is not intended to be heretical :D

Do you think Jesus was married?

If yes - why do we not hear about it in the Gospels?
If no - Why didn't he marry?

No, I do not think he married. He had a bigger name on the other line?

[smyrna]

If this God-Human was fully human, but also Fully God - how could He experience fear, since God has absolute knowledge and command of events, in advance of their occurence?

How can God be afraid of an event which can do him no harm, which he set in motion, which unfolds according to His plan, and which he had millions (or, assuming the smallest threshold - thousands) of years during which He could prepare for, and which would cause a Not-God-Human to experience fear?

I could nail down an answer...but I won't.

[DRS]

Do fully human, fully divine god figures experience the full panoply of human emotions?
Do fully human, fully divine God figure experience embarrassment? Shame? Guilt?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience attraction to members of the opposite gender? The same gender?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience other forms of excitement or arousal? Emotional ecstasy? Erotic ecstasy?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience anticipation? Trepidation? Worry?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures wish to avoid death?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures conform to the Standard Model of God?


Not sure about anything of those things as to the best of my knowledge there has never been one who was fully God and fully man

There was Jesus who existed in heaven in the spirit form and then was made fully human born to Mary

Who experienced fear,sadness, joy, was obedient but would not have felt shame since it was the product of sin

[meggers49]

Do you think that Jesus possessed human sexuality? If so, did he ever act on it? If not, how could he be considered fully human?

You think the only way to be fully human is to have sex? You can't have feelings, and not act on them because you have a greater purpose than to be physical with someone, particularly if you aren't married and the physical act outside of marriage is a sin?

Wouldn't that preclude him being tempted but without sin?

I'm sorry, it's not necessary to have sex to be fully human. There are millions of people who have gone and do go through life without it.

We are not animals. We do not rut. We do not go into 'heat' and do not need to have sex with anything just because we feel the desire. That people have debased sex in that manner just shows a devolution of what it (sex) is supposed to be to what it has become.

[HokieCougarVandal]

Jesus was without sin. Jesus was never married. We are left to draw our own conclusions.

Without sin =/= Never married.

Christ still could have been without sin if He was married.

[meggers49]

Thank you for the answer...my next question is not intended to be heretical :D

Do you think Jesus was married?

If yes - why do we not hear about it in the Gospels?
If no - Why didn't he marry?

No, I don't think he was married. A) it would have been mentioned, b) he had other things to do.

Do all people get married?? Confirmed bachelors, people who are job driven and purpose driven who don't marry because 'they don't have time for a relationship'.

What makes this aspect so important? People do not HAVE to live their lives married or having a relationship with one person. I don't understand why you are using this as your measurement for 'fully human'. If you question it, then you'll have to question the humanity of any person who has decided not to marry, because it doesn't fit in with their plan for themself.

[Meriweather]

Do fully human, fully divine god figures experience the full panoply of human emotions?
Do fully human, fully divine God figure experience embarrassment? Shame? Guilt?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience attraction to members of the opposite gender? The same gender?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience other forms of excitement or arousal? Emotional ecstasy? Erotic ecstasy?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience anticipation? Trepidation? Worry?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures wish to avoid death?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures conform to the Standard Model of God?


Perhaps I missed it, but what I haven't seen addressed here is Jesus has two natures. He is not a combined Man-God (half man, half God); he has two natures (or intellects if you prefer): One human, one divine.

[Scruffy]

Thank you for the answer...my next question is not intended to be heretical :D

Do you think Jesus was married?

If yes - why do we not hear about it in the Gospels?
If no - Why didn't he marry?

Jesus Christ came to Earth to suffer and die a horrible death, to pay the price for all of our sins, and open the gates of Heaven for us. That was his mission.

He did not come here to fall in love with a person, get married and procreate. He loves all of humanity. And His mission was to save us.

He did not have sex, although since He had a human body there might have been temptation, but he was sinless. He was a pure sacrifice for our Father in Heaven. He was born of a virgin.

If what makes a person human is to get married and have sex.... well then........ I know some people who are less than human I guess, because there are some that I know who never married.

[terri910]

Without sin =/= Never married.

Christ still could have been without sin if He was married.
That would be true, but your equation was not, I don't believe, what smyrna was saying. The premise was that Jesus was never married. Using that premise, Never married + sinless = never had sex.

[Chuangtzu]

Not sure about anything of those things as to the best of my knowledge there has never been one who was fully God and fully man

There was Jesus who existed in heaven in the spirit form and then was made fully human born to Mary

Who experienced fear,sadness, joy, was obedient but would not have felt shame since it was the product of sin

The Witness position is different from that of "mainstream" doctrine, yes?

[Chuangtzu]

Perhaps I missed it, but what I haven't seen addressed here is Jesus has two natures. He is not a combined Man-God (half man, half God); he has two natures (or intellects if you prefer): One human, one divine.

"Two natures" doesn't negate the perfect knowledge of the Godly nature, unless you're suggesting that the Godly nature was unavailable to the human one, so that the Godly knowledge was denied to human experience.

Is this what you suggest - a split persona?

[Chuangtzu]

I could nail down an answer...but I won't.

Why for not?

[Chuangtzu]

Ahhh... a dichotomy that I've not considered before. Very interesting and thought provoking!

I'm not suggesting my own perfect knowledge. My disbelief aside, I don't approach this subject with any hostility. I'm trying to understand the fullest possible set of implications of the doctrine of Incarnation.

In one tradition, a fully human-fully divine Person is seen trembling on the night before His death, asking that a burden be removed, that He be spared a fate He prepared for Himself, as His Own Self. How can He fear what cannot cause Him harm, what cannot surprise Him, and which He could avoid if He chose otherwise?

[Tim]

I'm not suggesting my own perfect knowledge. My disbelief aside, I don't approach this subject with any hostility. I'm trying to understand the fullest possible set of implications of the doctrine of Incarnation.

In one tradition, a fully human-fully divine Person is seen trembling on the night before His death, asking that a burden be removed, that He be spared a fate He prepared for Himself, as His Own Self. How can He fear what cannot cause Him harm, what cannot surprise Him, and which He could avoid if He chose otherwise?

My interest is a purely philosophical one. I enjoy pondering such as this.

[smyrna]

Without sin =/= Never married.

Christ still could have been without sin if He was married.

The question being answered was whether or not Jesus had sex.

[smyrna]

That would be true, but your equation was not, I don't believe, what smyrna was saying. The premise was that Jesus was never married. Using that premise, Never married + sinless = never had sex.

Thank you terri910.

[Meriweather]

"Two natures" doesn't negate the perfect knowledge of the Godly nature, unless you're suggesting that the Godly nature was unavailable to the human one, so that the Godly knowledge was denied to human experience.

Is this what you suggest - a split persona?

Two natures, not a split persona. For example, let's use a dog and a cat. Suppose an animal appeared that had two natures--that of a dog and that of a cat. When existing in the nature of a cat, this dual natured animal would look and behave exactly like a cat. It would not have a "split" persona where it looked like a cat but barked like a dog. When it took on the appearance of a cat, it was all cat; when it took on appearance of a dog, it was all dog.

In the same way, when the Word of God became man, Jesus was fully man. The soul of Christ now possessed a completely human intellect. This intellect had to learn and observe like the intellect of any other child. It is thought the soul of Christ (his spirit) is what allowed him to remain sinless despite his humanity, and also to understand his oneness with God. This soul, however, was now in the possession of the man, Jesus.

[smyrna]

"Two natures" doesn't negate the perfect knowledge of the Godly nature, unless you're suggesting that the Godly nature was unavailable to the human one, so that the Godly knowledge was denied to human experience.

Is this what you suggest - a split persona?

Chuangtzu, when you read about when John the Baptist baptizes Jesus, it says that the Holy Spirit descended upon him like a dove. Immediately Jesus went into the wilderness to be tempted by Satan. Something happened to him that changed him. Jesus began his ministry. He became versed in scripture and it must have been a noticable change because others that he grew up with noticed it.
Luke 4:22 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=4&verse=22&version=49&context=verse)
And all were speaking well of Him, and wondering at the gracious words which were falling from His lips; and they were saying, " Is this not Joseph's son?"

It would appear that possibly Jesus was in a non-fully enlightened form until his baptism. At that time, he knew and fully understood what would happen and his purpose. This is strictly a possibility and only my opinion but it would shed some light on your question.

[DRS]

The Witness position is different from that of "mainstream" doctrine, yes?

If by mainstream you mean popular than yes.

The Godman is not new though the Egyptian pharoah was said to be a Godman

[Angryamerican]

Do you accept religious doctrine that a person or persons is both God and human, simultaneously?

If so, how do you know this doctrine is true?

If it is true, how do you define human, such that a God-Human can be understood?

Also, if so, how can this doctrine be taught or demonstrated, if there's no way to answer questions about it?

Good questions.

[Angryamerican]

Two natures, not a split persona. For example, let's use a dog and a cat. Suppose an animal appeared that had two natures--that of a dog and that of a cat. When existing in the nature of a cat, this dual natured animal would look and behave exactly like a cat. It would not have a "split" persona where it looked like a cat but barked like a dog. When it took on the appearance of a cat, it was all cat; when it took on appearance of a dog, it was all dog.

In the same way, when the Word of God became man, Jesus was fully man. The soul of Christ now possessed a completely human intellect. This intellect had to learn and observe like the intellect of any other child. It is thought the soul of Christ (his spirit) is what allowed him to remain sinless despite his humanity, and also to understand his oneness with God. This soul, however, was now in the possession of the man, Jesus.

How can that be,the scriptures say that Jesus was in the nature of God?

[Koushi Shinigami]

Jesus was without sin. Jesus was never married. We are left to draw our own conclusions.

Marriage is sinful.

[Koushi Shinigami]

Jesus Christ came to Earth to suffer and die a horrible death,

Then he should have married.

[Meriweather]

How can that be,the scriptures say that Jesus was in the nature of God?

Could you quote me chapter and verse, please so that we know we are both on the same page?

Meanwhile, I'll go find Koushi and give him a hug.

[Koushi Shinigami]

:snooty:

[Scruffy]

Then he should have married.

That's a good one! :))

[Chuangtzu]

Chuangtzu, when you read about when John the Baptist baptizes Jesus, it says that the Holy Spirit descended upon him like a dove. Immediately Jesus went into the wilderness to be tempted by Satan. Something happened to him that changed him. Jesus began his ministry. He became versed in scripture and it must have been a noticable change because others that he grew up with noticed it.
Luke 4:22 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=4&verse=22&version=49&context=verse)
And all were speaking well of Him, and wondering at the gracious words which were falling from His lips; and they were saying, " Is this not Joseph's son?"

It would appear that possibly Jesus was in a non-fully enlightened form until his baptism. At that time, he knew and fully understood what would happen and his purpose. This is strictly a possibility and only my opinion but it would shed some light on your question.

I'm not assuming a historicity to claims about Jesus - or any other God-Man. Nor am I assuming falsehood. I'm attempting to understand the doctrine itself, to flesh out if you will the ramifications of such a teaching.

Assuming even your scenario, it does not alter the fundamental problem: that at some point this God-Man has perfect faith and perfect knowledge. How are these compatible? How can these be compatible.

***

Merri,

Your altering of the words still doesn't actually change the problem of 'dual natures." Accepting absolute simultaneity of both "natures" still doesn't address the overlap and contradictions of perfect faith and perfect knowledge.

[Meriweather]

:snooty:


Psst! Koushi! Just a hug! No marriage proposal! :hug:

(Walking away mumbling. May as well go over to DU. First vir won't give me a hug, and now Koushi.

[Meriweather]

I'm not assuming a historicity to claims about Jesus - or any other God-Man. Nor am I assuming falsehood. I'm attempting to understand the doctrine itself, to flesh out if you will the ramifications of such a teaching.

Assuming even your scenario, it does not alter the fundamental problem: that at some point this God-Man has perfect faith and perfect knowledge. How are these compatible? How can these be compatible.

***

Merri,

Your altering of the words still doesn't actually change the problem of 'dual natures." Accepting absolute simultaneity of both "natures" still doesn't address the overlap and contradictions of perfect faith and perfect knowledge.

Perhaps I need to better understand what you mean by perfect faith and perfect knowledge.

After the Last Supper, Jesus truly suffered while praying in the Garden of Gethsemane. According to scripture, he knew he was going to be crucified, but would rise again. He prayed that there might be another way. Is this a good example by what you mean by perfect knowledge and perfect faith?

By the way, I'm not trying to alter words. I am trying to explain Catholic teaching on the two natures of Jesus. You can reject the teaching, and that is fine, but it is still the way the Church sees this. When Jesus was man, he was fully man. Two natures, not a combined nature.

[Koushi Shinigami]

Psst! Koushi! Just a hug! No marriage proposal! :hug:

(Walking away mumbling. May as well go over to DU. First vir won't give me a hug, and now Koushi.

Awwwww Meri. You know I can't resist you. :hug:

[Meriweather]

Awwwww Meri. You know I can't resist you. :hug:

Thanks! My world is now better.

Getting back on topic...how would you define the two natures of Christ?

[smyrna]

Marriage is sinful.


Did I tell you I love you yet today?

[smyrna]

Then he should have married.

What's the difference in your book?

[Koushi Shinigami]

Thanks! My world is now better.

Getting back on topic...how would you define the two natures of Christ?

Do you mean the divine vs the human?

[Koushi Shinigami]

Did I tell you I love you yet today?

Not yet...

[Koushi Shinigami]

What's the difference in your book?

Crucifixion only lasts a few hours.

The suffering of marriage is eternal.

[RayMan]

Crucifixion only lasts a few hours.

The suffering of marriage is eternal.


Naw...just til death do you part. Unless you recently went LDS and didn't tell us.

[barre53]

How can that be,the scriptures say that Jesus was in the nature of God?

In Philippians 2 the contrast is between the nature of God and the nature of a servant. What Jesus let go of was his role or position as the top person and became a servant. As a servant, he placed himself in the position of only knowing what he needed to know as determined by the Father and of doing only what the Father wanted him to do. The human nature was susceptible to fatigue, hunger and thirst. The contrast is not between the nature of God and the nature of man, but between the nature of God and the nature of a servant.

[Koushi Shinigami]

Naw...just til death do you part. Unless you recently went LDS and didn't tell us.

It just FEELS like forever.


I must admit, LDS have found the most effective means to keep me out of their ranks.


Know how I know Jesus was never married? NO wife in the world would have bought the ressurection story. Husband leaves the house with 12 other guys on Thursday night and doesn't come back till Sunday....

"SO! Where have YOU been for the past 3 days, "MR SAVIOUR"???

[smyrna]

I'm not assuming a historicity to claims about Jesus - or any other God-Man.

I'm taking that to mean the Bible.

Nor am I assuming falsehood. I'm attempting to understand the doctrine itself,

Me too.

to flesh out if you will the ramifications of such a teaching.

That is the best part...it is to be saved.

Assuming even your scenario, it does not alter the fundamental problem: that at some point this God-Man has perfect faith and perfect knowledge. How are these compatible? How can these be compatible.

Let's take perfect knowledge; When Jesus was asked by the desciples, 'When would this time be?' Jesus said that he didn't know. Only the Father knew. So in your opinion can Jesus have perfect knowledge? I think I understand your point or question, that if you have perfect knowledge, what is left to have faith in...is that right?

[smyrna]

Crucifixion only lasts a few hours.

The suffering of marriage is eternal.

:)):)):)):))

:silenced:I married a great wife and I am very greatful for her.

[smyrna]

Yes...Dear.

[Koushi Shinigami]

http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo240/koushishinigami/whipped.gif

;)

[Meriweather]

Do you mean the divine vs the human?

Yes, please. What is your take?

[hillplus]

It just FEELS like forever.


I must admit, LDS have found the most effective means to keep me out of their ranks.


Know how I know Jesus was never married? NO wife in the world would have bought the ressurection story. Husband leaves the house with 12 other guys on Thursday night and doesn't come back till Sunday....

"SO! Where have YOU been for the past 3 days, "MR SAVIOUR"???


:)) You are so bad.

[Koushi Shinigami]

Yes, please. What is your take?

I'll have to get back to you. I'm fried after a weekend camping with my Scout troop. Went skiing/snowshoeing.

[Koushi Shinigami]

:)) You are so bad.

:dance: :dance: :dance:

[Meriweather]

I'll have to get back to you. I'm fried after a weekend camping with my Scout troop. Went skiing/snowshoeing.

Did you leave Thursday night and return Sunday? ;)

Seriously, I hope you had a good time. I can wait.

[HokieCougarVandal]

Do you think that Jesus possessed human sexuality? If so, did he ever act on it? If not, how could he be considered fully human?Jesus was without sin. Jesus was never married. We are left to draw our own conclusions.Without sin =/= Never married.

Christ still could have been without sin if He was married.That would be true, but your equation was not, I don't believe, what smyrna was saying. The premise was that Jesus was never married. Using that premise, Never married + sinless = never had sex.
In smyyrna's reply to Marleysdaddy, they (IMO) state 2 things:
(1) Jesus was without sin, and
(2) Jesus was never married
and then says we are to draw our own conclusions. I simply drew mine. IMO, Christ could have still remained sinless even if He was married. Remaining sinless would not have prevented Him from marriage, and in turn, being married would not have removed the sinless label from Him.

I will agree with your statement that using a premise of Jesus was never married, Never married + sinless = never had sex. But my point was that taken into account that the possibility does exist that He may have married, this in no way negates the sinless state of our Lord.

[terri910]

In smyyrna's reply to Marleysdaddy, they (IMO) state 2 things:
(1) Jesus was without sin, and
(2) Jesus was never married
and then says we are to draw our own conclusions. I simply drew mine. IMO, Christ could have still remained sinless even if He was married. Remaining sinless would not have prevented Him from marriage, and in turn, being married would not have removed the sinless label from Him.

I will agree with your statement that using a premise of Jesus was never married, Never married + sinless = never had sex. But my point was that taken into account that the possibility does exist that He may have married, this in no way negates the sinless state of our Lord.
Just trying to clarify what I believed smyrna was saying. And I think I was correct in that, considering smyrna's post to me.

[HokieCougarVandal]

The question being answered was whether or not Jesus had sex.
So to be sinless, Christ couldn't be married because sex is part of the marriage relationship? Really.

[terri910]

So to be sinless, Christ couldn't be married because sex is part of the marriage relationship? Really.
Once again, reasoning the other way around, I think, using a particular premise.

[HokieCougarVandal]

Once again, reasoning the other way around, I think, using a particular premise.
Once again, I understand that.

If Jesus never married + remained sinless = no sex in His lifetime.

If is the biggest two-letter word in the dictionary. If assumes a particular variable that may or may not be correct. Add to that, that the absence of something mentioned does not always prove the absence of the thing/event. There is alot of detailed information missing/excluded from the Bible about the Savior's life from His birth to His ministry save for the event in the temple around 12 years of age. Because of the lack of this information, do we assume He immediately turned twelve shortly after birth, and then turned 30 once He returned home from the temple? Hardly.

All I'm pointing out is that simply because the information is not there (unrecorded, unneeded, etc.) does not infer it never happened.

So, once again, we are left with two possibilities of Jesus human sexuality:
(1) If Jesus never married + remained sinless = no sex in His lifetime.
(2) If Jesus married + remained sinless = sex in marriage OK.

I'm content with either scenario. I honestly don't know why some folks get up in arms about the marriage possibility. It would not affect His divinity one way or another, and would not shake my faith in Him the least.

[terri910]

Once again, I understand that.
Since your post didn't use the word "IF" but asked a question of smyrna, it came across as if you were misunderstanding his reasoning. To make sure I'm clear, you understand what smyrna was saying, but want to make some sort of point by asking if he meant something else?

I honestly don't know why some folks get up in arms about the marriage possibility.Many people are unnerved by others suggesting what they believe (some would say "know") to be the truth, to be false. It happens all the time.

[Koushi Shinigami]

So to be sinless, Christ couldn't be married because sex is part of the marriage relationship? Really.

Doesn't the extension of that logic indicate that sex within the confines of a marriage commitment is sinful? Sad. Very, very sad.

[HokieCougarVandal]

Since your post didn't use the word "IF" but asked a question of smyrna, it came across as if you were misunderstanding his reasoning. To make sure I'm clear, you understand what smyrna was saying, but want to make some sort of point by asking if he meant something else?
Partly. Yes, I do understand what smyrna was saying. I also wanted him to understand that while I may not hold his view entirely, I recognize the possibility of truth pertaining to his view. I once held smyrna's view that Jesus was never married. But as I have grown older, I recognized the possibility that He still could have been married while remaining sinless. I accept either scenario as consistent with His teachings.

Many people are unnerved by others suggesting what they believe (some would say "know") to be the truth, to be false. It happens all the time.
Yep.

[HokieCougarVandal]

Doesn't the extension of that logic indicate that sex within the confines of a marriage commitment is sinful? Sad. Very, very sad.
Yep

[Chuangtzu]

I guess for some "flesh" means "sex."

:mrgreen:

Interesting turn.

[terri910]

As we can see, perpetuating the "misunderstanding" and not acknowledging the clarification of smyrna's point -- in order to make one of one's own -- has resulted in more people misunderstanding it and taking it the wrong way.

I do not believe for a moment that smyrna believes that sex within the confines of marriage is sinful.

[terri910]

Partly. Yes, I do understand what smyrna was saying. I also wanted him to understand that while I may not hold his view entirely, I recognize the possibility of truth pertaining to his view. I once held smyrna's view that Jesus was never married. But as I have grown older, I recognized the possibility that He still could have been married while remaining sinless. I accept either scenario as consistent with His teachings.
Seems to me it would be much more straightforward to simply say that, rather than help to perpetuate the misunderstanding of smyrna's admittedly (sorry, smyrna) confusingly-worded post.

Are you a man or a woman, Hokie? (Sorry, I don't always remember) Because we were just talking in the Gathering Place thread about women not being as straightforward as men! *LOL*

[HokieCougarVandal]

Seems to me it would be much more straightforward to simply say that, rather than help to perpetuate the misunderstanding of smyrna's admittedly (sorry, smyrna) confusingly-worded post.

Are you a man or a woman, Hokie? (Sorry, I don't always remember) Because we were just talking in the Gathering Place thread about women not being as straightforward as men! *LOL*
I'm a man, terri. And my apologies for any confusion I have brought (or may bring in the future 'cuz I'm fairly certain it'll happen again!).
:hug:

[smyrna]

So to be sinless, Christ couldn't be married because sex is part of the marriage relationship? Really.

Christ could have been married, had sex and remained sinless...agreed. An event this important would be expected to be mentioned in the Bible. It wasn't mentioned so it is logical to presume Christ was never married, never had sex and remained sinless.

[Seeker]

Do fully human, fully divine god figures experience the full panoply of human emotions?
Do fully human, fully divine God figure experience embarrassment? Shame? Guilt?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience attraction to members of the opposite gender? The same gender?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience other forms of excitement or arousal? Emotional ecstasy? Erotic ecstasy?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience anticipation? Trepidation? Worry?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures wish to avoid death?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures conform to the Standard Model of God?


It isn't possible to be both fully human and fully God. Christ was neither of these. He was part human and part god, having a divine father and human mother.

[Ron Jon]

It isn't possible to be both fully human and fully God. Christ was neither of these. He was part human and part god, having a divine father and human mother.So, like Greek mythology, you believe Jesus was a demi-god? :think:

[Ron Jon]

Do fully human, fully divine god figures experience the full panoply of human emotions?I don't believe so. I believe Jesus of Nazareth was fully human and fully divine. So, from my study of the Bible, I can find no evidence that He experienced shame. I suppose "shame" is an emotion one experiences when they feel they have done something wrong. If Jesus didn't feel He had done anything wrong, then naturally He would not experience this emotion.
Do fully human, fully divine God figure experience embarrassment? Shame? Guilt?See previous answer. How can I feel guilt or shame if I have never done anything wrong?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience attraction to members of the opposite gender? The same gender?The Bible says Jesus was tempted just as we are, yet without committing sin. So, while it is possible He may have experienced sexual attraction, if He did not act on (or dwell on) that feeling, He would not have sinned.
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience other forms of excitement or arousal? Emotional ecstasy? Erotic ecstasy?Again, since Jesus taught that it was a sin to even look upon a woman in lust, then it would seem highly hypocritical for Him not to practice what He preached.
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience anticipation? Trepidation? Worry?I suppose that would depend on your definition of "worry". Worry and trepidation insinuate "not knowing". Jesus knew full well what would happen, so I don't think He had to "worry". Not worrying, doesn't mean the person cannot experience anguish or sorrow. Sometimes knowing what will happen is worse than not knowing.
Do fully human, fully divine God figures wish to avoid death?No. But that doesn't mean He didn't want to avoid the process He had to go through in order to complete the task.
Do fully human, fully divine God figures conform to the Standard Model of God?And what "Standard Model" would that be?

[RayMan]

So, like Greek mythology, you believe Jesus was a demi-god? :think:

It may be time to call the Trinity thread boys over. :whistle:

[terri910]

I'm a man, terri. :hug:
Cool -- evidence that it isn't just us wimmins not being straightforward! :))

:hug:

[terri910]

It isn't possible to be both fully human and fully God.
Some of us believe that with God, nothing is impossible.

[Ron Jon]

Some of us believe that with God, nothing is impossible.Well, some things are. I think it's impossible for God to sin or be unholy.

[terri910]

Well, some things are. I think it's impossible for God to sin or be unholy.
I vaguely remember the answer to that. Has to do with His nature, I think. I don't remember...*LOL* But, yes, I agree with you that God does not, will not, or cannot sin (I don't know which of those would be the most correct to say) and is not unholy.

But I definitely believe He can pull off 100% man and 100% God.

Just as I believe He can pull off the mystery of the Holy Trinity!

[Ron Jon]

I vaguely remember the answer to that. Has to do with His nature, I think. I don't remember...*LOL* But, yes, I agree with you that God does not, will not, or cannot sin (I don't know which of those would be the most correct to say) and is not unholy.

But I definitely believe He can pull off 100% man and 100% God.

Just as I believe He can pull off the mystery of the Holy Trinity!+1 :clap:

[Seeker]

So, like Greek mythology, you believe Jesus was a demi-god? :think:


No, I don't believe Jesus was a demi-god. I think that, physically, Jesus was not much different from us, except that He was not subject to death. In other words, he would still be alive today if He had not been killed. That, and a higher IQ were inherited from His immortal Father.

The ability to feel pain, sorrow and joy came from Mary, His mortal mother.

[barre53]

So, once again, we are left with two possibilities of Jesus human sexuality:
(1) If Jesus never married + remained sinless = no sex in His lifetime.
(2) If Jesus married + remained sinless = sex in marriage OK.

I'm content with either scenario. I honestly don't know why some folks get up in arms about the marriage possibility. It would not affect His divinity one way or another, and would not shake my faith in Him the least.

The reason some of us get up in arms about the marriage possibility has nothing to do with whether or not Jesus is sinless. It's just that the Biblical record gives no credence to contentions that he was married. A person has to read into the text, and even if they do, there is not text to read even the suggestion of marriage. After his death, he would have provided for a wife as he did for his mother. She would have been venerated as well. But neither happened.

[optrader]

Do fully human, fully divine god figures experience the full panoply of human emotions?
Do fully human, fully divine God figure experience embarrassment? Shame? Guilt?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience attraction to members of the opposite gender? The same gender?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience other forms of excitement or arousal? Emotional ecstasy? Erotic ecstasy?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures experience anticipation? Trepidation? Worry?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures wish to avoid death?
Do fully human, fully divine God figures conform to the Standard Model of God?



The only way Jesus' mission could have succeeded is if He were in every way human. Most of the specific points you ask about are answered in scripture. The question of Jesus' sexual desire is not. We can make some educated assertions though, by what is revealed about His character.

Many have speculated about His relationship with Mary Magdalen, there is even the case made that they were secretely married. I reject the notion they were married because marriage would have distracted him from His mission. I also believe He would not have gotten married because he knew he was going to die. He could have loved her, as men love women, but we know that He never had a sexual relationship beacause this would have been adultry. We can also know He was not homosexual because this too is against scripture.

Bear in mind that temptation, be it sexual or other, is not a sin. we know Jesus was tempted in other ways so sexual temptation can't be ruled out.

Jesus did wish to avoid death, He asked His father to take this cup from me." However, as he did His fathers will in all things, we can know He "conformed to the standard model of God."

I can't speak about other "fully human, fully divine God figures" because there has been only one that I know about.

[HokieCougarVandal]

The reason some of us get up in arms about the marriage possibility has nothing to do with whether or not Jesus is sinless. It's just that the Biblical record gives no credence to contentions that he was married. A person has to read into the text, and even if they do, there is not text to read even the suggestion of marriage. After his death, he would have provided for a wife as he did for his mother. She would have been venerated as well. But neither happened.

How did Jesus get to every event?

Did Jesus ever "use the outhouse?"

How often was Jesus awake? How long did He usually sleep?

Did Jesus sleep on a bed? straw? bare ground?

The absence of records does not always equate with the absence of events. I'm not saying that it did happen, but to assume solely that it did not happen simply because there is no record is intellectually dishonest.

And, as I stated in my earlier post, it doesn't affect my faith one way or the other whether or not He was married. He was sinless. He did what He needed to do in order to provide a means of salvation (the Atonement) for me. If He did marry, it was for Him ... not me.

[optrader]

[QUOTE=Ron Jon;50100611]I don't believe so. I believe Jesus of Nazareth was fully human and fully divine. So, from my study of the Bible, I can find no evidence that He experienced shame. I suppose "shame" is an emotion one experiences when they feel they have done something wrong. If Jesus didn't feel He had done anything wrong, then naturally He would not experience this emotion.
How can I feel guilt or shame if I have never done anything wrong?

Couldn't He have felt shame over the actions of others?


Again, since Jesus taught that it was a sin to even look upon a woman in lust, then it would seem highly hypocritical for Him not to practice what He preached.


Lust is much more than simply looking at a woman with admiration, or entertaining thoughts. God did create us as sexual beings. If you want a good example of what lust is, consider the actions of David...

[Greyclouds]

1) We don't know that she didn't
2) If my wife were to be executed, I don't think I would attend.

That doesn't mean he wasn't married.

Really? Where? If so, that's a bit ridiculous, considering the whole "become one flesh" thing...I mean, didn't god create marriage? Isn't it the foundation of modern society?

Paul does advocate complete abstinence for believers; primarily because of the fact that the kingdom of God is nigh.

Mark 13:17 But woe to them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! (referring to women who will be present at the "end-times" OR the Roman sacking of Judea, depending on how you translate Jesus' prophecies about the fate of Jerusalem)

So, under the Early Christian theologian interpretation, Jewish women who were pregnant or who had infants would suffer during the Roman Revolt. In the new age Christian interpretation, any pregnant woman/ woman with child will suffer greatly when the end-times comes.


1 Corinthians 7:7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.
7:8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I.
7:9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
7:10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:

1 Corinthians 7:27 Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife.
7:28 But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you.
7:29 But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none;

So, if you want to be as good of a Christian as Paul is, don't have sex and don't seek a wife. If you feel lu****l for sex, its better to marry than to commit a sin, but clearly the best choice is complete and utter abstinence EVEN IN marriage.


HOWEVER, it all depends on your interpretation of when the second coming of Christ will be or has been! If you believe it is going to be in the not so distant future... well...

[barre53]

How did Jesus get to every event?

Did Jesus ever "use the outhouse?"

How often was Jesus awake? How long did He usually sleep?

Did Jesus sleep on a bed? straw? bare ground?

The absence of records does not always equate with the absence of events. I'm not saying that it did happen, but to assume solely that it did not happen simply because there is no record is intellectually dishonest.

And, as I stated in my earlier post, it doesn't affect my faith one way or the other whether or not He was married. He was sinless. He did what He needed to do in order to provide a means of salvation (the Atonement) for me. If He did marry, it was for Him ... not me.

I agree with your contention that "the absence of records does not always equate with the absence of events." I also agree that his marriage, if it took place, would do anything to destroy my faith. There is nothing sinful about marriage between a man and a woman within the Biblical parameters.
But if he had a wife or children, it would be safe to assume that they would be mentioned either during his life, at his death, or in the further history given in the book of Acts. There is a huge difference between the absence of the mention of an outhouse or the length of his naps and the silence surrounding a wife or child.

[HokieCougarVandal]

< snip >

But if he had a wife or children, it would be safe to assume that they would be mentioned either during his life, at his death, or in the further history given in the book of Acts. There is a huge difference between the absence of the mention of an outhouse or the length of his naps and the silence surrounding a wife or child.

Well, since we do not have all the records written during and after His time here on earth, we could also assume that a wife (and possible offspring) were mentioned in those records that are yet to be discovered, kept hidden from the public view, or were simply lost to time/elements. I will agree with you about the importance of an event such as marriage versus the event of sleeping. However, seeing that much of the NT focuses on His divine mission and the apostles communications to the church afterwards, I would expect that much of His personal life was left out so that the author(s) could devote their time to relaying to us the importance of His gospel.

[barre53]

Well, since we do not have all the records written during and after His time here on earth, we could also assume that a wife (and possible offspring) were mentioned in those records that are yet to be discovered, kept hidden from the public view, or were simply lost to time/elements. I will agree with you about the importance of an event such as marriage versus the event of sleeping. However, seeing that much of the NT focuses on His divine mission and the apostles communications to the church afterwards, I would expect that much of His personal life was left out so that the author(s) could devote their time to relaying to us the importance of His gospel.

We are not far apart on this. I do believe that the priority of Jesus was the gospel. But having said that, Marriage was discussed, talked about and even mentioned. Paul said that he had the right to have a wife just like the other apostles. Why not use Jesus as his illustration to really make the point, unless Jesus did not have a wife. Also, Jesus said he had no place to lay his head. No home, no roof over his head. It would have been a sin to have a family and not provide financial support, to give them a roof over their heads, to put food on their tables. My faith would not be destroyed if Jesus was married, but the texts we have give no indication or pointers towards any concept of marriage. And children present a further problem. Would they be human or divine?

[HokieCougarVandal]

We are not far apart on this. I do believe that the priority of Jesus was the gospel. But having said that, Marriage was discussed, talked about and even mentioned. Paul said that he had the right to have a wife just like the other apostles. Why not use Jesus as his illustration to really make the point, unless Jesus did not have a wife. Also, Jesus said he had no place to lay his head. No home, no roof over his head. It would have been a sin to have a family and not provide financial support, to give them a roof over their heads, to put food on their tables. My faith would not be destroyed if Jesus was married, but the texts we have give no indication or pointers towards any concept of marriage. And children present a further problem. Would they be human or divine?
IMO, they would be fully human. The divine (spiritual) nature of the Christ would not have been passed to them. However, their knowledge about the mysteries of God would have had the capacity to surpass the most intellectual apostle on earth.