re trinity correspondence

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

>Jesus IS the image of GOD (not the Father) 2 Cor 4:4 "in whom the god
>of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest
>the light of the glorious gospel of Christ , WHO IS THE IMAGE OF GOD,
>should shine unto them."

Right. Now his FLESH is gone, there is no more flesh at the time Paul wrote
this. Jesus had become a life giving spirit according to Paul. So at the
time Paul wrote this, in what sense is the ascended Son of God in heaven the
"IMAGE"
or reflection of the Father? Remember, Jesus appeared in a different form on
the road to Emmaus, he was not flesh and blood. The author of Hebrews speaks
of "the days of his flesh" in past tense. Jesus is a spirit being STILL in
submission to his superior, the Father (1 Co 15:20-28, Rev 1:1-6, 7). Jesus
went to heaven, where flesh and blood do not inherit the Kingdom of God. His
body was sown flesh, and raised spirit, sown corrupt, and raised incorrupt,
sown mortal, and raised eternal. Yet WIHTOUT FLESH he is STILL the IMAGE of
God. Not actually God himself...?! When he purged all sins, he sat down at
the right hand of the Majesty, his Father, where he was before! John
16:27-29 & Hebrews 1:1-3

Remember, 2 Cor 4:4 was PRESENT TENSE many years AFTER Jesus rose from the dead.

>God and Father do not necessarily imply the SAME thing.  I may
>understand that GOD is the Father (in Creation), but to use this phrase
>to imply that the Son of God (as merely a person in a godhead) is the
>image of another person in this godhead, is NOT the same thing.  Jesus
>was a MAN who was the IMAGE of GOD.  Jesus is the ONLY form of GOD
>anyone will ever see.  Was Jesus three persons?  Of course not.  

On this we are certainly agreed!

>HI>Jesus is the name of the Son of God. He is not "just man" of course not.
>HI>He was filled with the Spirit of God and lived in perfect submission to it.
>HI>Yes he was a manifestation of God.
>
>Correction, Jesus was the manifestation of God in the FLESH (1 Tim
>3:16).  The 'Son of God' does not mean that there is a 'God the Son.'

I never said God the Son. I said the Son was PERSON who was not the same
PERSON as God the Father. It's obvious.

>HI>He was SUCH a manifestation he represented the FULNESS of God in a
>HI>bodily form, a human being.
>
>Wonderfully stated!  But, do you see the truth in this?  Jesus was only
>one person, yet the fullness of the Godhead dwelt in him, bodily!  One
>God, one person.  

One God AND One Person. One God IN One Person. Two people! Per John 8:16-18.

/\/\0sC0/\/\=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-ISO 9001-=-
Michael Joseph Murphy III		Moscom Corporation
tes@moscom.com			        716-383-6000x6599
PBX/KTS Peripherals     		Technical Support

My opinions do not necessarily reflect that of the staff or
management of the Moscom Corporation. And they are grateful.