Romans 5 (New King James Version)
6. For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. 7. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. 8. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. 10. For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. 11. And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.
I was reading this passage the other day and it struck me as very odd statement if Jesus is no more than God's son, another diety, another person. I like to think of analogies to help my understanding, but I'm not having much success with this one. If we think of a widower with one son, and the widower falling in love with a woman and then giving the life of his only son to demonstrate his love for the woman, we would not be favorably impressed with the widower.
Then consider this statement by Jesus:
John 15:13 (New King James Version)
13. Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one’s life for his friends.
So Jesus is the one who laid down His life for us. Then it is not possible for God to love us more than Jesus. Or even as much, because God has not died for us. Unless Jesus is God, that is.
Romans 5:6-11 and the Trinity
Re: Romans 5:6-11 and the Trinity
Are you saying "unless Jesus is God the Father"? Or are you saying "unless Jesus is part of a compound God, the Trinity, consisting of three divine Persons"?So Jesus is the one who laid down His life for us. Then it is not possible for God to love us more than Jesus. Or even as much, because God has not died for us. Unless Jesus is God, that is.
If the former, then you are a modalist, not a Trinitarian, and believe that when Jesus prayed to the Father, He was talking to Himself.
If the latter, then you are left with the same problem you posed. For the Father didn't die for us, and therefore "it is not possible for the Father to love us more than Jesus... or even as much, because the Father has not died for us. Unless Jesus is the Father, that is."
Paidion
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Re: Romans 5:6-11 and the Trinity
Hello Bro Paidion!
You wrote:
And you wrote:
Perhaps we have defective models to consider. To me, the modalist is clearly a defective model. And the trinitarian view with three persons (individuals?) also is problematic. My tendency is to think of God as three personae manifested simultaneously. An analogy would be the human body. My hand is not my mind. My hand communicates to my brain the shape of objects, warmth or lack thereof, texture, pain, etc., while the brain also communicates to the hand, and the hand can do nothing apart from the brain.
(Before I corrected it I had mistyped modalist as "madalist". Perhaps I should have left it that way.
)
God bless, Homer
You wrote:
Interestingly, you only offered two categories. What if I choose "other"?Are you saying "unless Jesus is God the Father"? Or are you saying "unless Jesus is part of a compound God, the Trinity, consisting of three divine Persons"?
And you wrote:
And do you see any problem with your own view? It would seem to me that if Jesus is not God but is "diety", then you face the same dilemma I brought up.If the latter, then you are left with the same problem you posed.
Perhaps we have defective models to consider. To me, the modalist is clearly a defective model. And the trinitarian view with three persons (individuals?) also is problematic. My tendency is to think of God as three personae manifested simultaneously. An analogy would be the human body. My hand is not my mind. My hand communicates to my brain the shape of objects, warmth or lack thereof, texture, pain, etc., while the brain also communicates to the hand, and the hand can do nothing apart from the brain.
(Before I corrected it I had mistyped modalist as "madalist". Perhaps I should have left it that way.
)God bless, Homer
Re: Romans 5:6-11 and the Trinity
When I say He's "not God", I am saying that He is not the Father, nor is He part of a compound Trinity. But I say that He is the Only Begotten God (John 1:18 in p66 and p75, second century manuscripts). I say He's "Deity" instead of "God" only so as to exclude the confusion of being thought that I am either a Modalist or a Trinitarian.And do you see any problem with your own view? It would seem to me that if Jesus is not God but is "diety", then you face the same dilemma I brought up.
I don't think I do face your dilemma. Since Jesus is Another exactly like the Father, He loves neither more nor less than He.
May the enabling grace of Christ be with you!
Paidion
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Re: Romans 5:6-11 and the Trinity
Hi Paidion,
You Wrote:
God bless, Homer
You Wrote:
But then God (the Father) loved us by giving the life of another who is like Him. How has God demonstrated His love for us if the criteria for the highest possible love, as Jesus said, is to lay down your life for another?I don't think I do face your dilemma. Since Jesus is Another exactly like the Father, He loves neither more nor less than He.
God bless, Homer
Re: Romans 5:6-11 and the Trinity
I fail to see how this does not apply also to the Father in every system of Christology except Modalism in which it is believed that Christ is the same Person as the Father.How has God demonstrated His love for us if the criteria for the highest possible love, as Jesus said, is to lay down your life for another?
For example, in Trinitarianism, if your thesis is correct, the Father has not demonstrated the highest possible love for us since He has not died for us.
As I see it, God's Son, being of the same essence, WAS the Father's life, and the Father gladly gave His Son for us. Thus the Father's love for us was no less than the Son's.
Paidion
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Re: Romans 5:6-11 and the Trinity
Hi, I hope all is well with you!
When dealing with theology that seems unexplainable, I believe we should apply simple obedience to the literal terms in the Bible. For example, since the Bible says there is only one God, we should say there is only one God. (scriptural examples: Is. 11: 7; I Tim 2:5) And since the Bible says Jesus is the Father's Son, (Matt 3:17) we should recognize there is something about Jesus that is "separate" from the Father. However, Jesus also said that "he who has seen Me has also seen the Father" (John 14:9 middle) so I don't think we should speak, think or meditate "separateness" because the Bible shows that Jesus said, "I and the Father are one." (John 10:30)
This is one instance where the scripture 2 Cor 10:5b, "bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ" seems to demand simplicity in child-like faith. So again, since the Bible is accurate and since the LORD wants us to follow the Bible, then we should think and speak the way the Bible states it. Then, we will please the LORD--this being our highest privilage.
I am not implying that you are not thinking or speaking accurately; I'm only interjecting my simple explanation. And I really appreciate reading your posts.
selah*
When dealing with theology that seems unexplainable, I believe we should apply simple obedience to the literal terms in the Bible. For example, since the Bible says there is only one God, we should say there is only one God. (scriptural examples: Is. 11: 7; I Tim 2:5) And since the Bible says Jesus is the Father's Son, (Matt 3:17) we should recognize there is something about Jesus that is "separate" from the Father. However, Jesus also said that "he who has seen Me has also seen the Father" (John 14:9 middle) so I don't think we should speak, think or meditate "separateness" because the Bible shows that Jesus said, "I and the Father are one." (John 10:30)
This is one instance where the scripture 2 Cor 10:5b, "bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ" seems to demand simplicity in child-like faith. So again, since the Bible is accurate and since the LORD wants us to follow the Bible, then we should think and speak the way the Bible states it. Then, we will please the LORD--this being our highest privilage.
I am not implying that you are not thinking or speaking accurately; I'm only interjecting my simple explanation. And I really appreciate reading your posts.
selah*
Jesus said, "I in them and you in Me, that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that you have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me." John 17:23