Was it Jesus that performed those miracles?

[WhiteWings]

Another heritic title  :laughing7:

Jesus has been and is a supreme power uin all area's let me start with saying that.
But was he during His 33 years on earth 2000 years ago. Did He leave is powers behind in Heaven.
Afteral God for example doesn't need sleep, rest, food, water, doesn't die, etc, etc.
Jesus did. He even felt pain of the whips and nails on the cross. I doubt we could hurt God with such things.
Before Jesus died He said something like why have you forsaken me?

My Heretic question is:
"Did Jesus willingly lay down His supreme powers and became as weak as we are for 33 years? But He constantly had massive support from the HS."

PS please do not turn this into another begotten mudsling fight because that's not what this is about!

[martincisneros]

"Did Jesus willingly lay down His supreme powers and became as weak as we are for 33 years? But He constantly had massive support for the HS."

Yes.  That's what the Scriptures teach.  Otherwise, how was God going to be anointed?  Luke 4:18; Acts 10:38.  He functioned as the last prophet of the Old Testament, anointed with the Holy Spirit.  John chapter 2 says that His miracle at the wedding was His first miracle.  So that means that when He was little, He wasn't making the dreidels levitate or miraculously turning the last slice of bread into a meal to feed the whole family when he was ten or eleven.  No miracles until after He was 30.  There were people that died around Him when He was a child that He didn't raise from the dead at that time.  He lived by faith all of the days of His life, though, because it's impossible to please God without faith, according to Hebrews 11:6.  How else do you think that His mother knew to say at the wedding "Whatever He tells you to do, do it!"  He was living on Mark 11:22-26 before He ever shared that with anyone.  So, obviously His mother had seen Him walk things out with the Word of God between the "Amen" and the "there is it!" with praise, thanksgiving, worship, counting it done, etc.

[WhiteWings]

Yes.  That's what the Scriptures teach.  Otherwise, how was God going to be anointed?  Luke 4:18; Acts 10:38.  He functioned as the last prophet of the Old Testament, anointed with the Holy Spirit. 

Then I have the question did the people 2000 years ago really see Jesus.
I don't know how to picture Jesus; but i don't really see Him as a person. Can't even explain taht in my own language so I won't even bother to try in English. Plus He left his superior skills behind in Heaven.
The smart/insightful things He said where 'just' the HS speaking trough His mouth.
So we saw a Jesus as He doesn't look like. We didn't saw His superiority. And his scriptual intelligence was borrowed on te spot from the HS. Not meaning to be disrepectful but couldn't God just have one of the billion other bodies on earth for that purpose? Lets call it a super-prophet born by a 100% human process of conception etc.

It just puzzles me that people say: Behold the Son of God (but He is missing 80% of His being)

John chapter 2 says that His miracle at the wedding was His first miracle.  So that means that when He was little, He wasn't making the dreidels levitate or miraculously turning the last slice of bread into a meal to feed the whole family when he was ten or eleven.  No miracles until after He was 30.

Depends on what you call miracles I think.
IIRC Jesus was debating a group of Rabbies (sounds like that dog decease..) at the age of 12. And he was making fools of them.
Isn't it a small miracle a young child, that probably had little education (poor simple parents) completely blows away those old men in a debate on a subject they studied their whole life?

[Paul Hazelwood]

Hi white wings,

I want to respond more indepth about this, but this is all I have time for right now.

The term willing(ly), voluntary, etc from mans perspective is something that only has value if man of his own power makes a decision and is from his own "self".

In terms of interacting with each other, I do believe there is merit to that way of thinking.

From a biblical point of view that is an incorrect way to look at it,  but I will respond more later.   It has to do with the manner in which our will exists and how Gods will directs our feet.  ;)

[martincisneros]

God could raise up a prophet from anywhere, that's true.  But nobody else would have been pure enough to have been the atonement.  And as far as His mental abilities, you have to remember that He was never tained by sin.  Therefore, death wasn't at work in Him until the Garden of Gethsemane when He was taking upon Himself the sin of the whole world.  So, without death at work in Him in the way that it was at work in others, He was at 100% mental capacity, productivity, activity, etc., which probably means a photographic memory, never forgetting anything, etc.  The book of Isaiah, I'm thinking Isaiah chapter 50 but don't hold me to that.  But I'm sure it's in Isaiah, where it talks about His daily prayer and meditation time in the Scriptures.  Okay, I've found my Bible.  The Isaiah 50 reference isn't the passage I was thinking about, but verses 4 and 5 are a part of what I'm talking about.  It's getting really dark where I'm at with rain storms, so I'm not sure how much longer I can be online.  If His memory was perfect, because He was perfect humanity without any taint from sin, and there was no genetic defects and none of the pollutions from the last 250 years of so-called "Industrial Revolution," then He'd only need to be able to get His hands on the Scriptures occasionally and then just spend His time thinking about what He read.  He's not the only prodigy that there's been like that.  The minister that probably changed my life more than anyone else with one exception is a man by the name of Elhanan Winchester
http://www25.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/elhananwinchester.html
and he had one of those super memories as well that could remember anything, didn't forget very much, and that learned very easily and was another marvelous tool in the hands of the Holy Spirit.  I'm bringing him up as an example that it happens even with "regular DNA" that people can be that smart and that it's not something so "out there" that we can't relate to Jesus Christ where that's concerned.  Plus, with diligent, diligent meditation in the Scriptures our own memories can improve, our own thinking can become very very advanced, etc.  And Jesus' parents weren't poor thanks to the wise men that came from the East.  When people were complaining about Jesus' claims they would say "Isn't this THE carpenter's son?"  Evidently, they were doing very well.  And Jews aren't normally known for very much poverty.  It happens, but not with real regularity because of THE blessing on their lives.  The Holy Spirit empowered Jesus.  That's for sure.  There's no mistaking that.  And the Holy Spirit gave Jesus the Words to speak to the crowds.  But His Scriptural knowledge was His own.  I personally blew my teachers away when I was 10 or 11 years old.  Coming at a teacher with a fresh insight isn't all of that hard 'cause teachers, if they're not careful, become rigid about their interpretations and how things are supposed to be done with their formulas.  Just show them how to do in 3 steps what they teach in a class requires 11 steps and show them that it can consistently be done, then you've got their undivided attention.  And I'm nowhere near in the category of either Elhanan Winchester or Jesus Christ when it comes to intellect.  The Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, etc., of Jesus' day didn't hoard the Scriptures as badly as the Roman Catholic Church later did for centuries.  Jesus could probably read all He wanted and it was within Joseph's means to have bought a copy of the Scriptures.  And on your thought about "Son of God minus 80%," a simple illustration is that Batman is Bruce Wayne.  Bruce Wayne is a billionaire.  But when he's Batman he's not a billionaire.  But at the same time he is, although he's not able to act like one, unless you're wanting to get really really really technical about the Batmobile not being what you'd buy at a used car lot.  That's a bit of an oversimplification, but you can fill an office, or wear a hat, or assume a duty that doesn't allow you to fully be in one context what you'd be in another context, in another place, etc., but you'd still be you.  A husband is not the same thing as being a child, a writer, a body builder, etc., but in different contexts a husband can be all of those things.  Philippians 2 simply says that Jesus disrobed Himself from all of His divinity and became a mere man, although in Person He was also the Son of God.  If someone that can do absolutely anything -- anything whatsoever, within the bounds of the character that they've already established for themselves, etc., and they decide to limit themselves for a few decades in order to acheive a certain end, then obviously they'd still be able to do it, and they wouldn't cease to be who they are during the season that they'd partially tied their own hands.  The old Christopher Reeves movie, Superman2, shows us a Superman willing to lay it all down for the woman that he loves.  So, he gives up his great powers and becomes like any other mortal.  During that time period, before he realizes that he has to go back and be Superman because of General Zod and his gang, he's still a Kryptonian although during that time period a knife would have cut him just the same as it would have cut anybody else.  Jesus Christ basically did something similar when it came to reclaiming the Creation from it's fall.  And after He was raised from the dead, He was still a human being, plus everything that He ever was previous to being a human being.  That old, Superman2 movie probably isn't the only movie full of illustrations along these lines.  You've probably just not fully thought this subject through, like most of us haven't 'cause there's so much to put together from the Scriptures about the real Superman, Jesus Christ.

[WhiteWings]

The minister that probably changed my life more than anyone else with one exception is a man by the name of Elhanan Winchester
http://www25.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/elhananwinchester.html

Looks like he had a real sad life...

Also in 1769 he married Alice Rogers (at first secretly, it has been said, and without legal ceremony). Alice, the first of his five wives, died in 1776. In 1776 he married Sarah Peck (d.1777), in 1778 Sarah Luke (d.1779), in 1781 Mary Morgan (d.1783), and in 1784 or 1785 Maria Knowles. All but one of the children of these marriages were stillborn; the other did not live to age two.

[martincisneros]

Mortality rates were pretty high back then.  Much of it was likely more a matter of hygiene than anything related to goofy immunizations.  I'm not sure if anyone [back then] bathed and washed their hands with anything approximating the regularity that most of us wouldn't hesitate to these days.  You'd like to think that most of them probably washed their hands at least before they ate, but other than that, by today's standards, they were probably pretty nasty for much of the day and night.  That's one of the things that God introduced with the Mosaic law, but knowledge was so little back then that they probably thought it was a matter of pleasing Him rather than proper disposal of human waste and proper hand washing for their sake, to avoid dying of disgusting things! :laughing7: :eeew: :offtopic: :omg: :help: :thumbdown: :laughing7:

And a couple hundred years from now, as knowledge continues to increase, they'll probably look upon our hygiene as favorably :thumbdown:  We're good at washing our hands and bathing, but food handling and probably one or two other things are going to come up to higher standards as we learn more about how/what causes diseases.

[Pierac]

I think I will pass on this one for the forums sake!

WhiteWing, P.M. me if you really want my view!  :HeartThrob:

Paul

[AJ]

.
Whitewings,  You asked:
Was it Jesus that performed those miracles?

The following verses seem to indicate that its our heavenly Father(God) doing the works of miracles through Jesus (the son of man).
Also the words that Jesus spoke were not his either.



John 4:34 -
"My food," said Jesus, "is to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work.


John 5:17 - 
Jesus said to them, "My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I, too, am working."


John 5:36 -
"I have testimony weightier than that of John. For the very work that the Father has given me to finish, and which I am doing, testifies that the Father has sent me.


John 14:10 -
Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.


.

[WhiteWings]

To be honest with you; the first 3 verses are just telling Jesus was here with a mission and he worked hard on it.
So not really an answer to my question.
That said the last verse you quoted seems to be more on target....

"words I say to you are not just my own."
I still don't see that as someone working inside of Jesus.
It can just aswell mean that in Heaven Father said to Son what He wants to be thaught on earth.
Jesus just repeats the words Father said to Him.
Or even simpler: Jesus thaught a lot from the OT. And that are the words of Father.

"it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work."
This can indeed mean Father is doing the hard work and Jesus is just vessel.
(I must admit that feels a bit degrading toward Jesus)
But it also can simply mean that Jesus is so 100% convinced of Fathers plan that He acts 100% on that plan.

So... not conviced of anything here...  :sigh:

[rosered]

My Heretic question is:
"Did Jesus willingly lay down His supreme powers and became as weak as we are for 33 years? But He constantly had massive support from the HS."

PS please do not turn this into another begotten mudsling fight because that's not what this is about!

  Hi WW  ol matey ,   I believe Jesus Christ  come in a physical body / human in nature for a short time ..
but is Not ALL of  what he is ..  He is all things 
so the point being  to me was to fulfill all this prophecy to the T [CROSS]

  the main thing   Done to me was become  Lord [master ] of the living and dead   both world / ages  etc..   filling the chasm [ gulf fixed ] 
that was the main thing to me 
I probably did not answer you well did I ? no fights lol....

  and He did become one of us,a living soul , powerless  and totally dependant upon the Fathers will /desire , learning obedience  and suffering  in doing Good .., but yet in His Spirit he knew all things ... :HeartThrob:

[WhiteWings]

"Did Jesus willingly lay down His supreme powers and became as weak as we are for 33 years? But He constantly had massive support for the HS."

Yes.  That's what the Scriptures teach.  Otherwise, how was God going to be anointed? 

"He was created little less than an angel" is verse I remember.
So He might not that weak afterall???

[Pierac]

"Did Jesus willingly lay down His supreme powers and became as weak as we are for 33 years? But He constantly had massive support for the HS."

Yes.  That's what the Scriptures teach.  Otherwise, how was God going to be anointed? 

"He was created little less than an angel" is verse I remember.
So He might not that weak afterall???

I see you are referring to the Kenotic Doctrine.

The Kenotic Doctrine claims that Jesus emptied himself of his deity. Well, you can simply read in the Chalcedon Creed that it defines Jesus' nature as fully God and fully man at all times, without division, without separation. You cannot say that you believe in the Trinity and use this excuse. If you subscribe to the Kenotic Doctrine, then you have already rejected the Trinity.  You cannot be both.

So just what is Philipians 2:5-11 all about?

It is unfortunate that the Old King James version of the Bible translated this verse completely wrong. It reads that Jesus "thought it not robbery to be equal with God" and gives the impression that as the preexistent God, Jesus did not think there was anything wrong in being considered equal with God.

It ought to be clear by now that this is the exact opposite of what is meant. The whole context of the passage is about being humble, putting God's will and glory first, and serving others' interest above one's own interest.  Although he was in "the form of God" Jesus did not reckon his God-given status as something to be exploited.

This meaning contrast well with the conduct of Adam who unfortunately did consider equality with God anything to be grasped at. Adam wanted to be like God as Genesis 3:5 teaches.  Adam tried to grasp at equality with God.  But Jesus would not usurp God's authority for selfish advantage.  He said, "I came to serve" (Matt. 20:28), not to snatch!  At his arrest in the garden, he said, "Do you not think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and He will at once put at my disposal more than 12 legions of angels?" (Matthew 26:53).  As the Messiah, God's appointed King, he had every right to call for divine protection.  He "emptied himself" of all such Messianic privileges.

Therefore, it can be categorically stated that Philippians 2: 5-11 has nothing to do with Jesus Christ being God in a preexistence state. The importance is really very simple and very practical: how are Christians to conduct themselves in this world?  Not by imitating the man Adam who forfeited everything by a grab for power and glory, but by imitating Jesus the Messiah (v.5) who through humility and obedience to God gained it all and more.  After all, if Jesus was already God, then verses 9 to 11 are nonsensical.  There is no "Therefore also God highly exalted him, and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those who are in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth." If he was already God, he had this before his birth!  No. It is clear that God has given him a new position, a new name (authority), and a new rank that he did not previously possess. The Greek is very clear here: dio kai means (as in Luke 1:35) "for this reason precisely."  Why has God exalted Jesus to His right hand?  "Therefore, God has highly exalted him and given him the name above every other name because he is back where he was before as God"?  Not at all!  He is given the status as a reward for the precise reason that he humbled himself and died.  His exalted status is a reward.  If we follow the last Adam's pattern, we too will be exalted by God when Christ returns.  It is evident, then, that "this hymn does not contained what numerous interpreters seek and find in it: an independent statement about preexistence or even a Christology preexistence. 

Peace,
Paul

[martincisneros]

Considering it not robbery to be called equal with Love isn't usurping any authority or identity.  It's the place of believers, according to Ephesians who've been seated at the right hand of God.  The KJV, NKJV, Scarlett's, and the Concordant get it right in Philippians 2:5-6.  Otherwise, where was the stooping on His part, and how can you be filled with Him?  Isaiah says He wouldn't share His glory with another, but we're not another: we're members of His Body, flesh, and bones, per Ephesians 5:30 and John 17.  John 17 says His glory is ours, the glory which He had before the foundation of the world.  As He is, so are we in this world, according to 1John 4:17, because of 1John 2:5-6.