Jesus Christ has a God that he worships

[onewithhim]

Jesus said that we all must love Jehovah our God and worship only Him. He stated clearly that his Father was the only true God (John 17:3); he didn't say that we are the only true God. In many places in the Scriptures he calls the Father "my God."

"And this is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." (John 17:3, KJV)

"Jesus saith unto her [Mary], Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father, but go to my brethren and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God. (John 20:17, KJV)

"At the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted: My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Mark 15:34, KJV)

"Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall no more go out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is New Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name." (Revelation 3:12, KJV)

I think Jesus wants us to recognize that his Father, Jehovah, is God, and he is God's Son. (John 10:36) What do you make of this?

[The Tanager]

Since say you "still hold to that" definition would you agree then that if something meets the two defining features in a definition , it could be classified that thing?

Yes, in a general sense. But that doesn’t mean you can add sub-categories (i.e., specific senses) that the Hebrews didn’t have.

No doubt about it, but he "became" better, which indicates there was a change which improved him. Further Paul said this Jesus became better by means of inheritance which it was something one receives. That Jesus was given his better name by his Father is confirmed in Eph 1:20 (compare Mat 28:19). An Almighty God cannot be promoted or given more authority by anyone, so we have good reason to conclude that Jesus is a spirit being superior to angels but inferior to the Almighty.

He became better by inheriting a name, not being promoted or given more authority. The verse doesn’t say the Father gave Jesus this name. Ephesians 1:20 doesn’t say that either. It says God raised Christ and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly realms, then (in vv. 21-22) above all others now and forever, giving Him the Church who is His body.

What do you mean by originate?

Something like that it doesn’t stand on its own but is connected to the source.

[JehovahsWitness]

Since say you "still hold to that" definition would you agree then that if something meets the two defining features in a definition , it could be classified that thing?

Yes, in a general sense. ...

So what are the two defining features that you presented that allows us to determines if something can be defined as a "spirit being"?

He became better by inheriting a name...

Fair enough ; And how could he "inherit" something without receiving It? Who did he receive it from ? Notice the following

PHILIPIANS 2: 9

Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name

It seems the that Jesus was exhalted, made higher than previously, and this position was recieved from The Father.An Almighty God cannot be exhalted or recieve more authority from anyone, so we have good reason to conclude that Jesus is a spirit being superior to angels but inferior to the Almighty.



THE LIGHT ORIGINATED

What do you mean by originate?

Something like that it doesn’t stand on its own but is connected to the source.

Interesting. Do you have any reason to believe that is the definition the language experts had in mind when they used the word?

[The Tanager]

So what are the two defining features that you presented that allows us to determines if something can be defined as a "spirit being"?

You know what they are, your problem is in not distinguishing between the general sense and specific senses.

Fair enough ; And how could he "inherit" something without receiving It? Who did he receive it from ? Notice the following.

PHILIPIANS 2: 9

Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name

It seems the that Jesus was exhalted, made higher than previously, and this position was recieved from The Father.An Almighty God cannot be exhalted or recieve more authority from anyone, so we have good reason to conclude that Jesus is a spirit being superior to angels but inferior to the Almighty.

I didn’t say He didn’t receive it. I didn’t say He didn’t receive it from the Father. You said Hebrews 1 and Ephesians 1 said He received it from the Father and I was disagreeing with that.

Now, let’s address the whole of Phil 2:6-11 to get the context correct. Jesus had equality with God, but didn’t hold onto it (6), instead becoming human (7) humbling (the opposite of exalting) Himself to the point of undergoing a human death (8) and because of seeing that through God exalted Him and gave Him the name (9) that all will bow to (10) and confess Jesus as Lord to the glory of the Father (11).

Jesus first humbled Himself from equality with God (6-8) and then was exalted by the Father (9-11).

Interesting. Do you have any reason to believe that is the definition the language experts had in mind when they used the word?

That they used the metaphor of light from the sun. Do you have any reason to believe they had the 2024 Oxford Languages definition in mind when they used the word?

[JehovahsWitness]

You know what they are, your problem is in not distinguishing between the general sense and specific senses

Let's just keep to the two defining features that you presented for now. What are they and what conclusion would normally be drawn from that which meets those defining features. If you think there is something that negates or mitigates that conclusion, we can deal with after you state what the primary conclusion would be. Its best you state it in writing yourself, so there is no misunderstandings.

I didn’t say He didn’t receive it.

So then can de agree Christ recieved not only an exhalted position but the most exhaulted position anyone can receive. And this from His Father? An Almighty God cannot be more Almighty and certainly does not recieve his position from another source nor can he improve (become better) since he is the superlatifs in goodness. Conclusion we have ample reason to believe that a "spirit being " can be of higher rank than an angel but lower than the Almighty.

Jesus first humbled Himself from equality with God (6-8) and then was exalted by the Father (9-11).

So, if I understand you correctly, you are claiming at the time Thomas called the resurrected Christ "his God" Jesus was not equal to Almighty God. Correct?

[The Tanager]

Let's just keep to the two defining features that you presented for now. What are they and what conclusion would normally be drawn from that which meets those defining features. If you think there is something that negates or mitigates that conclusion, we can deal with after you state what the primary conclusion would be. Its best you state it in writing yourself, so there is no misunderstandings.

The primary conclusion depends on the context, including whether it is the general sense or a more specific sense, so it would be foolish to just keep to the two defining features that I presented for just one of those senses without determining that the context was the general sense.

So then can de agree Christ recieved not only an exhalted position but the most exhaulted position anyone can receive. And this from His Father? An Almighty God cannot be more Almighty and certainly does not recieve his position from another source nor can he improve (become better) since he is the superlatifs in goodness. Conclusion we have ample reason to believe that a "spirit being " can be of higher rank than an angel but lower than the Almighty.

No, we cannot agree to all of that. An Almighty God can be exalted in position (Exod 15:2; Psalm 18:46, 46:10, 47:9, 68:4, 99:2, etc.). That doesn’t mean He is more Almighty or improved, but that more people come to realize His greatness. In these passages, God is receiving this exaltation from others.

So, if I understand you correctly, you are claiming at the time Thomas called the resurrected Christ "his God" Jesus was not equal to Almighty God. Correct?

No. According to Phil 2:6-11, Jesus didn’t grasp the equality He had.

[JehovahsWitness]

....
... it would be foolish to just keep to the two defining features that I presented

So may I ask, is the definition you provided of any use whatsoever? If not, why did you post it? If yes, under what circumstances might it be of some use. Please be specific.

... doesn’t mean He is more Almighty or improved...

I was talking about being more Almighty and improved.

So, if I understand you correctly, you are claiming at the time Thomas called the resurrected Christ "his God" Jesus was not equal to Almighty God. Correct?

No. ..

So please explain what point you were trying to make here....

Jesus first humbled Himself from equality with God (6-8) and then was exalted by the Father (9-11)

Are you suggested he was equal with Almighty God at the same time that he " he humbled himself from equality" ?

HEBREWS 2:9 ESV

“But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone”

Do you have any reason to believe they had the 2024 Oxford Languages definition in mind when they used the word?

Are you suggesting that the 2024 meaning if the word is different from that when the authors in question compiled their works ?

• A manual Greek lexicon of the New Testament, Abbott-Smith, George Pub 1922 : ... of light beaming from a luminous body, radiance, effulgence

• The Life and Epistles of St. Paul (2 vols.)William John Conybeare , Pub 1852 .: ... not 'brightness', but emanation, ....

• A grammar of the Greek New Testament in the light of historical research
  by Robertson, A. T., Pub. 1914 " ... effulgence (ray from an original light body) as the Greek fathers hold

[The Tanager]

So may I ask, is the definition you provided of any use whatsoever? If not, why did you post it? If yes, under what circumstances might it be of some use. Please be specific.

It is useful to avoid a mischaracterization that elohim means “gods” in a general sense, when it more accurately means “spiritual beings” in a general sense. You follow the mischaracterization of the general category and then, when talking about specific elohim, create a specific sub-category (lesser god) that the Hebrews didn’t have. For the Hebrews there is a Divine spiritual being, false divine spiritual beings, and angelic spiritual beings.

No, we cannot agree to all of that. An Almighty God can be exalted in position (Exod 15:2; Psalm 18:46, 46:10, 47:9, 68:4, 99:2, etc.). That doesn’t mean He is more Almighty or improved, but that more people come to realize His greatness. In these passages, God is receiving this exaltation from others.

I was talking about being more Almighty and improved.

Yes, and the or bolded above covers both. God being exalted neither means God is more Almighty nor that God is improved.

So please explain what point you were trying to make here....

Jesus first humbled Himself from equality with God (6-8) and then was exalted by the Father (9-11)

Are you suggested he was equal with Almighty God at the same time that he " he humbled himself from equality" ?

Yes, because those are two different referents for “equality”. The Son wasn’t equal in the specific sense that He put on a human nature (which is “being made lower than the angels”), while the Father did not have a human nature. That’s the inequality. They were both God, however; that’s what is equal.

Are you suggesting that the 2024 meaning if the word is different from that when the authors in question compiled their works ?

No, to be clearer, I should have asked if you had any reason to believe they had your understanding of the 2024 Oxford Languages definition in mind when they used the word. You think “have a specific beginning” and “create or initiate (something)” contradicts something “being connected to a source.” I think light rays do have a specific beginning and are created by the sun, but they are also connected to that source in a way that they aren’t separate, distinct things.

[JehovahsWitness]

So may I ask, is the definition you provided of any use whatsoever? If not, why did you post it? If yes, under what circumstances might it be of some use. Please be specific.

It is useful to avoid a mischaracterization ...

Agreed. So de will classify spirit being as such If it meets the two criteria you proposed .

I was talking about being more Almighty and improved.

Yes, ...

Indeed , so Jesus must have been lower than the Almighty to be exhalted ( in terms of a higher position ) and better (in terms of improved) .

Jesus first humbled Himself from equality with God (6-8) and then was exalted by the Father (9-11)

Are you suggested he was equal with Almighty God at the same time that he " he humbled himself from equality" ?

Yes ...

That contradicts scripture, which state he became lower than the angels. If Jesus was Almighty God in human form he would certainly be superior to any angel.

.

Are you suggesting that the 2024 meaning if the word is different from that when the authors in question compiled their works ?

No, to be clearer, I should have asked if you had any reason to believe they had your understanding ...

Let's not deal with my understanding (and lets not discuss uninspired metaphor (like the sun - open to interpretation) , let's just deal with the words they wrote that can be defined in clear unequivocal terms. If you are not contesting the meaning of the words written have changed since these scholars used them, we have the following two key words ....

EFFULGENCE
ray from an original light body - Thomas Robertson's Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research pub 1914

EMANATION

1.something which originates or issues from a source

• Abbott-Smith: ... of light beaming from a luminous body, radiance, effulgence

• Conybeare: ... not 'brightness', but emanation, as of light from the sun.

• Robertson: " ... effulgence (ray from an original light body) as the Greek fathers hold

Both mean that which originate, so de need to find a deffinition for "originate" ...



If we accept the dictionary definition , then they are saying this light began or started at a source*

SOURCE noun
1. a place, person, or thing from which something originates or can be obtained

[The Tanager]

Agreed. So de will classify spirit being as such If it meets the two criteria you proposed.

Yes, in its general sense. But why, when talking about Jesus, a specific elohim, do you think of elohim in its general sense and, therefore, create a new specific sense ("lesser true god that is higher than the angels") that the Hebrews didn’t have?

Indeed , so Jesus must have been lower than the Almighty to be exhalted ( in terms of a higher position ) and better (in terms of improved) .

He was lower in the specific sense of taking on a human nature.

Yes …

That contradicts scripture, which state he became lower than the angels. If Jesus was Almighty God in human form he would certainly be superior to any angel.

What you cut out was my explanation of why it doesn’t contradict scripture. He is said to be lower in the sense of taking on a human nature, not, therefore, becoming inferior in every way.

Let's not deal with my understanding (and lets not discuss uninspired metaphor (like the sun - open to interpretation) , let's just deal with the words they wrote that can be defined in clear unequivocal terms. If you are not contesting the meaning of the words written have changed since these scholars used them, we have the following two key words ....

You are sharing your understanding, so I’ve got to discuss it. And, even in discussing the inspired words of God, we have to look at what those words meant in the language they were written. And to understand what those words mean, we English speakers often have to talk about metaphors because that is what the experts use to get the nuanced meanings across from the original language to ours.

If we accept the dictionary definition , then they are saying this light began or started at a source*

If we accept the Greek experts, then some are saying this beginning/starting is like how light begins/starts at the sun. And that does not mean the light is a distinct, separate thing from the sun.

[onewithhim]

So what are the two defining features that you presented that allows us to determines if something can be defined as a "spirit being"?

You know what they are, your problem is in not distinguishing between the general sense and specific senses.

Fair enough ; And how could he "inherit" something without receiving It? Who did he receive it from ? Notice the following.

PHILIPIANS 2: 9

Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name

It seems the that Jesus was exhalted, made higher than previously, and this position was recieved from The Father.An Almighty God cannot be exhalted or recieve more authority from anyone, so we have good reason to conclude that Jesus is a spirit being superior to angels but inferior to the Almighty.

I didn’t say He didn’t receive it. I didn’t say He didn’t receive it from the Father. You said Hebrews 1 and Ephesians 1 said He received it from the Father and I was disagreeing with that.

Now, let’s address the whole of Phil 2:6-11 to get the context correct. Jesus had equality with God, but didn’t hold onto it

The scripture doesn't say that Jesus had equality with God. Nowhere else in the Scriptures does it say that either. Philippians 2:6 is rendered like the following in other translations:

"Who, although he existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped." (NASB)

"Who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped." (NAB)

"Although he was like God in nature, he never even considered seizing the chance to be equal with God." (21st Century New Testament)

"Who, existing in the form of God, counted NOT the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped." (ASV)

"Though he was divine by nature, he did not set store upon equality with God." (Moffatt)

You get the idea. Jesus didn't even consider grasping equality with God, and we have discussed the fact that "grasp" means to seize something that one did not already have.