Through HIM all things were made.

[Maxel]

LittleNipper- That helps clear up a lot of confusion on my parrt. Thanks!

[LittleNipper]

Thank you all for you help...

[Traveler]

JESUS CHRIST was that part of the GODHEAD who emptied HIMSELF to take on a humanity. JESUS healed, calmed storms, etc., etc., etc., HE was GOD but had chosen to limit himself and placed HIMSELF in subjection to the FATHER. This HE did to be human while visiting earth...

I am trying to understand why you testify that Jesus (the Son of G-d) is a person. I very much think that notion is anti-Christ and blasphemous.

Some other things in your post that I believe are not scripture nor do I believe at all.

1. That Jesus Christ was ever "empty".

2. That being in subjection to the Father limits anyone.

3. Since humanity is a fallen state of man; Jesus was not ever a fallen human.

The Traveler

[Hemidakota]

John 1:3

So GOD created time, space and matter.

Incorrect statement! But HE is the author of chaos. Chaos has a heritable portion for the Plan of Salvation.

[LittleNipper]

I am trying to understand why you testify that Jesus (the Son of G-d) is a person. I very much think that notion is anti-Christ and blasphemous.

Some other things in your post that I believe are not scripture nor do I believe at all.

1. That Jesus Christ was ever "empty".

2. That being in subjection to the Father limits anyone.

3. Since humanity is a fallen state of man; Jesus was not ever a fallen human.

The Traveler

I suggest you read Philippians Chapter 2. Pay strict attention to verse 7. The King James uses the term "emptied HIMSELF."

[Maxel]

Philippians 2:7 reads:

7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

I don't see the term 'emptied himself' in there, or anywhere else in Philippians chapter 2.

[Dr T]

It's known as kenosis Maxel

[Traveler]

I suggest you read Philippians Chapter 2. Pay strict attention to verse 7. The King James uses the term "emptied HIMSELF."

I disagree with your interpretation. If you read verse 6 we are given to understand (in conjunction with the concept of Jesus giving a ransom, that this scripture is to indicate that Jesus gave his divine possessions (equal to G-d) for a ransom for the sins of mankind. And in so doing became worthy of worship – see verses 9-10. We are to understand that he paid all that he had. You may think of that as emptiness but I see that as fullness.

All of which proves my point that Jesus (the Son of G-d) is not a person nor was he ever a fallen human. He was, is and always will be G-d. No person could do what is described in Philippians 2: 1-11

Please note (verse 11) the importance of confessing that Jesus is “L-RD” and not declaring or confessing him a “Person”. Also note that in verse 11 that those that believe do recognize “G-d the Father” not person the father.

Again I state – Declaring or confessing G-d the Father and G-d the Son (Jesus the Christ our L-rd) as persons is Blasphemous and Anti-Christ.

The Traveler

[Dr T]

Thanks Traveler. I thanked u for this like

He was, is and always will be G-d.

I've been wrestling with the concept of kenosis for some time now. I agree with this quote

[Hemidakota]

Philippians 2:7 reads:

7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

I don't see the term 'emptied himself' in there, or anywhere else in Philippians chapter 2.

Maxel, "κενόω kenóō" means "to empty" or be fully responsive to the will of higher creator [ or GOD]. Meaning of perfect will. Something we need to learn in this life that our will is GOD's will, GOD's will is our will.

OTHERS: GOD was not always GOD.

As discussed in the Adam and Eve thread, it was through revelatory moment for President Snow to learn this doctrine first hand through the prophet Joseph Smith that GOD was once man.

[Maxel]

Maxel, "κενόω kenóō" means "to empty" or be fully responsive to the will of higher creator [ or GOD]. Meaning of perfect will. Something we need to learn in this life that our will is GOD's will, GOD's will is our will.

I am confused... LittleNipper claimed that the King James Version of the bible included the phrase 'emptied himself' in Philippians chapter 2, verse 7. I quoted the KJV rendering of the verse and did not see the phrase. I would love to learn more about the Bible's original wording, but I can only assume "κενόω kenóō" is a Hebrew phrase extant in Philippians 2:7, but rendered in a form other than 'emptied Himself' in the KJV. Would you explain how the phrase fits into Philippians 2:7?

I understand the doctrinal idea; I'm just trying to place the phrase inside the proper place in the scriptures.

[Hemidakota]

It was changed in the New International Version vice the King James.

In gaining a clearer prospective by reading in the D&C 93:12-18

93:12 He received not of the fulness at the first. The apostle Paul wrote concerning the Lord's condescension to mortality: "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation" (Philippians 2:5-7). Here, the English translation of "He made himself of no reputation" is a derivative of the Greek word kenosis, which means "to make empty." Bible scholars render Paul's writings to literally say that Jesus "emptied himself" (Jerusalem Bible and Revised Standard Version), or "laid aside his mighty power and glory" (Living New Testament).

When Jesus was born into mortality, "over His mind had fallen the veil of forgetfulness common to all who are born to earth," wrote Elder James E. Talmage, "by which the remembrance of primeval existence is shut off" (Jesus the Christ, 111). "When Jesus lay in the manger, a helpless infant" further attested President Lorenzo Snow,

"He knew not that He was the Son of God, and that formerly He created the earth. When the edict of Herod was issued, He knew nothing of it; He had not power to save Himself; and His father and mother had to take Him and fly into Egypt to preserve Him from the effects of that edict. Well, He grew up to manhood, and during His progress it was revealed unto Him who He was, and for what purpose He was in the world. The glory and power He possessed before He came into the world was made known unto Him" (Conference Report, April 1901).

Edited February 10, 2009 by Hemidakota

[Hemidakota]

There was an article written by Craig J. Ostler, instructor in Church history at Brigham Young University, called "What is a Mortal Messiah?"

Paul taught the Philippians concerning the divinity and mortality of Christ: "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross" (Philippians 2:5-8).

The Greek verb used by Paul in this passage, rendered "he made himself of no reputation," is a derivative of the word kenosis, meaning "to make empty." Bible scholars translate Paul's writings to say literally that the Christ "emptied himself" (Philippians 2:7; NIV study notes). Other translations interpret Paul's writings to say he "made himself nothing" (NEB Philippians 2:7) or "of his own free will he gave up all he had" (GNNT Philippians 2:7). Referring to Philippians 2:5-8, the scholars who contributed to Dummelow's Commentary on the Holy Bible stated: "We take the sense of the passage to be, that Christ, while divine in His proper nature, did not, when the call came to serve others, hold fast in self-assertion His God-like state, but divested Himself of this by assuming a servant's form . . . and leading an earthly life such as our own."

But what did Christ empty himself of or give up? The Savior answered this question in a revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet: "John saw and bore record of the fulness of my glory . . . saying: I saw his glory, that he was in the beginning, before the world was. . . . And I, John, bear record that I beheld his glory, as the glory of the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth, even the Spirit of truth, which came and dwelt in the flesh, and dwelt among us. And I, John, saw that he received not of the fulness at the first, but received grace for grace; and he received not of the fulness at first, but continued from grace to grace, until he received a fulness; and thus he was called the Son of God, because he received not of the fulness at the first" (D&C 93:6-7, 11-14; emphasis added).

John also recorded the petition of Christ in which he appealed to his Father in prayer, "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was" (John 17:5; emphasis added). Therefore, it was the fulness of glory that Christ had enjoyed in his premortal state of which he emptied himself in being born into mortality.

[LittleNipper]

Philippians 2:7 reads:

7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

I don't see the term 'emptied himself' in there, or anywhere else in Philippians chapter 2.

Philippians 2:7 But emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant... This should help you.

Edited February 10, 2009 by LittleNipper

[Hemidakota]

Maxel is using the current King James version.

[LittleNipper]

I disagree with your interpretation. If you read verse 6 we are given to understand (in conjunction with the concept of Jesus giving a ransom, that this scripture is to indicate that Jesus gave his divine possessions (equal to G-d) for a ransom for the sins of mankind. And in so doing became worthy of worship – see verses 9-10. We are to understand that he paid all that he had. You may think of that as emptiness but I see that as fullness.

All of which proves my point that Jesus (the Son of G-d) is not a person nor was he ever a fallen human. He was, is and always will be G-d. No person could do what is described in Philippians 2: 1-11

Please note (verse 11) the importance of confessing that Jesus is “L-RD” and not declaring or confessing him a “Person”. Also note that in verse 11 that those that believe do recognize “G-d the Father” not person the father.

Again I state – Declaring or confessing G-d the Father and G-d the Son (Jesus the Christ our L-rd) as persons is Blasphemous and Anti-Christ.

The Traveler

Clearly I agree with you when you say that JESUS was not a "fallen" human. I agree with you that JESUS was indeed GOD. I disagree with you when you say that JESUS was not a human. JESUS became the second Adam ---- all man and yet very much also GOD.

[Dymmesdale]

A common way to describe the Trinity is that God exists is three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. this is not to say that God the Father is a person as the word is used commonly today, rather that there are three "personalities", if you will, that are God in unity. I believe that it is far beyond our human ability to conceive of the full nature of a triune God, and the term, "persons" is used in an effort for people to begin to comprehend the Trinity.

Jesus Christ was fully man, but was also fully God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, by whom all things were made. He is one substance with the father, but was sent by him for a time to dwell on the earth, made of flesh and bone, but preserving his divinity.

[LittleNipper]

A common way to describe the Trinity is that God exists is three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. this is not to say that God the Father is a person as the word is used commonly today, rather that there are three "personalities", if you will, that are God in unity. I believe that it is far beyond our human ability to conceive of the full nature of a triune God, and the term, "persons" is used in an effort for people to begin to comprehend the Trinity.

Jesus Christ was fully man, but was also fully God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, by whom all things were made. He is one substance with the father, but was sent by him for a time to dwell on the earth, made of flesh and bone, but preserving his divinity.

Yes, this seems to fit the bill. There are not a few triunes in nature --- past, present, future for example. The egg --- egg shell, egg white, egg yoke ----- still all egg. There is also gas, liquid, and solid. Water is still water...

[FunkyTown]

Yes, this seems to fit the bill. There are not a few triunes in nature --- past, present, future for example. The egg --- egg shell, egg white, egg yoke ----- still all egg. There is also gas, liquid, and solid. Water is still water...

Yes, but the Egg-shell won't walk off from the Egg White and teach marbles how to become eggs. Nor can water exist as a gas, liquid and solid simultaneously. Nor has the future ever split off from the Present, go to the earth and teach clocks how to become time itself.

Placing three similar things together does not a triune make.

[Traveler]

Clearly I agree with you when you say that JESUS was not a "fallen" human. I agree with you that JESUS was indeed GOD. I disagree with you when you say that JESUS was not a human. JESUS became the second Adam ---- all man and yet very much also GOD.

Jesus as a second Adam??? The scriptures tell us Adam as created by G-d had no knowledge of good or evil and was not capable of such knowledge until the fall. I do not accept your notion that Jesus was ignorant and lacked the knowledge of good and evil or the ability to obtain such understanding. Jesus was hardly another Adam type. I beg you to reconsider this notion.

The statement that Jesus was “all man” makes no sense at all – I do not understand. All men as well as all humans are of the world and as such are by nature an enemy of G-d. I do not understand why terminology not suitable for scripture is ever used to declare of Christ. Those that resort to such tactics communicate to me their disrespect and contempt of scripture. Are the scriptures incapable of providing terms suitable to you and your theology to describe your notions of Christ?

The Traveler

[Hemidakota]

Agh...Christ did not PROCESS any previous spirit world knowledge and had to learn it line-upon-line as we did. Though, lucky those individuals who had to ministered to him as a child. :)

[Traveler]

Yes, but the Egg-shell won't walk off from the Egg White and teach marbles how to become eggs. Nor can water exist as a gas, liquid and solid simultaneously. Nor has the future ever split off from the Present, go to the earth and teach clocks how to become time itself.

Placing three similar things together does not a triune make.

There is a significant problem with the Trinity: The Hebrew word that is translated into the English word “one” in all references to G-d is "Ehad" in the ancient Hebrew scripture text. If the singular meaning of ehad is used to define G-d as singular then it is implied that the subject of ehad must have no divisions or distinctive or discernable parts. This is the primary criticism of Jewish scholars that are expert in Hebrew in reference to the Trinity. The use of ehad for singularity also means whole or complete at the micro level and also includes holy. Any separation of the whole would be incomplete and unholy making the persons of the Father, the Son and the “Holy” Ghost all unholy and incomplete unless ehad is interpreted to be plural. The plural of ehad is used then the oneness is in unity of plural similarly contributing individuals. As a husband and wife being one. If this is used then by the structure of the ancient Hebrew, Christianity is without question polytheistic; which is exactly what Jewish experts in ancient Hebrew have argued for 2000 years.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

Agh...Christ did not PROCESS any previous spirit world knowledge and had to learn it line-upon-line as we did. Though, lucky those individuals who had to ministered to him as a child. :)

I am not sure I completly agree with what is being said here. As I understand Jesus was not fallen and therefore had direct access to G-d the Father even as a child. This is not possible for normal or "natural" humans. His learning process included divine instruction experienced by none other. There are differences between Jesus and every other individual born to this earth.

The Traveler

[Dymmesdale]

Yes, this seems to fit the bill. There are not a few triunes in nature --- past, present, future for example. The egg --- egg shell, egg white, egg yoke ----- still all egg. There is also gas, liquid, and solid. Water is still water...

I found a useful illustration on wikipedia...(I know, how original of me)

"God is seen like a person tending an aquarium which represents the entire universe. Too large to fit inside the aquarium, a man can slide his hand inside the aquarium. The fish will see a hand in one place in the water. The man can also put his face into the water, and the fish will see a face in an entirely different place. The fish will think the hand and the face are two entirely different beings, which look nothing like each other. The fish may also become dimly aware that outside the aquarium a larger being tends to their needs, spreading food in the water regularly. Thus intelligent fish would perceive three different beings from their perspective – even though in fact these three manifestations come from one, single being beyond their comprehension."

From the Trinity entry on Wikipedia

[LittleNipper]

There is a significant problem with the Trinity: The Hebrew word that is translated into the English word “one” in all references to G-d is "Ehad" in the ancient Hebrew scripture text. If the singular meaning of ehad is used to define G-d as singular then it is implied that the subject of ehad must have no divisions or distinctive or discernable parts. This is the primary criticism of Jewish scholars that are expert in Hebrew in reference to the Trinity. The use of ehad for singularity also means whole or complete at the micro level and also includes holy. Any separation of the whole would be incomplete and unholy making the persons of the Father, the Son and the “Holy” Ghost all unholy and incomplete unless ehad is interpreted to be plural. The plural of ehad is used then the oneness is in unity of plural similarly contributing individuals. As a husband and wife being one. If this is used then by the structure of the ancient Hebrew, Christianity is without question polytheistic; which is exactly what Jewish experts in ancient Hebrew have argued for 2000 years.

The Traveler

You must already realize that the very same Jewish experts in ancient Hebrew very often do not see JESUS CHRIST as their MESSIAH. So much for human understanding of the DIVINE... Try reading I Corinthians Chapter15 with regards the second Adam.

Edited February 11, 2009 by LittleNipper