Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | John 6:56 "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | John 6:56 "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood [believes in Me, accepts Me as Savior] remains in Me, and I [in the same way remain] in him. |
Bible Question (short): Conflict between the two natures? |
Question (full): Thank you for a thoughtful response! When I discuss or debate with someone, I am sincerely interested in interacting with them. Too often, those with differing views are unwilling to deal with the questions that others raise, and simply pile on more questions, without ever dealing with the issues that have been raised. We may never agree with one another, but we can share our reasons for our beliefs. The issue of prayer in an important one when it comes to understanding the differences between trinitarinism and modalism. You said, "By definition, God in His omnipotence has no need to pray, and in His oneness has no other to whom He can pray. If the prayers of Jesus prove there are two persons in the Godhead, then one of those persons is subordinate to the other and therefore not fully or truly God." Yet, in the incarnation, wasn't Jesus temporarily subordinate to the Father. In John 14:28, Jesus says that "...the Father is greater than I." Those who reject the Diety of Christ try to use this verse to deny that Jesus was fully God. We both agree that He was and is God. However, trinitarians believe that during the incarnation, Jesus was, as man, subordinate to the Father. Hence, it was legitimate for the Son to pray to the Father, while He was in the flesh. This fact does not deny the Deity of Christ, it only affirms both the fact of the incarnation and the reality of the prayer. Later, you wrote: "The choice is simple. Either Jesus as God prayed to the Father or Jesus as man prayed to the Father. If the former were true, then we have a form of subordinationism or Arianism in which one person in the Godhead is inferior to, not co-equal with, another person in the Godhead. This contradicts the biblical concept of one God, the full deity of Jesus, and the omnipotence of God. If the second alternative is correct, and we believe that it is, then no distinction of persons in the Godhead exists. The only distinction is between humanity and divinity, not between God and God." In your first alternative, I disagree with your definition of Arianism. Affirming that Jesus was subordinate to the Father during the incarnation is not the same as Arianism. Arianism taught that in terms of His essential essence, Christ was subordinate to the Father. Though we disagree, I appreciate a well thought out answer. My biggest problem with your response concerns the battle between the human and Divine wills of Christ. In my understanding of the nature of Christ, He was always fully aware of who He was. He was fully God and fully man. I don't see any evidence in Scripture that there ever was any kind of division or battle between these wills. Therefore, I don't accept that Jesus was praying to the Father, only as a human, not as God. Can you supply any evidence from Scripture that there was such a division between His nature's? I look forward to your reply! God Bless, Tim Moran |