ECT Omnipresence of Jesus

[Jason0047]

That is only your opinion. That passage in John 1 it is far, way far to demostrate the omnipresence of Jesus. The amuzement of Nathanael does not mean a thing in order to demostrate such omnipresence.

Do you believe God (in general) is Omnipresent?

 

[Jason0047]

That is only your opinion. That passage in John 1 it is far, way far to demostrate the omnipresence of Jesus. The amuzement of Nathanael does not mean a thing in order to demostrate such omnipresence.

Nathanael did not ask Jesus if He was hiding behind a bush watching him. Nathanael claimed that He was the Son of God as to how He was able to see him.

 

[Jason0047]

There is a falacy that says: if God is omniscient and Jesus is God, them Jesus is omniscient. The same falacy backward: If Jesus is not omniscient, then Jesus is not God, since God is omnisciense.

Conecting the omniscience with being God is a wrong thinking, a falacy. The fact of Jesus being or not being omniscient has no conection with the fact of Jesus being God.

Do you know of any verse stating that Jesus is omniscient?

Does a person's ability in having 20/20 vision forever lost if they put on a blind fold? No. That person would have to stab their eyes out in order for that to happen. But seeing they can remove the blindfold, they would then put their 20/20 vision into practice. The 20/20 was never gone. It was always there. Even when they had the blindfold on. So if Jesus is God (And He is), then He has the attributes of God even if He chooses to suppress those abilities or attributes so as to rely upon the Father. For Jesus willingly chose to hold back His divine privileges. But that does not mean that His divine attributes were gone or erased while He suppressed them. In other words, Jesus is still Omniscient (All knowing), even if He chooses not to use that particular divine attribute or not. For He could choose to exercise that attribute if so desired. It is not lost to Him forever. For surely Jesus is Omniscient now, right? Was Jesus Omniscient before He came down before His earthly ministry? Does God change? Or did He merely withhold an attribute or ability that is a part of His natural being?

 

[Jason0047]

Are you a follower of the Antichrist? Are you denaying Jesus deity? Do you denay that Jesus was human? If you do, you are an heretic.

No, I was asking you this because you did not initially make the facts about how Jesus is both God and man clear in the beginning of this thread. I had already stated my belief several times that Jesus is God and that Jesus is a man. Why would you suggest otherwise after I had said these things?

I believe and thrust in a fully God and man Jesus Christ.

Then you believe in a Hypostatic Union, that He is both God and man.

But that has nothing to do with him being or not being omnipresent. Do you know of any verse stating the omnipresent of Jesus?

The Bible does not say the word "Bible" but we know what it is. So the exact words do not have to be spelled out in order for us to understand something within the Scriptures.

During Jesus earthly life, He said to his disciples.

Matthew 18:20

"For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."​

It's important to note that there were other disciples besides the 12. If the disciples were to take Jesus's words literally, they would understand that Jesus' words in Matthew 18:20 were literal truth that applied to themselves and other disciples.

 

[Jason0047]

This is the situation. Your theologic needs require Jesus being omnipresent because you claim God being omnipresent. That is exactly my open post: the omnipresence atributed to Jesus by theologians is do to the need of him being omniscient. Such need is so great that if Jesus were not omniscient, those theologians feels like Jesus loses his deity. But that is only a theologian need.

What we read in The NT and the Gospels is a Jesus that always have been in a very specific place. When he wanted to be somewhere else, he traveled to where he was not. When the disciples, people or Jew looked for him, only floun him in the place he was, nowhere else.

My OP stands; the omnipresencense of Jesus is a theologian need, not something that the scriptures tels us.

Do you believe God is Omnipresent yet Jesus is not Omnipresent?
Do I lose my ability to walk if I choose to sit down and not walk?

As for a Theological need: I know God is greater than we can imagine Him. 1 Kings 8:27 says the Heaven of the Heavens cannot contain Him. Man always tries to place limitations upon God or Jesus. So when I say God is love to someone, it is greater than they can understand it. For we look thru a glass darkly.

Let me make this simple. Do you believe in the Trinity or the Godhead? That the Lord our God is one God who exists in three persons (i.e. The Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost) as described in 1 John 5:7? If you do believe in the Trinity, then the Son of God being a part of the Godhead cannot be any less God than the Father. Oh yes, the Eternal Word or the Son of God can choose not to use His divine attributes, but that does not mean that His powers were taken from Him or that they were erased in some. Jesus merely chose of His own ability to not His divine powers and He relied upon the power of the Father (By whom is one with).

For Jesus said He was one with the Father. Jesus said that He abides in the Father and the Father abides in Him. Jesus said the works He does are the works of the Father. This means that Jesus is a part of the Godhead. He is never separated from the Father in essence or being. For if Jesus was separated or cut from the Father, then that means that there was more than one God at one time; And that is not possible. There is always been one God.

 

[chairistotle]

Many christians do the next thinking: Jesus is God, God is omnipresent, Jesus is omnipresent.

That is correct logic pure and simple. If the premises are true, the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. (Premise 2 is not true)

This is a human reasoning.

Whenever I read something like this, I am immediately struck by the need of some people to delineate between human reason and godly reason as if good reason is somehow deficient. Godly reason is no different than human reason. God always has true premises and is qualified to know his premises. Humans are not.

Human reasoning is the base principle of the gnostisism. The gnostisism start by believing that God and the truth of God can be reached by human thinking, reasoning and logic.

One might ask the question if you were to discard thinking, reasoning, and logic, would you be able to discern the meaning of any sentence in the Bible? The answer is no you couldn't. Don't blame the tools for the mistakes of their users.

But human reasoning is dangerous and take us into the next thinking: If Jesus were not omnipresent, Jesus were not God, since God is omnipresent.

Trying to understan God and Jesus with the same atitude and tols of the gnostics, only get us into troubles and falceties. The falcety is that the deity of Jesus is directly conected to the fact of him being or not being omnipresent.

spelchek plese

But the truth is that the conection between Jesus deity and Jesus omnipresence is merely a gnostic-like reasoning. Jesus being God has nothing to do with Jesus being omnipresent.

I strongly believe, out of any doubt that Jesus was (past tence refers to his time on Earth) God, completely divine.
And I know by reading the NT that Jesus was NOT omnipresent at all.

Do you have/know of any verse in the Bible stating Jesus omnipresence?

You are hung up on the gnostics eh? If you know Jesus was not Omnipresent then you know that the second premise of the proof you provided is false therefore the proof itself is false. Problem solved. By the way, you used "human logic" to understand the meaning of the NT.

 

[0scar]

Do you believe God (in general) is Omnipresent?

define to be omnipresent

 

[0scar]

Nathanael did not ask Jesus if He was hiding behind a bush watching him. Nathanael claimed that He was the Son of God as to how He was able to see him.

because he saw him, not because he was able to see him.

Jesus were passing by (on any previous ocation) a saw nathanael and payed attention to him. Time later, he tels nathanael of the fact. Nathanael is amuzed... period.

There is not any evudence of omnipresence or omniscience.
Any how, you are contradicting. If Jesus choose not not be omnipresent, how is that he is omnipresent when YOU need him to be?

 

[0scar]

Does a person's ability in having 20/20 vision forever lost if they put on a blind fold? No. That person would have to stab their eyes out in order for that to happen. But seeing they can remove the blindfold, they would then put their 20/20 vision into practice. The 20/20 was never gone. It was always there. Even when they had the blindfold on. So if Jesus is God (And He is), then He has the attributes of God even if He chooses to suppress those abilities or attributes so as to rely upon the Father. For Jesus willingly chose to hold back His divine privileges. But that does not mean that His divine attributes were gone or erased while He suppressed them. In other words, Jesus is still Omniscient (All knowing), even if He chooses not to use that particular divine attribute or not. For He could choose to exercise that attribute if so desired. It is not lost to Him forever. For surely Jesus is Omniscient now, right? Was Jesus Omniscient before He came down before His earthly ministry? Does God change? Or did He merely withhold an attribute or ability that is a part of His natural being?

Good human reasoning.

Herod was omnipresent, as wel as Andrew was omnipresent. Only that theu both choosen not to use or be omnipresent.
The same is in the case of Jesus.
Can you prove that Jesus was omnipresent bu choose not to be? otherwisw I can say that herod and Andrew also were omnipresent but choose not to be.

Again: do you have any evidence of the omnipresence of Jesus, other that the need of the theologians????

 

[0scar]

Then you believe in a Hypostatic Union, that He is both God and man.

There is hundred of different christologies declaring Jesus God and man. The HU is only one of all those christologies.
I do believe to the degree of knowing that Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Mary (known as the son of Joseph) is God, God the Son, the Word and the Christ. Fully and completelly divine, and fully and completelly human.

 

[0scar]

During Jesus earthly life, He said to his disciples.

Matthew 18:20

"For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."​

It's important to note that there were other disciples besides the 12. If the disciples were to take Jesus's words literally, they would understand that Jesus' words in Matthew 18:20 were literal truth that applied to themselves and other disciples.

You have a tendency to take the words of Jesus aplicable for his very present.

You are being contradictory. If Jesus did choose not to exercise his omnipresence, how come that now he is exercicing his omnipresence?

Any how, he was not omnipresent. Jesus is saying that he will NOT be unless two of the disciples are together. Definetly he is not where there is not a disciple at all. Otherwise, he is not making sence.

 

[0scar]

Do you believe God is Omnipresent yet Jesus is not Omnipresent?
Do I lose my ability to walk if I choose to sit down and not walk?

As for a Theological need: I know God is greater than we can imagine Him. 1 Kings 8:27 says the Heaven of the Heavens cannot contain Him. Man always tries to place limitations upon God or Jesus. So when I say God is love to someone, it is greater than they can understand it. For we look thru a glass darkly.

Let me this simple. Do you believe in the Trinity or the Godhead? That the Lord our God is one God who exists in three persons (i.e. The Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost) as described in 1 John 5:7? If you do believe in the Trinity, then the Son of God being a part of the Godhead cannot be any less God than the Father. Oh yes, the Eternal Word or the Son of God can choose not to use His divine attributes, but that does not mean that His powers were taken from Him or that they were erased in some. Jesus merely chose of His own ability to not His divine powers and He relied upon the power of the Father (By whom is one with).

For Jesus said He was one with the Father. Jesus said that He abides in the Father and the Father abides in Him. Jesus said the works He does are the works of the Father. This means that Jesus is a part of the Godhead. He is never separated from the Father in essence or being. For if Jesus was separated or cut from the Father, then that means that there was more than one God at one time; And that is not possible. There is always been one God.

Thanks
You are saying that there is a depp need for theology for Jesus to be omnipresent.
You believe that because of that theological need, denaying Jesus omnipresence is denaying his divinity.
Do you agree that beside that strong need, there is not any evidence of that omnipresence in the Gospels?

 

[0scar]

That is correct logic pure and simple. If the premises are true, the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. (Premise 2 is not true)



Whenever I read something like this, I am immediately struck by the need of some people to delineate between human reason and godly reason as if good reason is somehow deficient. Godly reason is no different than human reason. God always has true premises and is qualified to know his premises. Humans are not.



One might ask the question if you were to discard thinking, reasoning, and logic, would you be able to discern the meaning of any sentence in the Bible? The answer is no you couldn't. Don't blame the tools for the mistakes of their users.



spelchek plese



You are hung up on the gnostics eh? If you know Jesus was not Omnipresent then you know that the second premise of the proof you provided is false therefore the proof itself is false. Problem solved. By the way, you used "human logic" to understand the meaning of the NT.

We live by faith. The basis of faith is by lisening to the Word of God. And faith is knowing, reasoning. Christian life is reasoning not feeling emotions. I use my reasoning when I read the Bible.
The problem is when we go to far with thinking, and go beyond the Bible. We reason the Bible, not beyon.
The gnostics did use reasoning beside revelation. We reason after revelation. But dont reason beyond revelation

 

[Nick M]

Do you have/know of any verse in the Bible stating Jesus omnipresence?

There aren't any.

 

[Jason0047]

define to be omnipresent

Omnipresent is having the power or ability to be everywhere at one time. Everywhere, meaning that God has the capacity to be in all areas or places in the known creation. Seeing God has this capacity to in multiple places at one time, He can surely fill every square inch of the creation, as well (If He so desired). How so? Well, do you think God is confined to living in just a certain amount of people? Do you think 1 billion or 1 trillion believers would be God's limit for His Spirit to live within them? No. God is beyond His creation. In other words, Omnipresent is defined by the fact that not only can God be present in many places at one time, but He can also fill every square inch of space of His creation (If He so desired).

 

[Jason0047]

because he saw him, not because he was able to see him.

Jesus were passing by (on any previous ocation) a saw nathanael and payed attention to him. Time later, he tels nathanael of the fact. Nathanael is amuzed... period.

There is not any evudence of omnipresence or omniscience.
Any how, you are contradicting. If Jesus choose not not be omnipresent, how is that he is omnipresent when YOU need him to be?

No, Jesus did not see Nathanael with his physical body. Jesus seen Nathanael with His Spirit. Hence, why Nathanael said He was the Son of God. If Nathanael said that Jesus did something supernatural by saying He was the Son of God when Jesus did not do anything divine, then Jesus would have corrected him and said that he was hiding behind a bush or something.

 

[Jason0047]

Good human reasoning.

Herod was omnipresent, as wel as Andrew was omnipresent. Only that theu both choosen not to use or be omnipresent.
The same is in the case of Jesus.

Humans do not have the capacity to be Omnipresent. I am not suggesting the actual physical body of Jesus was Omnipresent. No, no. The Spirit of Jesus was Omnipresent. Not the body. Big difference.

Again: do you have any evidence of the omnipresence of Jesus, other that the need of the theologians????

Can God choose not to be Spirit?
Can God choose not to be eternal?
Can God choose to erase His divine attributes?
That is essentially what you are suggesting.
That Jesus (Being God) had erased His divine attributes instead of choosing not to exercise them.

Besides, the reasoning I use is based upon the real world. Jesus used real world examples to illustrate spiritual truth. Can you illustrate your version of spiritual truth with the Scriptures?

 

[Jason0047]

There is hundred of different christologies declaring Jesus God and man. The HU is only one of all those christologies.

The Hypostatic Union or the Incarnation is just essentially saying that Jesus is both God and man at the same time. Do you deny that? If you do, then please explain how your belief is different?

I do believe to the degree of knowing that Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Mary (known as the son of Joseph) is God, God the Son, the Word and the Christ. Fully and completelly divine, and fully and completelly human.

Then you believe in the Hypostatic Union or the Incarnation.

 

[Jason0047]

You have a tendency to take the words of Jesus aplicable for his very present.

You are being contradictory. If Jesus did choose not to exercise his omnipresence, how come that now he is exercicing his omnipresence?

Any how, he was not omnipresent. Jesus is saying that he will NOT be unless two of the disciples are together. Definetly he is not where there is not a disciple at all. Otherwise, he is not making sence.

Yes, it is called context. Who was Jesus talking to? The men from Mars? No. I mean, do not really believe Jesus was speaking to his disciples when he said that if two or more are gathered in His name He would be amongst them? Are you saying you don't believe he was talking to them?

Can you show me in the context of the chapter that he was not talking to them?

 

[Jason0047]

Thanks
You are saying that there is a depp need for theology for Jesus to be omnipresent.
You believe that because of that theological need, denaying Jesus omnipresence is denaying his divinity.
Do you agree that beside that strong need, there is not any evidence of that omnipresence in the Gospels?

No, my belief about God's Omnipresence does not stem from some deep need for theology from man. The Scriptures teach us that both God and Jesus are Omnipresent. I already showed you the passages. It is up to you if you want to believe those passages or not.