Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Jesus cannot always be in the Father's will

Expand Messages
  • Dave Wave
    In John 5:19, 30, Jesus denies ability to anything by himself, but affirms that all which he does and says is the Father s will. 18 For this cause therefore
    Message 1 of 3 , Nov 7, 2006
      In John 5:19, 30, Jesus denies ability to anything by
      himself, but affirms that all which he does and says
      is the Father's will.



      18 For this cause therefore the Jews sought the more
      to kill him, because he not only brake the sabbath,
      but also called God his own Father, making himself
      equal with God.

      19 Jesus therefore answered and said unto them,
      Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing
      of himself, but what he seeth the Father doing: for
      what things soever he doeth, these the Son also doeth
      in like manner...

      30 I can of myself do nothing: as I hear, I judge:
      and my judgment is righteous; because I seek not mine
      own will, but the will of him that sent me.
      31 If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not
      true.
      32 It is another that beareth witness of me; and I
      know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is
      true.

      But in Matthew 26:39, Jesus says "Father, if it be thy
      will, let this cup pass..."

      Now if Jesus cannot say or do anything except it be
      the Father's will, then "let this cup pass" was just
      as much part of the Father's will as Jesus's, correct?

      How do you explain the Father having two opposing
      wills regarding the single fact of Jesus' suffering?

      --- Dave




      ____________________________________________________________________________________
      Sponsored Link

      For just $24.99/mo., Vonage offers unlimited local and long- distance calling.
      Sign up now. http://www.vonage.com/startsavingnow/
    • Robert M. Bowman, Jr.
      Dave, You claim that Jesus statement that he cannot do anything but the Father s will is contradicted by Matthew 26:39, which you quoted as follows:
      Message 2 of 3 , Nov 8, 2006
        Dave,

        You claim that Jesus' statement that he cannot do anything but the
        Father's will is contradicted by Matthew 26:39, which you quoted as
        follows:

        << But in Matthew 26:39, Jesus says "Father, if it be thy will, let
        this cup pass..." >>

        The problem is that what you omitted (as represented by the ellipsis)
        corrects your claim as to what the part you quoted implies.

        More technically, what Jesus did in the half verse that you quoted was
        to verbalize a hypothetical statement that he knew was contrary to
        fact in order to express a feeling. His doing so was not an act
        contrary to the Father's will. In fact, Jesus' meaning is distorted if
        you leave out the rest of the verse.

        In Christ's service,
        Robert M. Bowman, Jr.
        Manager, Apologetics & Interfaith Evangelism
        North American Mission Board

        Visit us online at http://www.4truth.net
      • Dave Wave
        ... If it wasn t contrary to the Father s will, that must mean that the Father WILLED for Jesus to voice this impossible hypothetical objection to His will.
        Message 3 of 3 , Nov 8, 2006
          --- "Robert M. Bowman, Jr."
          <faithhasitsreasons@...> wrote:

          > Dave,
          >
          > You claim that Jesus' statement that he cannot do
          > anything but the
          > Father's will is contradicted by Matthew 26:39,
          > which you quoted as
          > follows:
          >
          > << But in Matthew 26:39, Jesus says "Father, if it
          > be thy will, let
          > this cup pass..." >>
          >
          > The problem is that what you omitted (as represented
          > by the ellipsis)
          > corrects your claim as to what the part you quoted
          > implies.
          >
          > More technically, what Jesus did in the half verse
          > that you quoted was
          > to verbalize a hypothetical statement that he knew
          > was contrary to
          > fact in order to express a feeling. His doing so was
          > not an act
          > contrary to the Father's will.

          If it wasn't contrary to the Father's will, that must
          mean that the Father WILLED for Jesus to voice this
          impossible hypothetical objection to His will. Not
          the most consistent bit of communication between two
          "persons" I've ever heard.

          Also, you are quite confident, and offer nothing more
          than this, when you say Jesus "knew was contrary" to
          the will of the Father. It is far from obvious that
          Jesus knew his request was contrary to the will of the
          Father. I maintain the evidence showed, and will
          again show, that Jesus authentically hoped his request
          would be granted, and this doesn't disappear just
          because he later acquiesced to the Father's will.

          > In fact, Jesus'
          > meaning is distorted if
          > you leave out the rest of the verse.
          >
          > In Christ's service,
          > Robert M. Bowman, Jr.

          First, that "feeling" Jesus had is defined in the
          context as being sad and of great sorrow. I now quote
          the entire context from the NASB:

          37 And he took with him Peter and the two sons of
          Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and sore troubled.

          38 Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding
          sorrowful, even unto death: abide ye here, and watch
          with me.

          39 And he went forward a little, and fell on his
          face, and prayed, saying, My Father, if it be
          possible, let this cup pass away from me:
          nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt.

          40 And he cometh unto the disciples, and findeth them
          sleeping, and saith unto Peter, What, could ye not
          watch with me one hour?

          41 Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation:
          the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.

          42 Again a second time he went away, and prayed,
          saying, My Father, if this cannot pass away, except I
          drink it, thy will be done.
          =========

          Jesus' "feeling" as you put it, should be
          characterized as "sorrowful", "sore troubled",
          "exceedingly sorrowful, even unto death", "falling on
          his face". Such a troubled state of mind surely
          entertains authentic hope that his request for relief
          will actually be honored.

          Second, suppose you read in a book that a man was
          asked to work late for his boss. Suppose further it
          says that this man, after being exceedingly troubled,
          said to his boss "i'd like to go home on regular
          schedule, nevertheless I'll stay late if that's what
          you want"...and said this TWICE (suppose he knew that
          his continued stay would put him in the way of
          attackers who sought his life).

          Isn't it clear that such a troubled soul honestly
          hopes his request will be honored, IN SPITE of his
          later humble acceptance of his fate? I've suggested a
          change of plans and then just accepted somebody else's
          ideas many times....but my eventual acceptance of
          another person's plan doesn't disturb the fact that my
          own request was geninue and I honestly hoped it would
          be fulfilled.

          So then, this "feeling" that you mention, is the sort
          of feeling that is NOT in the will of the Father.
          Jesus felt like not drinking of that cup, even if for
          only a fleeting moment. His agreement to do the
          Father's will and not his own doesn't suddenly mean he
          was kidding when he said "let this cup pass."

          As such, it is far more likely, using common sense,
          that Jesus honestly wished his request to avoid the
          cup, be granted by the Father. Of course this
          conflicts with the idea that everything the bible says
          about Jesus is perfectly harmonious.

          But I maintain that the only way to uphold the
          inerrantist interpretation is to engage in absurdity
          and contradiction. I foresee you delving into
          Christ's "two natures", wherein you ascribe some of
          his words to only one of his two natures, out of
          concern to maintain biblical inerrancy at all costs.
          Personally I think the Nicene Christ of the Creeds is
          too high a price to pay to sustain inerrancy. If
          biblical inerrancy requires me to posit a man with two
          natures, who sometimes speaks from only one of the
          natures, and not both (how could that be, isn't it the
          entire man, who is involved as he speaketh?)


          There are other problems with your rebuttal:

          -- you say Jesus was using a hypothetical. Why?
          What use is an "if" between two persons who are
          equally "God"? Your choices are (a) Jesus was just
          kidding, knowing full well it was NOT possible for the
          cup to pass, the entire time he was asking, or
          (b)Jesus honestly felt there was a possibility his
          request would be honored by the Father (conflicting
          with inerrancy and stating Jesus wasn't always in
          harmony with the Father.)

          -- Jesus said "not my will, but thine be done". The
          will of the Son, who is God, is the same as the will
          of the Father, who is also God, because, well....both
          of them are equally "God", correct? If so, then when
          Jesus said "not my will", he is not just talking about
          his human half, but his whole person. After all, it
          was the whole person, was it not, who said "not my
          will"? Wouldn't that mean that BOTH his natures (God
          and man in completness, not divided but united in
          harmony) was saying "not my will"? As it must be the
          case, this would appear to ascribe more than one
          "will" to the Trinity. Not a suprise, since a "will"
          is that which constitutes personhood to begin with,
          and therefore suggests that the wills of Father and
          Son will not necessarily always be in harmony.

          -- How exactly do you know when it is right to
          ascribe statements of Jesus to only one of his two
          "natures"? Or is this necessitated by your
          presumption of full biblical inerrancy, the view that
          ALL the information on Jesus in the NT is true,
          regardless of apparant contradictions?

          Don't you think positing a man with two natures, who
          sometimes only talks out of one of his natures, is too
          high a price to pay, to maintain inerrancy? Is the
          suggestion that and ancient religious text contradicts
          itself on the person of it's god-man, more ridiculous
          than a person with two natures?

          And what exactly should prevent the unbeliever from
          concluding that your procedure makes Jesus look
          schitzophrenic? When somebody makes a statement,
          that's the WHOLE of the person, everything they are,
          if they are being honest, right?

          I assume you will claim a deep divine mystery not
          fully revealed. I maintain that a person with two
          natures, who sometimes talks out of only ONE of his
          two natures, is a deep contradiction, and just like a
          married bachelor, NO amount of explaination will
          suffice, and for the same reason in both cases.


          --- Dave




          ____________________________________________________________________________________
          Sponsored Link

          Get an Online or Campus degree
          Associate's, Bachelor's, or Master's - in less than one year.
          http://www.findtherightschool.com
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.