"There Is One God, the Father...and One Lord, Jesus Christ"

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about Jesus Christ as God. This follows this post about  Syria’s Civil War. For a free magazine subscription or to get the book shown for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.

"There Is One God, the Father...and One Lord, Jesus Christ"

A number of scriptural passages identify Jesus Christ as God along with God the Father. Yet some contend that the apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 8 denied the divinity of Christ in applying the distinction God exclusively to the Father. Let's consider what Paul was actually saying here - and what he wasn't.



In a discussion over whether Christians could eat meat sacrificed to idols, Paul agreed that idols were powerless and represented false gods, stating: "About eating food offered to idols, then, we know that 'an idol is nothing in the world,' and that 'there is no God but one.' For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth—as there are many 'gods' and many 'lords'—yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through Him" (verses 4-6, HCSB).



So does the fact that "for us there is one God, the Father," mean that Jesus cannot also be God? Initially it might seem so. But consider a parallel question based on the same passage: Does the fact that "for us there is . . . one Lord, Jesus Christ," mean that the Father cannot also be Lord?



This is obviously not the case, for the Father is certainly Lord—meaning Master and Ruler. Jesus prayed, "I thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth" (Matthew 11:25At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.



See All...). And Revelation 11:15And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.



See All... mentions the Kingdom "of our Lord and of His Christ." Jesus is indeed Lord, but obviously the Father is Lord above Him. This does not contradict Paul's statement. And neither do other verses that proclaim the deity of Christ.



Rather than excluding Jesus from being God, a careful reading of 1 Corinthians 8:4-6 [4] As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one.

[5] For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)

[6] But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.





See All... should help us to see that He is included in the divine identity. Paul is briefly affirming the contrast between pagan polytheism (the belief in many gods) and true monotheism (the belief in just one God). But why doesn't he limit his affirmation that "there is no God but one" to stating only that "there is one God, the Father"? Why does he even mention "one Lord, Jesus Christ," in this context?



Surely it is because Jesus is an important part of what God is. As elsewhere, Paul shows here that while "all things"—the entire created realm, both physical and spiritual—is ultimately from God the Father, it was all actually made through Jesus Christ. And Jesus rules over it all as Lord under the Father.



Does "Lord" designate divinity?

Some maintain that of the terms "God" and "Lord" used here, only "God" designates divinity in context. It is true that the term Lord does not always denote deity. It can refer to any master—divine, human or otherwise. Yet we should note the parallelism in what Paul has written. He refers to the pagans' "so-called gods" as both "many 'gods' and many 'lords.'" Thus he includes the latter term "lords" as designating deity—whether the imaginary gods of the pagans or human rulers looked on as divine. In parallel, Paul refers to the true God as both "one God" and "one Lord." So "Lord" in this context likewise designates divinity.



In fact, the passage here recognizes far more power and rule belonging to the Lord Jesus Christ than what the pagan systems attributed to their various gods. This point is vital to understanding the matter at hand. Paul acknowledges the label of "gods" for the pagan objects of worship, each believed to have a limited sphere of power. Yet he points out that Jesus, "through whom are all things," is the Maker of all that exists, including ourselves!



By the very terminology Paul employs here, Jesus must rank as divine. For how can the imaginary Aphrodite or Venus, goddess of love appearing as the evening star, be classified as deity while Jesus, Maker of all the stars and of man and woman and of human love—having greater power and lordship than that attributed to all of the pagan gods and goddesses combined—not be classified as deity?



With this in mind, some label Jesus as a god—but that would imply power over a limited sphere. Yet Jesus has dominion over everything that exists with the exception of only one thing—the Father, who is over Him. Jesus is thus subordinate to the Father, but the Father has entrusted "all authority" and "all things" to Him (Matthew 28:18And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.



See All...; 1 Corinthians 15:27-28 [27] For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.

[28] And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.





See All...). And as explained elsewhere, Jesus is in perfect and total agreement with the Father.



Both crucial to defining God

So if both Father and Son are God and both are Lord, why does Paul divide Them out as "one God, the Father" and "one Lord, Jesus Christ"? We are not explicitly told, but the classification is used elsewhere in Scripture. In Psalm 110:1(A Psalm of David.) The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.



See All..., Israel's King David referred to an intermediary between God and himself as Lord. The verse begins: "The Lord [ Yhwh ] said to my Lord . . ." As the New Testament makes plain, Yhwh (the Eternal God) in this case designates the Father, who is speaking to the One who became Jesus Christ, David's immediate Lord, ruling on the Father's behalf.



We also have Jesus' own prayer to the Father the night before His death, wherein He stated, "And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent" (John 17:3And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.



See All...). Some regard this verse as likewise denying the divinity of Christ, but it assuredly does not. Besides the fact that Jesus said this while His power was limited in human flesh, when only the Father could act throughout the universe as God (John 5:30I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.



See All...; 14:10), the obvious intent is that He was pointing to the Father as the true focus of our worship, with Himself as the Father's representative serving as intermediary.



This latter fact is evidently what Paul had in mind as well. In declaring the Father as the one God, he was referring to exclusivity of position, not exclusivity of divine nature. Just as Christ Himself did, Paul was acknowledging the Father as the Supreme Being over all and the focus of our worship. While "all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father" (John 5:23That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.



See All...), it should be evident that our honor of the Son is still relative to our honor of the Father. We honor the Son in this way because the Father has so ordained it. Thus, the Son is not the one God in the sense of the Supreme Being—and Paul therefore did not include Him in that designation.



But this does not exclude the Son from being God in the sense of sharing the same level of existence with the Father and sharing rule with the Father over all—and of acting as God on the Father's behalf throughout eternity, past and future. For the Son is in fact God in this very sense. Yet had Paul referred to Jesus as God in this particular context of denying polytheism and labeling the Father as the "one God," it would likely have resulted in confusion for many. So he chose to use a different distinction, Lord —the same title Paul typically used for Jesus in his writings.



Designating Jesus as the "one Lord" stresses His role as the One who exercises God's rule over creation—the point being that the Father does not do so directly but acts through Jesus Christ. This fact is a crucial aspect of defining God. And particularly for us, just as David recognized, Jesus is our immediate Lord and Master—the Father being ultimate Lord and Master. But there is no division in allegiance, for devotion to Christ is the way we are devoted to the Father. So again, the fact that the Father is Lord does not contradict Jesus being the "one Lord." For their lordship is not divided. Rather, the Father rules through the Son.



This then, in stark contrast to the competing deities of pagan polytheism, is Paul's brief explanation of true monotheism—God the Father, who is supreme, working through the Son, who perfectly carries out His will, these two being one in unity. And it is through Jesus that we worship and serve the Father. Thus, we should be able to see that Paul in 1 Corinthians 8 was not denying the deity of Christ but was, rather, affirming it through carefully chosen wording.

Constantinople was for 1,000 years the Byzantine capital!

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about the fall of Constantinople. This follows this post about a constitution for Egypt. For a free magazine subscription or to get the book shown for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886-8632.

Media Principles From the Prophets

article by Graemme Marshall





God's encouragement to Jeremiah and Ezekiel can help us in our approach to preaching the gospel today.



Constantinople was for 1,000 years the Byzantine capital of the eastern Roman empire with Christianity its religion from the fourth century In 1453 that all changed for the next nearly 500 years.



Muhammed II laid siege to the city to make it capital of the Ottoman empire which at its height stretched from the Danube to the Euphrates. That empire lasted until World War I. He climaxed the siege by taking his navy and enormous bronze cannons overland to bypass chains across the harbor mouth. He then shelled the city from the inner harbor. On May 29, 1453, the walls were breached and Ottoman soldiers poured into Constantinople subjugating the local Christian and Jewish populations. A story from that time tells how Christian scholars in the besieged city (within days of becoming Muslim for the next 500 years!) were preoccupied with the following theological questions:



What color eyes had the virgin?



If a fly falls into holy water, is the water defiled or the fly sanctified?



Whether true or not, there's an unsettling parallel with our times. With the fabric of society tearing apart, many today seem preoccupied with similar debates. But we don't have to fall into that trap. We can be motivated by these dangerous times to get on with the job we've been given of preaching the gospel in all the world.



God's Church Always Involved in Promoting the Gospel



Recent home office news illustrates how we seem once again poised to grow. Treasurer Tom Kirkpatrick, commenting on the Church's income, said, "Our financial stability now gives us the ability to continue strongly fulfilling the commission of the Church." This is evidenced by requests for literature more than double last year. Some callers responding to the new radio broadcast ask, "Are you the same program as Herbert Armstrong?"



We indeed strive to continue the calling and commission of our recent past. It also parallels that given Jeremiah and Ezekiel. We can learn much about media challenges from what these two prophets were instructed by God.



Jeremiah and Ezekiel's Problems



Jeremiah was called to preach God's message in Jerusalem as Ezekiel was called, 700 miles away in Babylon. Jeremiah was told the problems he'd encounter and that, no matter, he was to fulfill his calling. His immediate response quite lacked enthusiasm. Like Moses he pleaded inadequacy, saying he was too young (Jeremiah 1:6Then said I, Ah, Lord GOD! behold, I cannot speak: for I am a child.



See All...). He may have meant he was too young as a priest and felt inexperienced. Or it could have reflected his introspective nature and that he, by temperament, felt personal inadequacy. Paraphrasing God's response as it applies to us: "Don't you think I know what I'm doing in calling you? Don't be afraid of the looks on their faces because I will give you the right words to say" (verses 7-8).



We too can feel overwhelmed by God's calling and feel inadequate for the task. God anticipated negative reactions to preaching His truth. He told Jeremiah to not be dismayed about it. We get discouraged at the lack of seriousness from others when we speak on God's behalf. There was a personal warning too, that if Jeremiah allowed unresponsive attitudes to deter him from doing the job, God would trouble Jeremiah before his detractors (verse 17). God knew people would fight against him, but He assured Jeremiah they would not succeed because God would be with him (verse 19).



Now it seems Ezekiel had a different personality, but he faced the same problems. In graphic language God described his audience as a "rebellious house, impudent and stubborn" (Ezekiel 2:3-4 [3] And he said unto me, Son of man, I send thee to the children of Israel, to a rebellious nation that hath rebelled against me: they and their fathers have transgressed against me, even unto this very day.

[4] For they are impudent children and stiffhearted. I do send thee unto them; and thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD.





See All...). Whether they would listen, or whether they wouldn't (because after all "they are a rebellious house"), Ezekiel was to still take God's message to them (verse 5). God's purpose includes making sure our peoples will in the future come to know that a prophet has been among them. Much of our effort may not bear fruit until later. Understanding how His human instruments can become discouraged, God sympathetically outlined to Ezekiel the people's attitudes: though we may be hurt by resistance, and words and looks make us afraid, we are NOT to be deterred from the task. We are told the people's reaction to truth will be like briers, thorns and scorpions (verse 6). Thorns prick our skin and make us bleed. Scorpions sting with burning pain. In a similar way their words and looks can psychologically demoralize and weaken our resolve. God emphasizes that whether they hear or refuse, we are to still do the job and make sure we aren't rebellious like them (Ezekiel 2:6-8 [6] And thou, son of man, be not afraid of them, neither be afraid of their words, though briers and thorns be with thee, and thou dost dwell among scorpions: be not afraid of their words, nor be dismayed at their looks, though they be a rebellious house.

[7] And thou shalt speak my words unto them, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear: for they are most rebellious.

[8] But thou, son of man, hear what I say unto thee; Be not thou rebellious like that rebellious house: open thy mouth, and eat that I give thee.





See All...). In comforting Ezekiel God further explains the reason they won't listen to us is that they will not listen to Him. They are unreceptive because their nature is "impudent and hardhearted" (Ezekiel 3:7-9 [7] But the house of Israel will not hearken unto thee; for they will not hearken unto me: for all the house of Israel are impudent and hardhearted.

[8] Behold, I have made thy face strong against their faces, and thy forehead strong against their foreheads.

[9] As an adamant harder than flint have I made thy forehead: fear them not, neither be dismayed at their looks, though they be a rebellious house.





See All...). While preaching God's truth we must remember they will NOT listen because of insolent hard hearts.



As with Jeremiah and Ezekiel, a lack of response shouldn't put us off. Dirty looks and hurtful words are a natural result from a rebellious nation.



Relatives and Friends Can Discourage Too



Interestingly, even family may at times hinder the gospel. In Jeremiah's case close family, probably embarrassed before friends by what he was saying, enlisted others to deter his public preaching. God makes clear that Jeremiah was in danger of being deceived by family (Jeremiah 12:6For even thy brethren, and the house of thy father, even they have dealt treacherously with thee; yea, they have called a multitude after thee: believe them not, though they speak fair words unto thee.



See All...).



Today we can have similar difficulty with unbelieving relatives. Strangely, too, some opposition to the gospel comes from within our Church family. Perhaps we err by a desire to placate others when we should step out in faith and stand for truth.



Yet, There Is Hope



God explains to Ezekiel that, even though they have eyes that can't see and ears that won't hear, he should still go ahead and preach as "it may be that they will consider" (Ezekiel 12:2-3 [2] Son of man, thou dwellest in the midst of a rebellious house, which have eyes to see, and see not; they have ears to hear, and hear not: for they are a rebellious house.

[3] Therefore, thou son of man, prepare thee stuff for removing, and remove by day in their sight; and thou shalt remove from thy place to another place in their sight: it may be they will consider, though they be a rebellious house.





See All...). This is very comforting. It makes our efforts worthwhile when just one person responds to God's calling. Ezekiel would become a sign later when the people realized the words he had spoken had come to pass. God explains that a lack of response has to do with attitudes of people who conclude, "The vision is for many days, he prophesies of days far off" (verses 6, 25-27). Isn't this true in our history? What the Church has preached hasn't happened, so they put off involvement. The task of the prophets was to be accomplished whether people listened or not. They would at a later time come to know a prophet of God had been among them (Ezekiel 33:31-33 [31] And they come unto thee as the people cometh, and they sit before thee as my people, and they hear thy words, but they will not do them: for with their mouth they shew much love, but their heart goeth after their covetousness.

[32] And, lo, thou art unto them as a very lovely song of one that hath a pleasant voice, and can play well on an instrument: for they hear thy words, but they do them not.

[33] And when this cometh to pass, (lo, it will come,) then shall they know that a prophet hath been among them.





See All...).Yet, despite our knowing this, a lack of response can make us feel we aren't achieving much. Elijah felt this, which puts us in great company! It seems strange that after the triumph on Mount Carmel and the execution of the priests of Baal, he would throw in the towel just because of a death threat from Jezebel. She had been trying to kill him for years. But stress can become the last straw that breaks our emotional back and he fled.



God succored Elijah for a while, then informed him of something he didn't realize. There were 7,000 who had not bowed to Baal nor kissed the idol. Elijah probably didn't know of these people. When the paganism of Ahab and Jezebel reigned supreme, God-fearing people would have quietly hid themselves. This illustration of people who remain faithful to God's covenant was used by Paul about a remnant in Israel (Romans 11:1-5 [1] I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

[2] God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,

[3] Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.

[4] But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.

[5] Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.





See All...).



What of New Testament Times?



Although Justus, Crispus and many others believed and were baptized through Paul's preaching in Corinth, he became upset at stubborn attitudes against him. It deterred him enough to quit Corinth and plan to go elsewhere (Acts 18:6-11 [6] And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean: from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.

[7] And he departed thence, and entered into a certain man's house, named Justus, one that worshipped God, whose house joined hard to the synagogue.

[8] And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.

[9] Then spake the Lord to Paul in the night by a vision, Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace:

[10] For I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee: for I have much people in this city.

[11] And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them.





See All...). Paul concluded his work there was over. But God knew better. Because Paul was determined to leave, God gave a vision one night saying: "I have many people in this city. So don't be afraid, no one will attack you, and I will be with you." Paul obediently stayed another 18 months. We can be so short-sighted and demoralized by resistance to our efforts.As John the Baptist prepared the way for Christ's first coming, so too Christ's Church prepares the way for His second coming (Mark 1:2-4 [2] As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.

[3] The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

[4] John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.





See All...).We have a commission and obligation to preach the gospel. Paul expressed his role this way: "Yet when I preach the gospel, I cannot boast, for I am compelled to preach. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel! If I preach voluntarily, I have a reward; if not voluntarily, I am simply discharging the trust committed to me" (1 Corinthians 9:16-17 [16] For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel!

[17] For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.





See All..., NIV). It was Paul's preference to sacrifice and from the heart see the gospel made available. He asked how can anyone hear the truth unless there are those who make it known (Romans 10:14-17 [14] How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

[15] And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

[16] But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?

[17] So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.





See All...)? If we sit back uninvolved, how will people who could have been reached by our efforts ever hear? Christ was busy with His Father's work when He was on earth. He said, "I must work the works of Him who sent Me while it is day; the night is coming when no one can work" (John 9:4I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.



See All...).



Society ever rots around us. Can we afford to idly sit back and let darkness overtake us? Have the courage and heart for the gospel. Be involved in sowing the seed! UN

.

Ground Zero church will not be rebuilt, church officials shocked

A very interesting post from www.jihadwatch.com about the church that won't be built at Ground Zero. This follows this post about the Speaker of the House investigating opponents of the Ground Zero mosque and this article about the recent news about the ban offshore drilling which would encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here.

Ground Zero church will not be rebuilt, church officials shocked
Mosque yes, church no, say New York officials. "Decision Not to Rebuild Church Destroyed on 9/11 Surprises Greek Orthodox Leaders," from FoxNews.com, August 18 (thanks to all who sent this in):

Greek Orthodox leaders trying to rebuild the only church destroyed in the Sept. 11 terror attacks expressed shock this week after learning, via Fox News, that government officials had killed a deal to relocate the church.
The St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, once a tiny, four-story building in the shadows of lower Manhattan, was destroyed in 2001 by one of the falling World Trade Center towers. Nobody from the church was hurt in the attack, but the congregation has, for the past eight years, been trying to rebuild its house of worship.

Though talks between the church and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey stalled last year, church leaders say they've been trying to kick-start discussions ever since. But amid debate over whether a proposed Islamic community center should go forward near Ground Zero, government officials threw cold water on the prospect of any deal with the church -- telling Fox News the deal is off the table.

Confronted with the Port Authority's verdict, Father Mark Arey, of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, said it's the first he's heard that.

"Negotiations did break off last year. We were expecting to hear from their lawyers -- we never did. We're still expecting to hear from them," he told Fox News. "We're disappointed. ... 130 Liberty Street was promised to us."

Arey was referring to the address, about 100 yards away from the original site, where the government earlier proposed relocating the church. The Port Authority and the church announced a deal in July 2008 under which the Port Authority would grant land and up to $20 million to help rebuild the church -- in addition, the authority was willing to pay up to $40 million to construct a bomb-proof platform underneath.

Within a year, the deal fell through and talks ended -- apparently for good, according to the Port Authority. [...]

George Demos, a Republican candidate for New York's 1st Congressional District, also has drawn attention to the negotiations. He released an open letter to President Obama Tuesday urging him to, as he did with the mosque debate, weigh in on the church discussions.

"While we may disagree on the appropriateness of the mosque, we can surely agree that it is an issue of national importance that the only house of worship actually destroyed on September 11, 2001, the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, be rebuilt," Demos wrote. "Mr. President, please stand up and defend our Judeo-Christian values, express your public and unwavering support for St. Nicholas Church, and ensure that it is rebuilt."

Father Alex Karloutsos, assistant to the head of the Greek Orthodox Church in America, Archbishop Demetrios, told FoxNews.com that the Port Authority "simply forgot about the church" at Ground Zero.

Posted by Robert