Jesus, the Perfect Human

Jesus is 100% God and 100% man.

Jesus (a man) cannot reject or hate the Father. He cannot reject the Father because He too is God, and God is not divided. God is perfect and without sin.

Jesus, not being able to reject the Father, is not disqualified from being a full and true man.

Therefore, it is not a required condition, in order to be fully and truly human, to have the ability to reject God.

Therefore, true love for God from humans is not only possible if humans have the ability to reject and not love God, as some would argue: Love is only real if it is chosen.

If it’s not true for Jesus, it’s not true for mankind.

We should not decide what is required for one to be truly human by looking at ourselves, then applying those requirements to Jesus.

It should be done the other way around: What is required for Jesus to be a human (the perfect human) is also what is required for us to be humans.

Those who argue for human free will often state that humans need free will in order to truly love God — it’s not true love if it isn’t chosen.

The major flaw with that thinking is that it’s not true for Jesus. Jesus cannot reject the Father. Jesus loves the Father perfectly. Jesus is 100% man.

Do humans have free will? Yes, but only after being freed from the slavery of sin. True free will is when sin is impossible.

If you were completely free from sin, you would be unable to hate God. You would be a perfect human, like Jesus.

There’s No Going Back

Once a person, or a group of persons, enters into a covenant with Jesus, there are only two paths forward: progressing from glory to glory, or progressing to become something worse than what you were before entering the covenant. One path that is not available is to go back to a previous stage of development.

Today in the West, Christian morality has become an autoimmune disease. Whereas is the past, Christian morality was a cure to the disease of sin, now that same morality is being used to justify all kinds of destructive and evil ideologies.

The way forward now is not to try and get back to the days when people respected Christian beliefs, although did not believe themselves. The way forward now is either to become something worse than we were before ever hearing of Christianity, or to move on to a more glorious state. To move on to a more glorious state requires a newer and stronger dedication to Jesus. Will it happen? Is it too late?

Jesus and Covenantal Righteousness

Screen Shot 2017-09-17 at 2.21.26 PM

Do we fully grasp the righteousness of Jesus in the post-Reformation world? Is theology set in stone now? Was it perfected by the Reformers?

The Reformation did a lot of good for Christianity, but one thing it did not do is reconnect the Church with its Hebraic roots in covenant; i.e. the covenant started with Abraham and continuing on to Jesus and beyond. Post-Reformation Christians are more influenced by Plato than they are by Abraham, Moses, David, the prophets, and even Paul.

Because the modern Church does not have a proper understanding of the covenant which existed between God and Israel, we get a whole lot wrong when trying to understand the life, teachings, and work of Jesus two thousand years ago.

Followers of Plato tend to believe that there is a standard of good and evil, which can exist apart from God, which God Himself submits to, even if He Himself created that standard. Hebrew faith, however, holds that God arbitrarily decides what is good and evil, and without God there would be no such thing as good and evil. If the Hebrews are correct, then how can we ever know if we are in right standing with God? According to the Hebrews, we can know through covenant: a covenant in which the conditions are clearly laid out for each party — God has His obligations and the people have theirs.

The righteousness of Jesus, then, in regards to His life and ministry two thousand years ago, is not so much dependant on Him perfectly submitting to a standard of good and evil as it is dependant on Him perfectly submitting to the conditions of the covenant existing between God and Israel.

So, we could say that the primary mission of Jesus (the man living two thousand years ago) was not to live a perfect life without sin on behalf of all mankind (although He did indeed do that); His primary mission was to fulfill the primary mission of Israel, which was to reconcile mankind with God.

That kind of sounds like saying the same thing twice in just a little different way. But, why couldn’t have God just given the mission of Israel directly to Jesus first? Why fumble around with Israel at all? I write a little about that here: In The Fullness of Time.