A lower pray to higher. Jesus pray to God. But God never pray to jesus
You’re touching on a real theological tension, and your observation is logically correct at the level of prayer practice. Christianity has wrestled with this carefully.
Let me explain it clearly and accurately, without oversimplifying.
Your statement
“A lower prays to a higher. Jesus prays to God. But God never prays to Jesus.”
From a human and functional perspective, this is true.
1️⃣ Prayer reflects role, not worth
In Christian belief:
- Prayer flows from dependence
- Dependence flows from role, not essence
When Jesus prays:
- He is praying as a human
- He is living fully within human dependence on God
- He models how humans relate to God
So Jesus’ prayers belong to His incarnate role, not His eternal nature.
2️⃣ Jesus prayed because He truly became human
Christian doctrine holds that Jesus is:
- Fully God
- Fully man
As man:
- He depended on the Father
- He prayed
- He obeyed
If Jesus did not pray, He would not be truly human.
3️⃣ Why God the Father does not pray to Jesus
God the Father:
- Is not incarnate
- Is not dependent
- Has no higher authority to appeal to
Prayer assumes:
need, limitation, or mission guidance
God lacks none of these.
So no prayer is required.
4️⃣ This does NOT mean Jesus is “lower” in nature
Christian theology distinguishes between:
- Ontological equality (who they are)
- Economic/functional roles (what they do)
Jesus is equal in being, but subordinate in mission during the incarnation.
Equality of nature does not cancel difference of role.
5️⃣ A helpful analogy (limited but useful)
A king who disguises himself as a servant:
- Still has royal nature
- But lives under servant conditions
The king obeys rules by choice, not by inferiority.
6️⃣ Simple summary
Jesus prayed because He chose to live fully as man.
God does not pray because He lacks nothing.
Prayer shows role and mission, not value or divinity.
Your observation is logically sharp, and Christian theology agrees with it — with this important distinction.
If you want, we can:
- Compare this with Philippians 2
- Discuss how this differs from Islamic or Jewish theology
- Turn this into a clear teaching statement
Jesus asked God to forgive them who knew not what their doing. Jesus himself forgive has no full effect
You’re raising a very profound theological point, and it’s important to understand the context and the purpose of Jesus’ prayer on the cross (Luke 23:34). Let’s unpack this carefully.
1️⃣ Context of the statement
Jesus said:
“Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”
This was directed at:
- The soldiers who crucified Him
- Religious leaders who plotted His death
- The crowd mocking Him
2️⃣ Why Jesus prayed for their forgiveness
Even though Jesus is God, He prayed to the Father because:
- He was fully human and fully submitted to the Father
- Prayer models dependence, love, and mercy
- It expresses intercession for sinners
3️⃣ Does His forgiveness need God’s approval?
- Jesus’ death and resurrection made forgiveness possible for all humanity.
- The statement “Father, forgive them” is intercessory, not a question of whether He could forgive.
- The Father, in unity with the Son, grants forgiveness to those who repent or come to faith.
In other words:
- Forgiveness was already accomplished at the cross
- The prayer is participatory, inviting the Father to manifest mercy
4️⃣ Effect of the forgiveness
- Not everyone immediately experiences forgiveness because:
- Forgiveness requires repentance or faith
- People can reject it, even if Jesus prayed
So His prayer does not fail, but its effect depends on human response.
5️⃣ Simple way to understand
Jesus’ prayer shows His mercy and intercession.
Forgiveness is secured by Him, but it is applied through faith or repentance.
It’s like:
- A doctor cures a disease
- The patient must take the medicine to be healed
If you want, I can make a very short, clear explanation suitable for teaching or sharing about why Jesus prayed for forgiveness and its effect.
Do you want me to do that?
Only a subject need submission
Exactly — that statement is very accurate from both a logical and biblical perspective. Let’s break it down clearly:
1️⃣ Definition
- Submission = yielding authority or obeying someone higher
- Subject = one who is under the authority of another
So logically:
Only someone who is under authority (a subject) can truly submit.
2️⃣ Application to Jesus
- Jesus never needed to submit as God, because ontologically He is equal with the Father.
- During His earthly life, He chose to submit as part of His mission, not because He lacked authority.
- Submission here is functional, not ontological.
3️⃣ Application to humans
- Humans submit to God because:
- God is higher in authority
- We are created beings
- Submission is a response to divine authority, not optional if we are His subjects.
4️⃣ Key principle
Submission always implies a higher and lower relationship.
Jesus’ submission was voluntary and role-based, not because He was “lower” in essence.
If you want, I can tie this together with your earlier points about Jesus not taking a title, prayer, and faith-based confession to make a cohesive explanation of His humility and role. Do you want me to do that?
If jesus has to submit, being a subject, how can there be equality. It's do illogical
Ah — now I see exactly what you’re wrestling with. This is a classic question in Christian theology: how can Jesus be fully God and yet submit to the Father without losing equality? It does seem illogical if we only think in human terms. Let’s break it down carefully.
1️⃣ Distinguish nature vs role
Christian theology makes an important distinction:
| Aspect | Jesus | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Ontological nature | Fully God, fully equal with the Father | In essence, glory, power, and divinity, Jesus is equal to God the Father |
| Economic / functional role | Submits to the Father during incarnation | In His role as human and Savior, He obeys and prays, taking on a voluntary “lower” position |
Key point: Submission is about role and mission, not about essence or value.
2️⃣ Analogy (limited, but helpful)
Imagine a king who becomes a servant:
- The king remains fully a king in essence
- He acts as a servant to accomplish a mission
- His submission does not reduce his true status — it’s temporary and functional
Similarly, Jesus:
- Chooses humility to save humanity
- Does not relinquish His divinity
- Submission is part of His mission, not His nature
3️⃣ Biblical foundation
Philippians 2:5–8 says:
“Christ Jesus, being in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to His own advantage; rather, He emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant… he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death—even death on a cross.”
- Equality in being → He is fully God
- Voluntary emptying → He submits in mission
4️⃣ Why it seems illogical
- Humans usually think: if someone submits, they must be lower
- But in God’s economy:
- Submission can be voluntary and functional
- Equality of essence remains intact
- Logic of divinity is different from human social logic
5️⃣ Short takeaway
Jesus’ submission does not cancel His equality with the Father.
It reflects His mission and humility, not His essence.
If you want, I can make a very short, simple paragraph explaining this so it’s easy to share or teach without sounding contradictory.
Do you want me to do that?
We can only use husband and wife illustration. Husband and wife become 2 in 1. Of equal authority. But is us because of the role, husband loves the wife, wife Submit to husband
Exactly — that husband-wife analogy works well for illustrating role vs essence, though it has limits because it’s not perfect for divine mystery. Let’s lay it out clearly:
1️⃣ Core idea
- Husband and wife are one flesh → equal in value, dignity, and worth
- Roles differ functionally:
- Husband loves sacrificially
- Wife submits lovingly
- Submission here is role-based, not value-based
- Equality of essence remains intact
2️⃣ Apply to Jesus and the Father
- Jesus and the Father are one in essence → fully God, equal in glory and authority
- Jesus submits during His earthly mission → functional submission for love, obedience, and redemption
- Submission does not imply inferiority → it’s about fulfilling His role as Savior
3️⃣ Key point
Submission and love are voluntary roles, not measures of equality.
Just like a wife’s submission does not make her less than her husband in worth, Jesus’ submission does not make Him less than the Father.
4️⃣ Optional way to phrase it simply
“Jesus submits to the Father in role, just as a wife lovingly submits to her husband, but both are equal in value. Role does not determine worth.”
If you want, I can expand this analogy to also include the Holy Spirit, so you can explain Trinity + submission + equality in one simple illustration. Do you want me to do that?
Role means for operational purpose
Exactly — you’ve hit the point. In theology, “role” refers to functional or operational purpose, not essence, value, or worth. Let me explain clearly:
1️⃣ Role vs Essence
| Aspect | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Essence / Being | Who someone truly is (unchanging, inherent nature) |
| Role / Function | What someone does or how they operate in a situation |
- Role is temporary, functional, or mission-driven
- Essence is permanent, unchanging, and equal
2️⃣ Examples
- Husband & Wife:
- Essence → both equally human, equally valued
- Role → husband loves, wife submits
- Jesus & Father:
- Essence → both fully God, equal in glory
- Role → Jesus submits during earthly mission for redemption
3️⃣ Why this matters
- Submission or action in a role does not imply inferiority
- Roles exist for operational purpose, mission, or order
- This is how humans can understand Jesus’ submission to the Father without denying equality
4️⃣ Simple takeaway
Role = operational purpose, what someone does;
Essence = who someone truly is.
Jesus’ submission was functional, not ontological.
If you want, I can combine all your points — husband-wife analogy, Jesus’ submission, role vs essence, and prayer — into one concise teaching paragraph that explains it clearly. Do you want me to do that?
God, jesus, holy spirit, all 3 existed ar the same time, non were created being
Exactly — that’s correct according to classic Christian doctrine. Here’s a clear explanation:
1️⃣ All three are eternal
- God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit have always existed.
- None of them were created; they are co-eternal.
2️⃣ All are fully God
- Each Person of the Trinity is fully divine:
- Same essence, glory, and power
- Distinct in person, but equal in being
3️⃣ Relationship within the Trinity
- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have distinct roles:
- Father sends
- Son redeems
- Spirit applies and empowers
- Roles are functional, not a matter of hierarchy or creation
4️⃣ Biblical support
- John 1:1–3 → “In the beginning was the Word [Jesus], and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things were made through Him.”
- Genesis 1:2 → The Spirit of God was active in creation
- Shows that all existed from eternity, not created
5️⃣ Simple summary
God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all eternal, uncreated, and equal in essence. Their distinctions are about roles, not nature.
If you want, I can also make a short, teen-friendly diagram or illustration to show how the three Persons are equal yet have different roles — it makes the Trinity much easier to visualize. Do you want me to do that?
No comments:
Post a Comment