- This topic has 35 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
Gene
Everything you accuse me of doing or not doing is what you do or don’t do. In fact, you transfer to me what you are yourself.
You could do much better than that, Mr. Gene.You
I ASKED YOU A SIMPLE QUESTION, “How can Jesus be “himself” the word of God?, in light of this scripture,
John 14:10……“Believe you not that I am ”in” the Father , and the Father is “in” me? , THE WORDS THAT I SPEAK UNTO YOU, I SPEAK “NOT” OF, or (from) MYSELF : but the Father that dwells “IN” me , “HE” does the work?
Me
Gene, Jesus and the Father are one: in spirit, in hearth, in purpose. Amen?IN THE BEGINNING, JESUS WAS THE WORD OF GOD HIMSELF BECAUSE HE HIMSELF WAS GOD AND THEREFORE PERFECTLY ONE WITH THE FATHER.(John1:1)
HAVING COVERED OUR FLESH, HE WAS STILL THE WORD OF GOD, ONE WITH THE FATHER. HE WAS SPEAKING AND DOING THE WORD OF GOD.
AND WHEN IT COMES AGAIN IT WILL STILL BE THE WORD OF GOD, BECAUSE HE WILL SPEAK AND DO THE WORD OF GOD, THAT’S WHY IT IS CALLED THE WORD OF GOD IN REVELATION 19
And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called THE WORD OF GOD.
Jesus Christ is THE SAME yesterday and today, yea and for ever.(Hebrews 13:8)
…THE SAME 👉 GOD WITH US Emmanuel
Begotten in the Express Image of God
19 For it pleased the Father that in him should ALL FULNESS dwell.” “9 For in him dwelleth ALL THE FULNESS OF THE GODHEAD BODILY” (Col. 1:19; 2:9, KJV)
Other Bible renditions essentially convey the same message as the KJV, but the Amplified Bible rendition truly amplified the message with clarity:
“19 For it pleased the Father for all the fullness [of deity—the sum total of His essence, all His perfection, powers, and attributes] to dwell [permanently] in Him (the Son),” “9 For in Him all the fullness of Deity (the Godhead) dwells in bodily form [completely expressing the divine essence of God].” (Col. 1:19; 2:9, Amplified Bible)
In Christ dwells all the fulness of divinity, but this did not originate in Himself, but by the sheer pleasure of His Father that it dwells in Him.
Jesus said that He came out from God (John 16:27), and the disciples replied, “…Lo, now speakest thou PLAINLY, AND SPEAKEST NO PROVERB. 30 NOW ARE WE SURE THAT THOU KNOWEST ALL THINGS, and needest not that any man should ask thee: BY THIS WE BELIEVE THAT THOU CAMEST FORTH FROM GOD.” (vv. 29,30).
The disciples perceived and believed that Christ did not speak those words in proverbs, but in a literal sense, and as the consequence, they could not, but acknowledged that Christ “knowest all things,” which is a divine attribute; therefore, they perceived His declaration of coming out from God as the cause for His divinity, and when we connect Paul’s descriptions of Christ as “the brightness” of the Father’s “glory, and the express image of His Person…” (Heb. 1:3), then we can deduce that Christ was begotten in the express image of God’s Person, meaning He inherited divinity because the Greek word used for “person” was “hypóstasis,” which means “the substantial quality, nature, of a person” (Thayer’s 2b), “essence” or “substance” (Strong’s), “essence” (Mounce).
Therefore, Christ is fully God in terms of His divine nature by the means of having been begotten by the Father.
God bless
Berean, this is settled is it not?
There is the God who is the Father, and there was the Word that came from God who became flesh and was given the name Yeshua / Jesus. He existed with God in the beginning and all things were created through him and for him. it was the Word that became flesh and it was God who was manifest in flesh. If Jesus Christ was the Word of God, then he was divine, he came in the flesh, and is now back in the glory he had with God before the cosmos. He is the firstborn of all creation. He came first and all things followed.
Do you agree/
Proclaimer
WhatI believe is that CHRIST in the BEGINNING HAS, by being begotten directly from the Father, the same “divine attributes” as his Father which are omnipotence,
omniscience
omnipresence,
eternity.His life in the flesh, which was a life of total victory, ALLOWS HIM TO KEEP HIS ORIGINAL DIVINE ATTRIBUTES WHICH HE WOULD HAVE LOST IF HE HAD SINED.
2019 – Éditions Bibli’O At the beginning of all things, the Word existed; the Word was with God, it was God. (John 1:1)
New World Translation
© 2018 – Watchtower Bible & tract society of Pennsylvania In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. (John 1:1)
Liturgy Bible
© 2013 – Liturgical Episcopal Association for French-speaking countries IN THE BEGINNING was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Ecumenical Bible Translation
© 2010 – Éditions du Cerf & Bibli’O In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was turned towards God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Translation Claude Tresmontant
© 2007 – Éditions Francois-Xavier de Guibert In the beginning was speaking
and the talk was to god
and god he was the speaking (John 1:1)
Bible Segond 21
© 2007 – Bible Society of Geneva In the beginning, the Word already existed. The Word was with God and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
People’s Bible
© 2005 – Éditions du Jubilé In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
New Segond Bible
© 2002 – French Bible Society In the beginning was the Word; the Word was with God; the Word was God. (John 1:1)
New Translation Bayard
© 2001 – Éditions Bayard & Médiaspaul In the beginning, the word
the word with God
God, the word. (John 1:1)
Bible Word of Life
© 2000 – French Bible Society In the beginning, the Word already existed. The Word was with God and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Bible of the Sower
© 2000, International Bible Society In the beginning was he who is the Word of God. He was with God, he himself was God. (John 1:1)
Maredsous Pastoral Bible
© 1997 – Éditions de Maredsous In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
New World Translation
© 1995 – Watchtower Bible & tract society of Pennsylvania In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. (John 1:1)
Translation Sister Joan of Arc
© 1992 – Éditions Desclée de Brouwer In the beginning was the Word
and the Word was to God
and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Bible in fluent French
© 1982 – French Bible Society At the beginning of all things, the Word already existed; he who is the Word was with God, and he was God. (John 1:1)
Dove Bible
© 1978 – United Bible Alliance In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Chouraqui Bible
© 1977 – Éditions Desclée de Brouwer Header, him, the logos and the logos, him, for Elohîms, and the logos, him, Elohîms. (John 1:1)
Ecumenical Bible Translation
© 1976 – Les Éditions du Cerf In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was turned towards God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Jerusalem Bible
© 1973 – Les Éditions du Cerf In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Translation Osty-Trinquet
© 1970-1973 – Éditions Rencontre In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Translation Pirot Clamer
© 1953 – Éditions Letouzey & Ané In the beginning was the Word – and the Word was with God – and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Translation Abbé Crampon
© 1920-1923 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was in God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Synodal Version
© 1921 – Société Biblique de France In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Translation Louis Segond
• 1910 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Translation Jean-Baptiste Glaire
• 1900 – Vigouroux Bible In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Annotated Bible of Neufchâtel
• 1899 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Translation Abbé Fillion
• 1895 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Stapfer Translation
• 1889 In the beginning was the Word; and the Word was with God; and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Translation John Nelson Darby
• 1885 In the beginning was the Word; and the Word was with God; and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Ostervald Bible
• 1881 In the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Oltramare Translation
• 1874 In the beginning was the Word; the Word was with God, and the Word was god. (John 1:1)
Translation Albert Rilliet
• 1858 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was god; (John 1:1)Translation Lemaistre de Sacy
• 1759 In the beginning was the Word, & the Word was with God; & the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Translation David Martin
• 1744 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God; and that word was God: (John 1:1)
King James Version / King James Bible
• 1611/1994 – Nadine L. Stratford & Reformers’ Bible In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)
Codex Bezæ – Amphoux, Chabert D’Hyeres, Side
• 4th c. © 1996/2009/2017 – Éditions Le Bois d’Orion/L’Harmattan/Lulu In the beginning was the Logos and the Logos was with God and the Logos was God. (John 1:1)
Latin Vulgate – Jerome of Stridon
• 405 in principio erat Verbum et Verbum erat apud Deum et Deus erat Verbum (John 1:1)
Greek Septuagint – LXX
© 1935 – Alfred Rahlfs
Hebrew version
© 1968 – Biblia Hebraica StuttgartensiaBerean…….My bible say in the beginning God “SPOKE” , it does not indicate Jesus ever “SPOKE” ANYTHING “IN” THE BEGINNIG, not a single word ever sujested Jesus nor his Spirit was even there.
Do you really think that you can take the Glory of what God the Father did, and give it to any human being that ever lived? You are stealing Glory that belongs to God the Father “ONLY” and giving it to Jesus, something Jesus would never do? your words do not in any way identify with the words of Jesus nor God the Father’s words either. 2 Ths 2 , fits you perfectly, just like it does all trinitarians also.
WELL did Jesus say this, “many will come in my name, saying “I am ” Christ, and deceive “MANY”. Your part of those “MANY” , but just don’t realize it “YET” , but trust me the day will come when you will, but what will you say on that day?, you certainly can’t say you haven’t been told., because I have told you over and over. May God the Father give you Repentance, so you can, cast of all those ‘LIES’ SATAN AND HIS MINISTERS HAVE FILLED YOU WITH, AND START OVER.
Peach and love to you and yours Berean………….gene
Gene
COLOSSIANS 1:15-17
Jésus is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
[16] For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
[17] And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.God bless
Berean…….In the, “IMAGE” of God created he them, male and female created he them. So applying the word image to someone does not make you that thing, nor a God either.
Tell us if Jesus was and is God, why would he say., we could do greater works the he ever did? Why would scripture say, “he was the firstborn (into the kingdom of God) OF “MANY” BRETHERN? SCRIPTURE shows him exactly as we are. Need proof go read, no study for a change all of,
Heb 2:6-14
peace and love to you and yours Berean…………gene
Gene,
Tell us if Jesus was and is God, why would he say., we could do greater works the he ever did? Why would scripture say, “he was the firstborn (into the kingdom of God) OF “MANY” BRETHERN? SCRIPTURE shows him exactly as we are. Need proof go read, no study for a change all of,
Me
In the beginning Jesus was God, and in due time HE WAS MADE FLESH, while retaining his divinity which he did not rely on in a self-centered way.
He lived by faith in his Father, as we should.Berean,
You said “In the beginning Jesus was God, and in due time HE WAS MADE FLESH, while retaining his divinity which he did not rely on in a self-centered way.
He lived by faith in his Father, as we should.”Agreed!
Proclaimer,
If one can merely partake of divine nature in a future sense and not in an original sense, they obviously would not be gods. Nothing can “become” God in nature since the concept of the divine God would be eternal in nature. No one that has not been eternally divine in nature would qualify to be god/gods.
There are two persons who have the fullness of the eternal nature of God, that is the Father and the Son. No one who will be “partaking of the divine nature” in the future can even come close to being gods. Many are so-called gods but they are not gods for us. Only two have the fullness of the eternal divine nature, the Father and the only begotten God, the Son.
Berean.
Translating “divine” in John 1 is not STRONG ENOUGH and does not do the text justice, especially when we know that THE SON CAME UP FROM THE VERY SUBSTANCE OF THE FATHER, AND IS “the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person”
God is clearly identified in scripture as the Father. He is the God of us and the Lord Jesus Christ. You cannot argue this if you believe in scripture. The Father is the ONE TRUE GOD. This excludes Jesus Christ. HE IS THE SON OF THAT GOD.
However, in nature, the Word is theos and he came in the flesh, and is now back in the glory he had with God before the universe.
You say that divine is not a strong enough word. You might be right. Divinity speaks of nature and that nature is something we can participate in too. But Jesus Christ the Son of God and Word of God also has the character of God and the glory of God. In fact, he is the visible image and representation of the invisible God. Looking into his face is the closest thing you will ever see to looking at God. So he doesn’t just possess divine nature.
So yes, divine might not be a strong enough word. The problem is translating it to English from Greek. Divine is perhaps not strong enough and identifying him as actually God ‘The God’ is far too strong. In fact that is just plain error that leads to many false doctrines as history attests. So don’t overshoot the truth Berean because of translation issues between two languages. There is enough in scripture to understand what and who Jesus Christ is. He is between God and man and is the mediator. If we lack one word to describe all that he is, then do not force one word or two ‘The God’ to resolve it. Because that is error.
What I believe is that CHRIST in the BEGINNING HAS, by being begotten directly from the Father, the same “divine attributes” as his Father which are omnipotence,
omniscience
omnipresence,
eternity.His life in the flesh, which was a life of total victory, ALLOWS HIM TO KEEP HIS ORIGINAL DIVINE ATTRIBUTES WHICH HE WOULD HAVE LOST IF HE HAD SINED.
I pretty much agree with this Berean.
Lightenup.
If one can merely partake of divine nature in a future sense and not in an original sense, they obviously would not be gods. Nothing can “become” God in nature since the concept of the divine God would be eternal in nature. No one that has not been eternally divine in nature would qualify to be god/gods.
If you do not believe that God begat a Son, that the Word came from him, then you believe in two Gods. And just because they are in unity would not change the fact that you are teaching two Gods. Adam and eve were one, but they were still two humans.
You almost make my case for me however. Because divine nature doesn’t make you God despite God possessing divine nature. Similarly, if we are the light of the world and Christ is the light, that doesn’t make us God, despite God being light. And again, if we love our fellowman and love God, and Christ loves his Church, this does not make us or Christ, God, despite God being love.
Regarding this post of yours:
If one can merely partake of divine nature in a future sense and not in an original sense, they obviously would not be gods. Nothing can “become” God in nature since the concept of the divine God would be eternal in nature. No one that has not been eternally divine in nature would qualify to be god/gods.
If you do not believe that God begat a Son, that the Word came from him, then you believe in two Gods. And just because they are in unity would not change the fact that you are teaching two Gods. Adam and eve were one, but they were still two humans.You almost make my case for me however. Because divine nature doesn’t make you God despite God possessing divine nature. Similarly, if we are the light of the world and Christ is the light, that doesn’t make us God, despite God being light. And again, if we love our fellowman and love God, and Christ loves his Church, this does not make us or Christ, God, despite God being love.
But I do believe that God the Father begat a Son and that the Word came from him.
I believe that God the Father begetting a Son would equate to the Son being a begotten God and since there is an only begotten Son, that Son is therefore the only begotten God as well.
Not sure how you missed that I do believe that God the Father begat a Son…I have been saying that for as long as I have been on here some 14 years or so.
But I do believe that God the Father begat a Son and that the Word came from him.
But you essentially believe then that he begat a second God. Because you believe the Father is God and the Son is God.
But if you insist that they are not two Gods but one, then you have to deny that the Father is fully God. And you have to deny that the Son is fully God. Because if you hold that they are not fully God, then the Father without the Son is not God. And the Son on his own is not God. Similarly, Adam and Eve are both fully human. So that makes two humans. Thus you teach two Gods.
Saying that two have the nature of God is quite different to saying that two are actually God. This is also true with Adam and Eve because Eve is not Adam, but she is adam. That is, she doesn’t identify as Adam, rather Eve. But is still human making her part of mankind.
But in reality, there is one God and one who is the image and son of that God. He was begotten of that God and he is his son.
So, the Son of God is the important truth here. Making him out to be God is for the proud philosophers who think they know more than others and end up bringing confusion and lies. In fact, such directly attack the foundation of the Church. And why would they do that? What Spirit are they of?
Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”
Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
But I am willing to bet that you do not really understand all this.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
