Henotheism, Polythiesm vrs Monotheism!

[kejonn]

WJ,

Good to have you back.

Actually, my post was just saying it could be translated otherwise due to the Greek words being used. But I also said I know of no translation that does not use the masculine pronouns for the HS. Just saying the alternative is there, not necessarily supporting it .

The Holy Spirit is the hardest to figure out. It really does not have a “personality” we can really latch onto by scripture. So therefore it is harder to give the HS a “sex”.

In the end, for those who do not believe in the Trinity, knowing that the HS is a “person” does not matter. We know what the HS does according to scripture and that is what is important to us.

Trinitarians OTOH seem to be more concerned that the Holy Spirit is defined as a person than what the HS does. Or so it seems.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Kejonn

You say…

Quote

Since most scholars agree that the same John wrote both verses, why do they not agree? I know you think they do because of your belief in the Trinity, but if one doesn't approach them with such a viewpoint, it is seen that the Father is the true God in John 17:3.

Well since most scholars agree that it was John that wrote both verses, why not add a couple more…

1Jo 5:20
And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding so that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.

Jhn 17:3
“This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

And speaking of pronouns…
Jn 20:28
1. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God.
2. Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

I know these verses are hard for anti-Trinitarians to accept. Jesus himself told Thomas that he was blessed because he had seen and believed. So I do understand why there are those who don’t believe today. There is no rebuke by Jesus nor correction by the true witness John. In fact a couple verses later John says…

30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
31 but these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

So the Monogenes “Unique” Son of God was more than meets the eye.

Kejonn,  as you say John also wrote Jn 17:3 and 1 John 5:20. Did John have alshiemers. Obviously you will see it the way you do and I will see it the way I do.

Here is the thing, I have scriptures that unambiguously says that Jesus is God. But out of 27 books in the NT you have none that says he isn’t. As you know the Fathers worshipped him and called him God.

You would think someone would have said…
Jesus is not God!
I said…
How can millions of believers be “In Jesus” and “In God” at the same time if he is not God?

You said..

Quote

'Cause it was God's will to allow this to take place through the sacrificial life and death of His Son? Are the reasons that are plainly given in scripture not sufficient to explain this? I think so. None of them say this is necessary that they both be God. How can we be in them if we are not God if you continue to apply this logic? Because like Yeshua, we are reborn to a spiritual birth and given the adoption. Please provide scripture that supports your belief that Yeshua must be God for this to be possible.

The logic of Yeshua being in us is not the same as us being in God. We do not “dwell” in each other. Jesus dwells in every believer. So your response is fallacious!
There is no such scripture that says Yeshua must be God, for there is no need for one since scriptures say Jesus is God!

I said…
How can this Jesus call to men everywhere at the same time saying “Come unto me” if he is not God?

You said…

Quote

Because the Father draws them? Jhn 6:44   “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day. Jhn 6:65   And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”

Isnt that interesting, yet Jesus says…

Jn 12:32
And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.

Kejonn, think about the implications of Jesus words in the these Passages..

“No one can come to Me” Jn 6:44
“No one can come to Me” Jn 6:65
“will draw all men unto me” Jn 12:32

I can see them now, the Father (and Jesus) drawing all men to Jesus and when they get there they say “Excuse me Jesus, I cant pray to you, I want to talk to the Father.” Oh thank you Father in Jesus name!

1 Cor 1:2
Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:

Its truly amazing how men call upon the name of Jesus when they get saved, then suddenly someone tells them you should not pray to Jesus but the Father. Prayer should be reserved for God alone. Yet we see men praying to Jesus in scriptures.
If Jesus is not God, then I suppose the Catholics were right in praying to Mary or Peter or the saints.

He who has the Son has God! Trully our fellowship is with the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit!

I said…
How can this Jesus dwell in the hearts of every born again child of God and be every where at the same time where 2 or 3 are gathered together in his name, if he is not God?

You said…

Quote

Because it was his Father's will for this to be so? Mat 18:19  “Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven. Mat 18:20  “For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.” Jhn 14:26  “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you. 1Cr 6:17  But the one who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit with Him.

You got it. Jesus living inside of every believer by the “One selfsame” Spirit.

Rom 8:
9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the *Spirit of God* dwell in you. Now if any man have not the *Spirit of Christ*, he is none of his.
10 And if *Christ be in you*, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

II Cor 13:5
Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that *Jesus Christ is in you*, except ye be reprobates?

Phil. 1:19
For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ,

Do you see any difference in the Spirit of Jesus and the Spirit of God dwelling in you? You shouldn’t, for we have received “One Spirit”, the Spirit of God.

No being but God can be omnipresent!  Jesus fills all in all!
BTW, I noticed your highlight “it shall be done for them by My Father!

Jesus also answers prayer.

Jn14:
13 “Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
14 “If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it.

I said…
How could this being lay the foundations of the world if he is not God? Have you considered what these
things mean and how big this Jesus is to be able to fill all things and to uphold all things by the word of “his power” and that by this being all things consist and had their origins?

You said…

Quote

Yes, but I also know his source. How about this verse: Mat 17:20 And He said to them, “Because of the littleness of your faith; for truly I say to you, if you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you. Hmmm, if we can do such feats through faith, we must be God hmmmm? Yeshua said nothing would be impossible for us with faith the size of a mustard seed. How much more will the Son be given power from his Father if nothing is impossible for us?

LOL. Kejonn when is the last time you moved a mountain? How about a peanut? Hello. I am talking about the creating of the Universe. Show me where the Father has given men the ability to make something out of nothing.

I said…
Jn 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Jn 20:28
And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

Look again my friend. The apostles didnt call any other “Theos” in a true sense but the Father and the Son.

You said…

Quote

If Yeshua was truly God in the flesh, instead of Christ in the flesh, why would this happen? Mat 28:17  When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful. Could anyone doubt God in the flesh? But they could doubt that he was truly Messiah, because many of the things predicted of the Messiah had not – to them – come true. He did not deliver them from governmental oppression. He did not deliver them from the rule of the Romans.

I don’t know why they doubted, I wasn’t there to talk to them. LOL

I suppose they doubted for the same reasons men doubt today. They cant believe that God is capable of coming in the flesh.

What makes this even more amazing is there are millions that believe Jesus Is God and raised himself from the grave today, and have been saved as such, yet they have not seen like Thomas. LOL

Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

This was a perfect opportunity for Jesus to correct Thomas for his blasphemy!  

I said…
You have yet to show that the Apostles were polytheist and believed that there was more than one God!

You said…

Quote

How many Apostles said this? How many said he was co-equal with his Father? How many said he was God Almighty? How many said the Holy Spirit was God? How many said Yeshua was “the God”. Did not the writer of acts call Herod “theos” in Acts 12:22?

Well if they believed he was God then they wouldn’t have to would they? The Apostles most often coupled the Father with the Son in their Benadictions and their Valedictions, have you considered this? The Apostles were walking a tight rope between appearing to be modalist, polytheist, or gnostics. They were trying to convey that the Father was greater than the Son but not at the exclusion of the ontological relationship between the Father and the Son. Why do you think that when they preached Jesus and that men should call on “His Name” to be saved that there was so much kaos among the Jews. To pray to another being other than God took a lot af faith, and the beaking down of some huge barriers.

You said…

Quote

That there is no God but one, the Father? I don’t have to explain anything since it is written in plain English (from the Greek) for us in 1 Cor 8:6.

I am glad to see you admit it. Now what do you do with scriptures like John 1:1.

The “was God” argument dosn’t cut it. Contextually John was showing us the nature of the Son “before” he took on the likeness of sinful in vrs 12. And the “Word” did not stop from being the Word. There is no evidence in scripture that the “Word” had a beginning. Jesus is not, (as I heard you say in another post) the result of God speaking and Jesus had a beginning. That’s a real stretch. The Word, Yeshua created all things including “time” “space” and “matter” for they are included in all things. Without him was not “Anything Made” that was made including time.

He is before all things and by him all things consist. Col 1:17

Mich 5:2
But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

You said…

Quote

Then why did Paul write “yet for us there is but one God, the Father”? Why the confusion? If he believed as you, he would have said “one God, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit”. But alas, he only wrote “one God, the Father”. Beyond that, who is “us” in verse 8:6? The church, Christians. The Father is our God, Yeshua is our Lord. Paul was writing to the church at Corinth.

It’s the way you read into it kejonn.

Trintarians in light of all scripture sees the verse as saying

There is “One God”… Comma

The Father and the Lord Jesus Christ who have equal attributes.

From whom and through whom is the same thing to us. For Jesus being the through whom all things came to us is still the from whom all things came, namely God!

I said…
You have shown nothing to say Jesus is not God. You continue to ignore that “God alone” made the heavens, yet say that he did it through Jesus the Word, Implying that there was another being less than God with God that God made all things through.[/quote]

You said…

Quote

Not a separate being until Yeshua. The Word was an extension of God’s power. Just as the Holy Spirit is. But the Word became flesh and separated himself from God. “The Word was God”, “the Word became flesh”. Does the Bible say he relinquished his flesh after resurrection? No. He was still flesh when he ascended to his Father to sit at the right hand of God. How else would Stephen be able to recognize him? He took on the form of a bond-servant for the sake of mankind so that we could be reconciled with the God of all things, YHWH. Yeshua is the last Adam.

Can you show me where the “Word” separated himself from the Father?
The Father is omnipresent and fills all things. Yeshua also
does. :0
Where does it say the “Word” was an extension of Gods power?

All things are upheld by the “Word” of his (Yeshua’s) power. Heb 1:3. I think you have it backwards. The power is an extension of the Word!
The Power is contained in the Word!

The Word that came in the flesh did not cease to be the “Word”.

I reiterarate…
You have shown nothing to say Jesus is not God. You continue to ignore that “God alone” made the heavens, yet say that he did it through Jesus the Word, Implying that there was another being less than God with God that God made all things through.

I said…
You show the early Fathers calling the Father the One God and creator and yet the same Fathers calling Jesus the creator.

You said…

Quote

Yes, and if you read further, they say he did this as the Word of God. His Father spoke, the Word created. The Fathers called him the “creator” how can the creator be of the created? So the Word had a beginning? God spoke and Jesus came into existence? Where is there scripture for this? Was there a time God did not have a word? Jesus is named the Word of God because he hears and sees what the Father does and he says and does what the Father says and does. Jesus laid the foundations of the earth by his spoken word that proceeded from his own lips and the Holy Spirit carried out his actions. John 5:17,19 John 16:13, 14. This is the unity and the Glory “The Word” (not a saying of God) has with the Father as God. You said… Why does Hebrews merely say he has been made much better than the angels yet does not say he equals his Father? Would it not have been as simple to say that for the writer of Hebrews? But the writer did not. By this, he gives us the obvious hierarchy: Father > Son > Angels > Man.

Ah well, because he became a man! But the writer of Hebrews did say he is God. Heb 1:8. Yes there is a hierarchy. But positional hierarchy of things dosnt always speak to the ontological nature of things. Are the Angels like men or are they of the same nature as God. Yet we also know that men shall rule over angels.
As far as I can tell kejonn, Jesus has all authority and power and sits at the “Right Hand” of God. Not above him nor beneath him.

I said…

Quote

Your rants will not change the thousands of years the truth of God has shouted Jesus is God.

You said…

Quote

Huh? Where? By the Catholic Church? They also worship Mary. Do you? The thousands of years that the scripture has been around screams that “true God” belongs to the Father. I don’t think we need creeds of men to determine the truth…scripture suits me just fine.

No, how about the majority of Christianity today. How many believers do you know that was saved as a non-trinitarian.

They confessed Jesus by calling out to him in prayer and being born again. Then suddenly someone comes along and tells them “Hey you can’t pray to Jesus, you must go to the Father in Prayer, you are only supposed to pray to God, Jesus is not God. Therefore telling them they have received the wrong Jesus and that they should receive “Another Jesus”.

Most protestants believe in the trinity. Just because Constantine made a creed does not mean that the Catholics didn’t have some truth. They also believe in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus.

I said…
Maybe he is not your lord and God, I dont know. But he is mine. And I am not a polytheist!

How many gods do you have?

You said…

Quote

Yeshua is my Lord, the Father is my God. I pray to the Father in Yeshua’s name. I have only on God, and He is defined just as He was thousands of years ago in Dt 6:4. If I have two Gods, then I would be confused as to which one deserves my prayers and the glory. I do honor and praise Yeshua, but more so I thank the Father who sent His only begotten Son. I do not praise, worship, or pray to the Holy Spirit.

You have One God, but yet you say Jesus is “a god”.

So how do you explain John 1:1 and other scriptures that clearly says he is God.  

[kejonn]

WJ,

What are you doing? This is you birthday, go out an celebrate. Instead you drop this big post on me to answer .

I'l be back.

[Mr. Steve]

WorshippingJesus;

You have quoted the scriptures that Christ is the express image of God. You also state the God was manifest in the flesh. You conclude from then that Christ is God. This is what the scriptures say directly from the Heavenly Father, “Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased” One thing I've noticed a lot of recently with you and CB is that you speak in general terms a lot. Christ is God. Is that the depth of your understanding. You are suppose to be a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. When you say Christ is God do you mean that he is the Father? Do you mean that he is Jehovah like CB? Do you mean that he is the Son of God? What do you mean specifically with supporting scriptures. What if I said to you that Christ is in you by his word and his spirit, and that because of that, I believe you are Christ. After all the Bible says that we are to be conformed to the image of his Son. Does that mean that we can be Christ, too?

[Worshipping Jesus]

Steve

I simply confess what the scriptures say of Jesus. Thomas called him God. John called him God. Paul called him God. The writer of Hebrews called him God. Of course he is the Son of the God. But what does that mean? He was the Word/God that took on the likeness of sinfull flesh and dwelt among us, the Lord from heaven. If one studies the scriptures they will see these terms concerning the Son.

Steve is the Fathers name God? What is it? Do you know emphatically what the name of God is.

Is the not term God a term that describes a particular class of being like human describes man?

I could say to you, “Steve are you the Son of your father who is human a human”?

You see Steve the term Son of God does not take away from his deity. In fact they were gonna stone him for claiming to be the Son of God making himself equal to God!

Jesus is the “Monogenes” 'Unique' Son of God. He is the mediator. God and man.

[kejonn]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 03 2007,16:18)

Kejonn Well since most scholars agree that it was John that wrote both verses, why not add a couple more… 1Jo 5:20 And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding so that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.

Already been over this. Of course, you choose to use translations that support your theology. You may say I do the same. But I don't. I just point out that there are many more that deny it so that makes the verse not conclusive and therefore should not be included as “defense” verse.

Let me ask you then, do you say that “This is the true God” because Jesus was the last one mentioned in the preceding sentence? If that is so, then tell me how to interpret the following verses.

Act 7:18-19 – until THERE AROSE ANOTHER KING OVER EGYPT WHO KNEW NOTHING ABOUT JOSEPH. It was he who took shrewd advantage of our race and mistreated our fathers so that they would expose their infants and they would not survive.

Is “it was he” speaking of Joseph or the other king? Your interpretation of 1 John 5:20 says “Joseph”.

How about this verse (same author BTW)?
2Jo 1:7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.

Is “Jesus Christ coming in the flesh” the “deceiver and antichrist?” According to your interpretation of 1 John 5:20, he is.

Again, how about this verse
Hbr 9:2 For there was a tabernacle prepared, the outer one, in which were the lampstand and the table and the sacred bread; this is called the holy place.

Is the “holy place” the “lampstand and the table and the sacred bread” or the “tabernacle”? Your interpretation of 1 Jo 5:20 says the former.

What then of these verses?
Jhn 1:29 The next day he saw Jesus coming to him and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! This is He on behalf of whom I said, 'After me comes a Man who has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.'

Who is “He” here? The “sin of the world”? Your interpretation of 1 Jo 5:20 says so.

More
Jhn 4:53-54 – So the father knew that it was at that hour in which Jesus said to him, “Your son lives”; and he himself believed and his whole household. This is again a second sign that Jesus performed when He had come out of Judea into Galilee.

Is the “second sign” that “he himself believed and his whole household” or was it that Yeshua saved the child? Your interpretation of 1 John 5:20 says the former.

Just one more (but I could go on for some time)
Jhn 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.”

Using the method of interpretation that you employ for 1 Jo 5:20, the only conclusion is that the “Prophet” spoken of in John 6:14 is “the sign which He had performed”. Is this not right?

Quote

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Since it is well supported that Philo was the first to conceive Logos (Word) was with God, and he specifically addresses that “ho theos” means the true God and “theos” without the article means God's ancient Word, this verse has its meaning. Philo wrote in the Greek that John wrote in and knew its usage more so than any other scholar of today. Thank God for such a discovery.

From Philo's THE CHERUBIM

(27) I have also, on one occasion, heard a more ingenious train of reasoning from my own soul, which was accustomed frequently to be seized with a certain divine inspiration, even concerning matters which it could not explain even to itself; which now, if I am able to remember it accurately, I will relate. It told me that in the one living and true God there were two supreme and primary powers–goodness and authority; and that by his goodness he had created every thing, and by his authority he governed all that he had created;(28) and that the third thing which was between the two, and had the effect of bringing them together was reason, for that it was owing to reason that God was both a ruler and good. Now, of this ruling authority and of this goodness, being two distinct powers, the cherubim were the symbols, but of reason the flaming sword was the symbol. For reason is a thing capable of rapid motion and impetuous, and especially the reason of the Creator of all things is so, inasmuch as it was before everything and passed by everything, and was conceived before everything, and appears in everything.

If you read Philo's writings, you find that “reason” is Logos. He changes form calling Logos “word” and “reason” because he believes them indistinguishable. But as you see, there is no mention of separate entities in Philo's definition of who God is, but that God has two distinctive powers and a binding force called “reason” or Logos.

Again, Philo does not override scripture, but his explanation can help clarify scripture. His explanation of “ho theos” and “theos” without the article specifically addresses John 1:1 because he mentions the Word in his explanation of it, and the fact that both “theos” and “ho theos” are present in one verse that deals with the Word! Can you deny the extreme relation here? I'll provide it again.

(1.229) What then ought we to say? There is one true God only: but they who are called Gods, by an abuse of language, are numerous; on which account the holy scripture on the present occasion indicates that it is the true God that is meant by the use of the article, the expression being, “I am the God (ho Theos);” but when the word is used incorrectly, it is put without the article, the expression being, “He who was seen by thee in the place,” not of the God (tou Theou), but simply “of God” (Theou); (1.230) and what he here calls God is his most ancient word, not having any superstitious regard to the position of the names, but only proposing one end to himself, namely, to give a true account of the matter; for in other passages the sacred historian, when he considered whether there really was any name belonging to the living God, showed that he knew that there was none properly belonging to him; but that whatever appellation any one may give him, will be an abuse of terms; for the living God is not of a nature to be described, but only to be.

Since this response is long I will split it up.

[kejonn]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 03 2007,16:18)

And speaking of pronouns… Jn 20:28 1. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God. 2. Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. I know these verses are hard for anti-Trinitarians to accept. Jesus himself told Thomas that he was blessed because he had seen and believed. So I do understand why there are those who don’t believe today. There is no rebuke by Jesus nor correction by the true witness John. In fact a couple verses later John says…

True in many senses. How ever the belief which Yeshua spoke of was not that Thomas said “My God” but that he now believes that Yeshua has truly risen and appeared to others.

Jhn 20:25 So the other disciples were saying to him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see in His hands the imprint of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.“

It does not say “I will truly believe He is God”. But again, one must look back to verse 17

Jhn 20:17 Jesus said to her, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.' “

Yeshua did NOT say he is our God, but that the Father is his God and our God. How much more definitive can you get than that? Trinitarians cling to one person saying “My God” and then therefore proceed to override what Yeshua said in John 20:17. I thought he was your Lord? If so, why do you believe Thomas and not Yeshua when he says “My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.”?

Even in Heaven, Yeshua says he has a God.

Rev 3:11 'I am coming quickly; hold fast what you have, so that no one will take your crown.
Rev 3:12 'He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God, and My new name.

Now Yeshua makes no mention that “My God” here is the Father. But lets look at this in a Trinitarian way, shall we?

The Trinity says there is only 1 God, but 3 persons. Therefore, if Yeshua says “My God” he cannot mean one of the 3 persons of God because he simply says “My God”. So he must then refer to the complete God, in the case of the Trinitarian, the “Godhead”. However, how can he do this if he is supposed to be a part of that God? Do you not again see where this dogma falls apart?

Therefore only 2 conclusions can come of any verse where Yeshua says he has a God. (1) He is not God (2) Modalism is correct. I would support choice #1. Any other choice would lead to polytheism because Yeshua cannot have a God if he is a part of that God.

Finally, a Jew in the 1st century, Philo has written that there is more than one use of the word “God” or “theos”. He said there is the true God, the ancient Logos, and other gods. Therefore it seems that the 1st centrury Philo of Alexandria has shown that our concept of the use of “theos” is not quite in line with the 1st century usage. You know, the same century that the New Testament was written in?

I have thought as much all along. Philo just backs up my supposition. If a Jew that did not even know Yeshua says this, then what can we say to refute it? If a Jew who was proficient in writing and interpreting the Greek of his time tells us of other uses of “theos”, what can we say to refute it?

[kejonn]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 03 2007,16:18)

30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: 31 but these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. So the Monogenes “Unique” Son of God was more than meets the eye. Kejonn, as you say John also wrote Jn 17:3 and 1 John 5:20. Did John have alshiemers. Obviously you will see it the way you do and I will see it the way I do.

Yes. And I'm surprised that you listed the closing of John 20. After all, it is quite clear the reason that the Gospel was written “so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.”

John did not take the advantage of the closing to say Jesus is God, did he? Just a few more words and he could have done so but he did not. Instead, he told us that Yeshua is Christ and Son of God. And then he said that if we believe this, we have life in his name. Well, guess what? This is what I believe. Therefore John assures me that I have life in his name.

Quote

Here is the thing, I have scriptures that unambiguously says that Jesus is God. But out of 27 books in the NT you have none that says he isn’t. As you know the Fathers worshipped him and called him God.

And again, I have shown that a 1st century Jew has shown us that there is more than one interpretation of “theos”. If a Jew of Yeshua's century on earth says this, what can we say against it? We don't have the knowledge of his time like Philo does.

But you also ignore such verses as 1 Cor 8:6 which says “one God, the Father”. Instead, you explain it away by saying that “one Lord, Jesus” cannot be true because that would make the Father not Lord. But Paul was writing to Gentiles who had not followed YHWH as Lord. Therefore, to the Gentiles there is but one God, the Father and one Lord, Yeshua. YHWH is Lord to the Jew who does not know Yeshua if they follow Him. But a Jew can accept Yeshua and make him Lord, but the Father will still be his God. The Father sent Yeshua to be Lord of mankind.

Let me ask you, if I do as my boss says to do, does that nullify the orders of those above him? No, he follows the direction of others. But I don't do what his boss says because he does not direct me. The authority of the Father over the Son works in much the same fashion. But in the end, a company has a boss overall (CEO), just as mankind has a God over all: YHWH, the Father of Yeshua.

Quote

You would think someone would have said… Jesus is not God! I said… How can millions of believers be “In Jesus” and “In God” at the same time if he is not God?

Because the Bible says this is true (that he is in them). This is possible because all believers have the Holy Spirit, not because Yeshua is God. I know that is your thought but then you must put the function of the Spirit in the background. The Father is our God, Yeshua is our Lord, Savior, Mediator, and High Priest, and the Holy Spirit is our Helper, Comforter, and the means by which we are unified in Christ and God.

But you fail to note that a position held from silence is not a proper one. I can hold hate in my heart for someone (I don't but can) and treat them nice and they may never know my true feelings. So if someone say “Kevin hates” you, they would likely say “No he does not. Has he ever said so?”

This is the same ploy that homosexuals use whn they feel justified in their lifestyle. Did Yeshua ever speak out against homosexuality? No, therefore he must have supported it, correct? I think you know better. Yet, he never said he didn't.

But we do have an instance where Yeshua was accused of being God. Trinitarians latch onto that and say that it is proof that he is God, but in doing so, they admit to agreeing with the spiritually blind among the Jews who sought to kill him. The only difference is the treatment: they wanted to kill him for making himself out to be God, you want to worship him as God. But how did Yeshua respond?

Jhn 10:33 The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.“
Jhn 10:34 Jesus answered them, “Has it not been written in your Law, 'I SAID, YOU ARE GODS'?
Jhn 10:35 “If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken),
Jhn 10:36 do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?

Here Yeshua was comparing himself to others who were sanctified representatives of God. Yeshua was doing the same, yet he was also the Messiah. So in essence, Yeshua is indeed saying he is not God as the only true God can be, but he can be called God just as the OT representatives of God were. This compares favorably with Philo's view of “theos”.

If you think Yeshua is doing something else here, you subtly accuse him of deception. Would Yeshua deceive? Why did he choose this response? Why would he compare himself to other men called Gods if he was not doing the same that they were going? That is, representing the one true God.

Again, I find that Trinitarians have issues with context. The Bible without context is useless to the reader.

[kejonn]

Quote

The logic of Yeshua being in us is not the same as us being in God. We do not “dwell” in each other. Jesus dwells in every believer. So your response is fallacious! There is no such scripture that says Yeshua must be God, for there is no need for one since scriptures say Jesus is God!

I never said we dwell in each other. My response does not say that. Yes Yeshua dwells in each believer through the Holy Spirit. As does God. God made this so.

Yet your second statement is misleading. You support that Yeshua must be God for this to be possible but in doing so, you deny the power of the Father in that He made a way for Yeshua to dwell in us. All things are possible with God. Therefore, it is not necessary for Yeshua to be God for this to be possible but that God has made it possible.

Quote

I said… How can this Jesus call to men everywhere at the same time saying “Come unto me” if he is not God? You said… Quote Because the Father draws them? Jhn 6:44 “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day. Jhn 6:65 And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.” Isnt that interesting, yet Jesus says… Jn 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. Kejonn, think about the implications of Jesus words in the these Passages.. “No one can come to Me” Jn 6:44 “No one can come to Me” Jn 6:65 “will draw all men unto me” Jn 12:32 I can see them now, the Father (and Jesus) drawing all men to Jesus and when they get there they say “Excuse me Jesus, I cant pray to you, I want to talk to the Father.” Oh thank you Father in Jesus name!

Now you don't realize what you are saying. Here is your logic: if the Father draws and Jesus draws, then they are both God. Yet Yeshua clearly states that no man can come to him unless the Father draws them. So what you are really supporting is that Yeshua is the Father, not just God. You won't say that but your logic leads to that.

Let me ask you, whose will was it for Yeshua to come and die on the cross? The Father's. Therefore, the context of John 6:44, 6:65, and 12:32 plainly states that the drawing is of the Father. If you support that Yeshua is the only one behind the drawing in 12:32, then you make him out to be a liar in 6:44 and 6:65 because he specifically says “Father” and not “God”. Had he said “God” you would have a position but since he said “Father” you do not.

As far as praying to Yeshua, well why don't you listen to him?

Mat 6:6 “But you, when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees {what is done} in secret will reward you.

Mat 6:9 “Pray, then, in this way: 'Our Father who is in heaven, Hallowed be Your name.

Mat 11:25 At that time Jesus said, “I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from {the} wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants.

Mar 11:25 “Whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone, so that your Father who is in heaven will also forgive you your transgressions.

Jhn 12:28 “Father, glorify Your name.” Then a voice came out of heaven: “I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again.”

Jhn 17:1 Jesus spoke these things; and lifting up His eyes to heaven, He said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, that the Son may glorify You,

Hmmm, Yeshua prays to the Father. Christians are to pattern their lives after Christ. So then, who are we to pray to then? Yeshua showed us on many occasions. I follow him.

[Mr. Steve]

WJ;

God gave us power to become the sons of God. John 1:12 Are we becoming God? or equal with God? The jews were expecting the Son of God as their messiah. They tried to argue that Christ was claiming to be equal with God, but Christ denied it and elaborated on just exactly what he could do without the Father- nothing. Paul said God was the head of Christ. When Paul said God was the head of Christ, who was Paul refering to when he said “God”? When you say Christ is equal with the Father you are misrepresenting the scriptures. You mean well, but that does not validate your teaching the trinity, which is really pluralism. One who worships another is not equal with the one worshipped. One who is commanded by another is not equal with the one who commands. They may both humans as you point out, but they are not equal in authority and that's the issue. The trinity teaches that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all equal, which contradicts the teaching of Christ.

[Mr. Steve]

WJ;

Here is the reason you need sound doctrine. Paul said be not carried about with every wind of doctrine. Know what you believe. Lets just say you are a pastor and you are in charge of feeding the flock of God.
Your flock comes to you and ask you to explain the difference between the doctrine of the Godhead among different church groups. We'll limit the group to two, the Jehovah witnesses and the Baptists. Both groups believe in God and say that Christ is God, how would you respond?

[kejonn]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 03 2007,16:18)

1 Cor 1:2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours: Its truly amazing how men call upon the name of Jesus when they get saved, then suddenly someone tells them you should not pray to Jesus but the Father. Prayer should be reserved for God alone. Yet we see men praying to Jesus in scriptures. If Jesus is not God, then I suppose the Catholics were right in praying to Mary or Peter or the saints.

Ahhh, but you seem to miss something. “Call on the name”. It is certainly true that we are saved in the name of Christ. The Father willed this to be so.

What other man in the Bible called out to Yeshua besides Stephen? You say “men” but here we see only one. And the only time we see it is when Stephen was about to die. So was this the same prayer that Yeshua spoke about so many times? Was this truly a prayer at all?

The word often used for prayer in the NT is “proseuchomai”. In Acts 7:59, the word used when Stephen “called upon” Yeshua was “epikaleō”. This Greek word is translated more times than not as “surname” in the KJV. But in relation to “called”, “called on” and “called upon”, the word was used in the following ways:

Act 2:21 And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Act 9:14 And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.

Act 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

Rom 10:14 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?

2Ti 2:22 Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.

If you mean the next verse though, Acts 7:60, then you see Stephen “cried out” which is “krazō”. So neither of these verses supports that Stephen prayed to Yeshua but they do say he “called upon” and “cried out” to him.

However, in Acts 1:24 we do see an instance where prayer was directed towards Yeshua. This was a very specific case though because the Apostles needed to know which of the men, Joseph or Matthias, was to be chosen to replace Judas. Yeshua had charge over the Apostles and it is well supported that he chose them all throughout the Gospels. The lot fell to Matthias.

This verse, a very specific prayer for the replacement of Judas, was the only time “proseuchomai” was directed to Yeshua.

Quote

He who has the Son has God! Trully our fellowship is with the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit! I said… How can this Jesus dwell in the hearts of every born again child of God and be every where at the same time where 2 or 3 are gathered together in his name, if he is not God? You said… Quote Because it was his Father's will for this to be so? Mat 18:19 “Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven. Mat 18:20 “For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.” Jhn 14:26 “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you. 1Cr 6:17 But the one who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit with Him. You got it. Jesus living inside of every believer by the “One selfsame” Spirit. Rom 8: 9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the *Spirit of God* dwell in you. Now if any man have not the *Spirit of Christ*, he is none of his. 10 And if *Christ be in you*, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. II Cor 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that *Jesus Christ is in you*, except ye be reprobates? Phil. 1:19 For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, Do you see any difference in the Spirit of Jesus and the Spirit of God dwelling in you? You shouldn’t, for we have received “One Spirit”, the Spirit of God.

Yet this proves nothing towards the “Godship” of Yeshua. The Spirit of God is the Holy Spirit. It allows both God and Yeshua to dwell in us because the Spirit is bound to both of them.

Quote

No being but God can be omnipresent! Jesus fills all in all! BTW, I noticed your highlight “it shall be done for them by My Father!

Is Yeshua omnipresent? Truly? Provide evidence. Omnipresent means “Existing in all places at all times.” Where do we see that said of Yeshua? Filling the hearts of all believers does not mean he is everywhere but that he is in the hearts of those who believe him. There is a huge difference.

Quote

Jesus also answers prayer. Jn14: 13 “Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 “If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it.

Interesting. Certainly because he spoke while he was on earth, well before his death, resurrection, and ascension. But was he saying whatever you ask him in prayer? No. Again, you must imply your theology rather than go by what is written. How did Yeshua tell us to pray? To the Father.

Also, lets look at John 14:14. The only way this verse works for your defense is the phrase “If you ask Me”. The rest of 14:13-14 speaks only of asking in his name, not directly asking him. It says he will do it, but that does not mean that he is telling us to pray to him. He always said to pray to the Father. Except here in John 14:14, right?

According to the original Greek, there is no “”me” in verse 14. It is implied. The word for “ask” is “aiteō” and by itself it is never translated as anything but one word. The Greek word for “me” is either “eme” or “moi” and neither is not found in John 14:14.

Since there is no “eme” or “moi” found in John 14:14, then we need to find the real context of these verses so we know who we are to pray to.

Jhn 16:23 “In that day you will not question Me about anything. Truly, truly, I say to you, if you ask the Father for anything in My
name, He will give it to you.
Jhn 16:24 “Until now you have asked for nothing in My name; ask and you will receive, so that your joy may be made full.

[Mr. Steve]

Christ has been given a name which is above every name. Why? That at the name of Jesus every knee would bow and every tongue would confess that Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father. Christ is God manifest in the flesh. Revelation shows Christ being worshipped. Worthy is the Lamb that was slain, worthy to receive honor, glory, and power.
Christ is also the mediator between God and Man. He is our advocate with the Father. What is an advocate? Your attorney, arguing and interceeding on your behalf. There is no heresy in praying to Christ. However, Christ did teach us to pray to the Father in his name. In the book of Acts we see that preaching in the name of Jesus was where all the trouble started. Proclaiming that Jesus is the Son of God and God's way to salvation. That was the entire message that outraged the jews. They crucified Christ because of envy when Pilot was determined to let him go. The message to the world is salvation through Christ. The name of Jesus is the seal of God. Whatsoever ye do, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus.

[kejonn]

Quote

I said… How could this being lay the foundations of the world if he is not God? Have you considered what these things mean and how big this Jesus is to be able to fill all things and to uphold all things by the word of “his power” and that by this being all things consist and had their origins? You said… Quote Yes, but I also know his source. How about this verse: Mat 17:20 And He said to them, “Because of the littleness of your faith; for truly I say to you, if you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you. Hmmm, if we can do such feats through faith, we must be God hmmmm? Yeshua said nothing would be impossible for us with faith the size of a mustard seed. How much more will the Son be given power from his Father if nothing is impossible for us? LOL. Kejonn when is the last time you moved a mountain? How about a peanut? Hello. I am talking about the creating of the Universe. Show me where the Father has given men the ability to make something out of nothing.

No I have not done these things. Yet, there they are, in B&W for us to read. Was Yeshua being facetious here? Was he merely “sporting” with us? Do you accuse Yeshua of lying or deception?

Quote

I said… Jn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Jn 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. Look again my friend. The apostles didnt call any other “Theos” in a true sense but the Father and the Son. You said… Quote If Yeshua was truly God in the flesh, instead of Christ in the flesh, why would this happen? Mat 28:17 When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful. Could anyone doubt God in the flesh? But they could doubt that he was truly Messiah, because many of the things predicted of the Messiah had not – to them – come true. He did not deliver them from governmental oppression. He did not deliver them from the rule of the Romans. I don’t know why they doubted, I wasn’t there to talk to them. LOL I suppose they doubted for the same reasons men doubt today. They cant believe that God is capable of coming in the flesh.

Ah, but is does not say what you said in scripture does it WJ? Lets look then.

1Jo 4:2 By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God;

2Jo 1:7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.

Do those verses say that God came in the flesh? No, says Jesus Christ came in the flesh. The only thing you have is “Word was God, Word became flesh”. “was, became”. Nowhere do we see “was God, became flesh, was flesh, became God”. All of the verse supporting the authorization of powers to him by his Father do not say “an he became God”. In fact, the best it ever does is say “having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they” (Heb 1:4). Does “better than angels” mean “equal with God”? Only in the mind of a Trinitarian.

Beyond that, do we really know what Logos is? After all, what being has ever been called “speech, word, reason, discourse, doctrine, etc”.? So unless there is some clarification, there is no real way to know what John is talking about here.

Speaking of 1 John 4, there is another awesome verse in there.

1Jo 4:15 Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God.

Let me ask you WJ: do you have another verse that is similar to this, speaking of Jesus as God? Does the Bible say anything like “Whoever confesses that Jesus is God, God abides in him, and he in God.”? I won't be holding my breath waiting for your answer.

Quote

What makes this even more amazing is there are millions that believe Jesus Is God and raised himself from the grave today, and have been saved as such, yet they have not seen like Thomas. LOL Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. This was a perfect opportunity for Jesus to correct Thomas for his blasphemy!

But the belief was in the risen Lord, not in his “Godship”. The context proves this out. And Yeshua has already corrected the Jews by comparing himself to OT judges and prophets who were called Gods. Again, context rules the day when the Bible is studied. Without it, we can believe almost anything. So why would he rebuke Thomas if OT men could be called God? And don't come back with “how many others in the NT do we see 'theos' applied to?” But if you really want to play that game, here ya go

Acts 12:22 The people kept crying out, “The voice of a god and not of a man!”

Acts 28:6 But they were expecting that he was about to swell up or suddenly fall down dead. But after they had waited a long time and had seen nothing unusual happen to him, they changed their minds and began to say that he was a god.

Both instances was “theos” without the article. Just like in John 1:1. And the interesting part is that “he was a god” in Acts 28:6 is “autos einai theos” and “Word was God” is “logos en theos”. Both “einai” and “en” derive from the same word, “eimi”. So how do you explain “was a god” in Acts 28:6 but “was God” in John 1:1?

And the fact that millions believe it means little. How many of those millions have verified it scripturally? How many millions sit in pews every week, being fed only what they hear without bothering to study for themselves? How man were killed for heresy because they denied the Trinity in the early centuries? How many were denied their own copy of scriptures lest they too question the validity of this manmade doctrine? It is quite easy to see then why so many millions have believed this. After all, many were told that this was true, were threatened when they questioned it, and were not allowed their own copy of scripture.

How many millions believe in Allah? How many millions believe in Santa Clause? How many millions believe in Hindu gods? The belief of millions does not make for reality.

Quote

I said… You have yet to show that the Apostles were polytheist and believed that there was more than one God! You said… Quote How many Apostles said this? How many said he was co-equal with his Father? How many said he was God Almighty? How many said the Holy Spirit was God? How many said Yeshua was “the God”. Did not the writer of acts call Herod “theos” in Acts 12:22? Well if they believed he was God then they wouldn’t have to would they? The Apostles most often coupled the Father with the Son in their Benadictions and their Valedictions, have you considered this? The Apostles were walking a tight rope between appearing to be modalist, polytheist, or gnostics. They were trying to convey that the Father was greater than the Son but not at the exclusion of the ontological relationship between the Father and the Son. Why do you think that when they preached Jesus and that men should call on “His Name” to be saved that there was so much kaos among the Jews. To pray to another being other than God took a lot af faith, and the beaking down of some huge barriers.

The Apostles knew nothing of the Trintitarians “ontology”. Did you ever stop to consider that the New Covenant was about the Son and the Father? So how could they leave him off? They were no longer Jews, but Christians.

The New Covenant message was salvation of the soul, not the same as the OT deliverance from oppression of other peoples. This was accomplished through the death of Yeshua. So salvation to Christians is all about Yeshua and God. Not Yeshua is God. “For God so loved the world that He sent His only begotten Son”. If God is one God but three persons, the Son must be separate because God (3 persons) sent the Son. It does not say “For God the Father” it says “God”. Again, even in such simple verse, the Trinity dogma stumbles. If the writers of the NT wanted so much to inform us that Yeshua was God in the same sense as the Father, they would have always uses “God the Father” in such instances. But they simply used “God”. This makes the Trinity fall down because they did not make such distinctions. Once more, the only way to support the Trinitarian view is by implication. IOW, you say “This is what the writer really meant”.

[Mr. Steve]

WJ;

The Father spoke himself (not through Jesus) on a couple of occassions in the new testament, what did the Father say?

Steven

[kejonn]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 03 2007,16:18)

You said… Quote That there is no God but one, the Father? I don’t have to explain anything since it is written in plain English (from the Greek) for us in 1 Cor 8:6. I am glad to see you admit it. Now what do you do with scriptures like John 1:1. The “was God” argument dosn’t cut it. Contextually John was showing us the nature of the Son “before” he took on the likeness of sinful in vrs 12. And the “Word” did not stop from being the Word. There is no evidence in scripture that the “Word” had a beginning. Jesus is not, (as I heard you say in another post) the result of God speaking and Jesus had a beginning. That’s a real stretch. The Word, Yeshua created all things including “time” “space” and “matter” for they are included in all things. Without him was not “Anything Made” that was made including time.

Explain to me “autos einai theos” (“he was a god”) in Acts 28:6 and “logos en theos” (“Word was God”). Both “einai” and “en” derive from the same word, “eimi”. So how do you explain “was a god” in Acts 28:6 but “was God” in John 1:1? Neither has the article, both phrases almost identical. This one should be fun to play with.

Quote

He is before all things and by him all things consist. Col 1:17 Mich 5:2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

Yes, he existed with God in some form or fashion since before the creation. This does not say he is the true and living God Almighty.

Quote

You said… Quote Then why did Paul write “yet for us there is but one God, the Father”? Why the confusion? If he believed as you, he would have said “one God, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit”. But alas, he only wrote “one God, the Father”. Beyond that, who is “us” in verse 8:6? The church, Christians. The Father is our God, Yeshua is our Lord. Paul was writing to the church at Corinth. It’s the way you read into it kejonn. Trintarians in light of all scripture sees the verse as saying There is “One God”… Comma The Father and the Lord Jesus Christ who have equal attributes.

Uh, yikes. That has to be the strongest cases for special pleading I have ever encountered. The sentence stands alone to speak of only one God, the Father. This is definitely “rose colored” glasses at its finest. Why would this verse even exist if “one God” and “Father” was not coupled? Perhaps…and hold on to your seat…Paul knew some would come along and start believing in something like, say, the Trinity. So he proceeded to disabuse you of such notions by saying “There is but one God, the Father”. To deny this is to place into question everything else in the Bible because there is no stronger case in all of the NT against any other bing the true God but the Father of Yeshua.

Basically you want to read that this verse is telling us that there is only one God the Father as opposed to many God the Fathers. And then, that there is only one Lord Jesus Christ as opposed to many Lord Jesus Christs. Is that what you see here?

So why does Eph 4:6 say “One God and Father”. Why does 1 Tim 2:5 say “One God” and then go on to say that there is only one mediator between that God and man, Yeshua? Why bother with this verses if they were not meant to specifically show that the Father was the One True God? Yet, Trinitarians through their special pleading come up with some weird, eyebrow-raising way to explain these verses away. Only those who think they will lose all faith if they stop believing the Trinity continue to deny the plain, simple way these verses differentiate the Lord Jesus from God the Father.

Quote

I said… You have shown nothing to say Jesus is not God. You continue to ignore that “God alone” made the heavens, yet say that he did it through Jesus the Word, Implying that there was another being less than God with God that God made all things through.

You said…

Quote

Not a separate being until Yeshua. The Word was an extension of God’s power. Just as the Holy Spirit is. But the Word became flesh and separated himself from God. “The Word was God”, “the Word became flesh”. Does the Bible say he relinquished his flesh after resurrection? No. He was still flesh when he ascended to his Father to sit at the right hand of God. How else would Stephen be able to recognize him? He took on the form of a bond-servant for the sake of mankind so that we could be reconciled with the God of all things, YHWH. Yeshua is the last Adam.

Can you show me where the “Word” separated himself from the Father?
The Father is omnipresent and fills all things. Yeshua also does. :0
Where does it say the “Word” was an extension of Gods power? [/quote]
Show me where Yeshua “fills all things”. Show me where the Word wasn't an extension of who God is. Show me that the Word is anything but “reason, speech, spoken words, etc”. Show me the Word in action in the OT as a separate being. “Us” in Gen 1 won't suffice because the angels had already been created. How do we know we were not created in the image of God and the likeness of angels?

Quote

All things are upheld by the “Word” of his (Yeshua’s) power. Heb 1:3. I think you have it backwards. The power is an extension of the Word! The Power is contained in the Word!

But where did he obtain this power? Where do we see that the power he has was not given to him by his Father? Again, I could refer back to us moving mountains, but you seem to disbelieve Bible verses that don't fit your theology. So if we can move mountains with a little faith, how much more will the power be of one whom was given such from his Father?

Quote

The Word that came in the flesh did not cease to be the “Word”.

He didn't? It says “The Word became flesh”. The only other time we s
ee the “Word” again is in Revelation, and it is just a name on his garment. Kevin is my name, it is not who I am.

Quote

I reiterarate… You have shown nothing to say Jesus is not God. You continue to ignore that “God alone” made the heavens, yet say that he did it through Jesus the Word, Implying that there was another being less than God with God that God made all things through.

Nope. I have suggested that the Word is an extension of the Father. You, in turn, have not shown that Yeshua was a separate being before his earthly birth. I ask that you do so, without implication.

And of course, no scripture in the Bible will convince a Trinitarian that Yeshua is not God because they refuse to believe anything else, even when there are verses like 1 Cor 8:6 which plainly, blatantly, and boldly deny such. “One God, the Father”. But no, the Bible does not mean that these is only One God, the Father it means that there is only one Father, right? The “One God” phrase was just thrown in there. That Paul, such a kidder!

Quote

I said… You show the early Fathers calling the Father the One God and creator and yet the same Fathers calling Jesus the creator. You said… Quote Yes, and if you read further, they say he did this as the Word of God. His Father spoke, the Word created. The Fathers called him the “creator” how can the creator be of the created? So the Word had a beginning? God spoke and Jesus came into existence? Where is there scripture for this?

Well, lets see, maybe this verse?

Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.

Hmmm, to be “firstborn” means to come from someone else, wouldn't you say? Only the Father is unbegotten.

Quote

Was there a time God did not have a word? Jesus is named the Word of God because he hears and sees what the Father does and he says and does what the Father says and does. Jesus laid the foundations of the earth by his spoken word that proceeded from his own lips and the Holy Spirit carried out his actions. John 5:17,19 John 16:13, 14. This is the unity and the Glory “The Word” (not a saying of God) has with the Father as God.

The Bible is not specific on when the Word came along, but to be “firstborn” means you can't be co-eternal in all sense. So, in relation to man's time, he is eternal. In relation to God's time, the Word had a beginning. Which came first, the chicken or the egg? God didn't create eggs, he created creatures, so the eggs came second. Just as the “firstborn” Word came from the all eternal Father.

Quote

You said… Quote Why does Hebrews merely say he has been made much better than the angels yet does not say he equals his Father? Would it not have been as simple to say that for the writer of Hebrews? But the writer did not. By this, he gives us the obvious hierarchy: Father > Son > Angels > Man. Ah well, because he became a man! But the writer of Hebrews did say he is God. Heb 1:8. Yes there is a hierarchy. But positional hierarchy of things dosnt always speak to the ontological nature of things. Are the Angels like men or are they of the same nature as God. Yet we also know that men shall rule over angels. As far as I can tell kejonn, Jesus has all authority and power and sits at the “Right Hand” of God. Not above him nor beneath him.

Yet, you still cannot deny that (1) he was made better than angels but was never said to be made equal with his Father and (2) the OT reference was made to an earthly king. Again, and once more, we see another instance where “God” doesn't always mean “God Almighty” and “God of gods”.

Finally, think about this one and think hard. If God is 3 persons, and Jesus is God in the same sense as the Father and not in the sense that Yeshua pointed out (“You are Gods”), how can one God have a God if they are both that God? This would be out-and-out polytheism. There is absolutely no escape. After all, there is only one God, right? So how can they call each other God if there is only one?

Quote

I said… Quote Your rants will not change the thousands of years the truth of God has shouted Jesus is God. You said… Quote Huh? Where? By the Catholic Church? They also worship Mary. Do you? The thousands of years that the scripture has been around screams that “true God” belongs to the Father. I don’t think we need creeds of men to determine the truth…scripture suits me just fine. No, how about the majority of Christianity today. How many believers do you know that was saved as a non-trinitarian.

Every single one? I have yet in 20 years to hear a gospel message presented in a Trinitarian manner. People usually learn about the Trinity after they receive Christ. Many do not even learn then. I had someone in my class who has been a Christian for 17 years who had no idea what I was talking about when I mentioned the Trinity. So your question is set up on false pretenses.

I myself was saved as a non-trinitarian. I only learned of the belief that Yeshua was God some time after I accepted Christ. It may have even been years. After all, most prayers I've heard start out “Heavenly Father” or “Our Father who is in Heaven”. I can't personally recall a single public prayer where someone started out “Lord Jesus”. But on the flipside, almost all close out “In Jesus' name I pray, Amen”. And I still close my prayer's out in such manner. He did tell us to ask in his name after all.

Quote

They confessed Jesus by calling out to him in prayer and being born again. Then suddenly someone comes along and tells them “Hey you can’t pray to Jesus, you must go to the Father in Prayer, you are only supposed to pray to God, Jesus is not God. Therefore telling them they have received the wrong Jesus and that they should receive “Another Jesus”.

Not where I'm from. Every “sinner's prayer” I've hear
d starts out with God, about repentance, and accepting Yeshua as Savior and Lord. Like I said, I've never – not one single time – heard anyone pray directly to Jesus. In 20 years of being a Baptist, who, BTW, believe in the Trinity.

Quote

Most protestants believe in the trinity. Just because Constantine made a creed does not mean that the Catholics didn’t have some truth. They also believe in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. I said… Maybe he is not your lord and God, I dont know. But he is mine. And I am not a polytheist! How many gods do you have? You said… Quote Yeshua is my Lord, the Father is my God. I pray to the Father in Yeshua’s name. I have only on God, and He is defined just as He was thousands of years ago in Dt 6:4. If I have two Gods, then I would be confused as to which one deserves my prayers and the glory. I do honor and praise Yeshua, but more so I thank the Father who sent His only begotten Son. I do not praise, worship, or pray to the Holy Spirit. You have One God, but yet you say Jesus is “a god”. So how do you explain John 1:1 and other scriptures that clearly says he is God.

Already covered. It is plainly evident by studying Philo and his direct mention of “theos” without article, and then comparing John 1:1 with Acts 28:6 that there is a difference.

[Mr. Steve]

To WJ;

You and Kejonn seem to have quite a lengthy debate that appears perpetual. No matter what I post in usually a few sentences Kejonn posts a 5000 word essay in response to yours. Consequently, my posts seem to be falling through the cracks in the floor. I would appreciate a response to mine as well. Thank you.

Steven

[kejonn]

Steve,

Did you see his original post? I had to break it up .

[Mr. Steve]

Kejonn;

I know. The worst part is that he asked the same questions over and over? I like where you said in one place that you've already responded to part of his post. That's probably the best response.

Take care,

Steven

[kejonn]

Steve,

The funniest part to me — and I never really bought it when I accepted the Trinity — was that Trinitarianism was monotheistic. As it is laid out, perhaps you can make a case but then when you try to apply it to scripture, it fails to remain monotheistic.

A simple case is John 20. Yeshua says “My Father and your Father, My God and your God”. So here, the Father is God for both us and Yeshua. Not a “person” of God, by “my” and “your”. In other words, this leaves no wiggle room.  The Father, according to Yeshua is our God and his God.

Now go on to Thomas. He says to Yeshua “My Lord and my God!”. Now what do we have? If Thomas is truly calling Yeshua his personal God, on equal grounds with the Father, then Thomas now has 2 Gods. Unless he ignores the Father and only Yeshua is his God. But Yeshua tells Mary that his God, the Father, is also the God of the disciples.

So if we say the Father is our God, is then the Father all of the “Godhead”? After all, God is 3 “persons”, right? Well, the Father is one of those, so how can we say He is our God when God is supposed to be all three?

Here's a simple analogy. A company has 3 presidents with equal standing. They form the top level of the company, there are none above them. Let's call them Bob, Larry, and Frank. Now, would it be correct for Frank to say that Larry was his President? No, they are all equal.

So then, how can Yeshua say he has a God if he is part of God?

So in the words of the Trinitarians “how many Gods does Thomas have?”

[Author]

Posts