- This topic has 25,959 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hi Gadam,
YOU:He wanted to convince his Jewish audience that Jesus was the Messiah but the chapter 1 proved other than that. His Gospel became the source of claiming Jesus’ divinity.
No Jew or Hebrew will agree with this writer’s views on Messiah that he would be involved in God’s creation and would be called divine.
This is the problem with the NT writers.
ME: THE PROBLEM IS WITH THE JEWS AND THE HEBREWS, TO REMAIN STAGNATED TOTALLY CARNAL-MINDED PEOPLE AND STILL EXPECTING ONLY AN EARTHLY TRANSIENT REDEEMER.
Peace and love in Jesus Christ
Proclaimer and Adam,
The Father + The Son + The Spirit = One God, One Lord, and One Spirit. All are identified as YHVH.
The Father alone is not One God, One Lord, and One Spirit.
So you are a Trinitarian then.
Except you do not believe that the Spirit is a person, thus making you a heretic in the eyes of Trinitarian authority.
So you are a Trinitarian heretic.
Neither those who believe in the one true God can accept your doctrine and neither can the Trinitarian accept you.
Think for a minute. What are the chances that you are the only one right? You would even need to correct Jesus because he believed and taught different to you.
The Father alone is not One God
yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.
Your not US are you LU?
ADAM……Scripture that say “the word of God became flesh” is one of the most misunderstood scriptures in our text for several reasons, one is a very simple to understand , because a word is an expression of intellect, it has nothing to do with flesh, words never has and never will have either , words are spirit according to Jesus.
“Jesus said the words I am telling you. Are “NOT” MY WORDS, but the words of him that sent me”.You argue this way because you really cannot differentiate between an attribute and a person. Just like truth and light, there is the one who is The Truth and the Life. The Logos is like that. It is an attribute of God and it is a person, the first to be with God.
And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war. He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called THE WORD OF GOD.
I understand that gadam doesn’t believe in the New Testament and I can respect that because he is being honest. What about you Gene. You claim to believe it and to even represent it, but you really do not do you?
Like I said earlier, a wolf is better than a wolf in sheep’s clothing IMO. One is at least honest about attacking the sheep and the faith. And you call each other brother which is another clue of wolf status.
Hello brother Gene, I appreciate your post to me on John 1:1 about the “Word”. In fact the poetical narration of this writer of Fourth Gospel wanted to place Jesus, the supposed Messiah along with God in the beginning by comparing him with the “Word” which was involved in God’s creation in the beginning. This imagination of this writer caused Christianity to interpret Jesus as God who was with God in the beginning.
Let me correct you on this one. Making Jesus as God took about 3 or 4 centuries to evolve. The NT writers were not alive on earth in that period. Here is what was believed before the Nicene Creed by apostles and biblical scholars.
Come on another, another style, but I appreciate …. and you?
Proclaimer: It was addressed perfectly and you know it. That is why you got a bit upset.
Actually, you still haven’t addressed it. Since the point I’m making is easy for anyone to understand, I can only imagine that you’re going out of your way to pretend like you can’t understand it. Maybe this will help…
Are you able to grasp the concept that what would be considered “UP/OVER THE HEAD OF/ABOVE” person #1 would NOT be “UP/OVER THE HEAD OF/ABOVE” persons 2, 3 and 4? All 4 persons in this painting have a different “UP”.
It is the same on your imaginary ball earth. If you are at the top, bottom, or one side of the ball, with your feet on the ball, then you will look UP to see the sky, and DOWN to see the ball you’re standing on. If I am on the opposite side of the ball, then I will look UP to see the sky, and DOWN to see the ball I’m standing on. But to see the sky that is above YOU, I wouldn’t look up. I’d have to look DOWN and through the ball to see the sky that is above YOU. It’s really not that hard, is it?
YOUR up is the complete opposite of MY up. YOUR up is actually MY down.
So the question, once again, is: How is God able to be ABOVE you when you look UP OVER YOUR HEAD TO THE SKY, while God is also ABOVE me when I look UP OVER MY HEAD TO THE SKY?
Proclaimer: If God is only above that which is on one referenced flat plain, then who is the God of all the things that inhabit the other side of things that are essentially below in the same reference frame?
The “other side”? There is no “other side”. There is only ONE up, and ONE down…
Here you’ll notice that God is ABOVE all 3 people. They all look “UP/ABOVE THEIR HEADS” to where God dwells. And God is ABOVE all three of them.
Gene: Berean …..I realize Jesus is your God, and you worship him as such, but he is not my God, I have a God and it’s the same God , Jesus has. Thank you for your concern though.
peace and love to you and yours……..gene
Brilliant! No long explanations needed. Just the plain, simple and SCRIPTURAL fact that our God is also Jesus’ God. We know this because Jesus told us so.
Btw, our Heavenly Father is also Jesus’ Heavenly Father. And we strive to become spiritual children of God. We don’t strive to become spiritual children of Jesus – but of God. Reason #2493 that Jesus cannot be God.
gadam: Your strange ideas of interpreting Hebrew scriptures…
Like I told you in the other thread, “Lol, ha ha” is not a valid argument. Neither is claiming the other guy’s ideas are “strange”, therefore you “win”. 🙄
gadam: Sorry I don’t want any further arguments on this Arian controversy here with me.
Fantastic! Take care.
Berean: Gene
[15] Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
[16] For by him were all things created…Berean, who is our Creator?
Hi Mike,
Yes, Pebbles, not Bambam. When I realized that I got the name wrong, the “edit” button was gone, haha.
You said:
The Bible ALWAYS identifies God with SINGULAR pronouns and verbs. But PLURAL families (the Flintstones) or entities (the YHVHs) would not be characterized with singular verbs and pronouns.
We say the Flintstones got in THEIR car, not HIS car. Similarly, if there was such a thing as “the YHVHs”, we’d say that THEY sent THEIR angel, not HE sent HIS angel.
The Bible DOES NOT ALWAYS identify God with singular pronouns and verbs. Also, a family can be characterized with singular verbs and pronouns.
For example:
Do you see that where it says “I am Yahweh, your God” the “your” is plural? Then it continues “who brought you,” the verb “brought you” is singular?
This kind of thing is in multiple places. While you are thinking about it, the Hebrew wouldn’t put an ‘s after a family name. So Flintstone’s is the English way of including the whole family with the last name of Flintstone but not the Hebrew way. The Hebrew language most certainly uses the singular pronoun and verb for a group as you can see in the above example.
Prov 8
22Jehovah possessed me — the beginning of His way, Before His works since then.
23From the age I was anointed, from the first, From former states of the earth.
24In there being no depths, I was brought forth, In there being no fountains heavy [with] waters,
25Before mountains were sunk, Before heights, I was brought forth.
26While He had not made the earth, and out-places, And the top of the dusts of the world.
27In His preparing the heavens I [am] there, In His decreeing a circle on the face of the deep,
28In His strengthening clouds above, In His making strong fountains of the deep,
29In His setting for the sea its limit, And the waters transgress not His command, In His decreeing the foundations of earth,
30Then I am near Him, a workman, And I am a delight — day by day. Rejoicing before Him at all times,
Mike,
You asked:
Kathi, do you really think Paul was saying that the Father isn’t also our Lord?
Paul understands the Father is also our “kurios” Lord, and Paul understands that Jesus is also our theos. In the context of 1 Cor 8:6, Paul is identifying two persons who are our God and Lord. In the NT when the context is speaking about the Father and the Son, they are typically distinguished as God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. That doesn’t mean that the Father is never referred to as Lord or the Son is never referred to as God.
But what is even more striking is how the Father, Himself, identifies the Son as the YHVH who laid the foundation of the earth and the heavens are the works of His hands. Wrestle with that.
Paul understands the Father is also our “kurios” Lord, and Paul understands that Jesus is also our theos. In the context of 1 Cor 8:6, Paul is identifying two persons who are our God and Lord. In the NT when the context is speaking about the Father and the Son, they are typically distinguished as God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. That doesn’t mean that the Father is never referred to as Lord or the Son is never referred to as God.
But what is even more striking is how the Father, Himself, identifies the Son as the YHVH who laid the foundation of the earth and the heavens are the works of His hands. Wrestle with that.
I always wonder what did Paul wanted to prove by quoting Father as One God and Jesus as One Lord in 1Cor 8:6. Was he modifying the Shema of Israel Deut 6:4 “Hear, O Israel: The Lord (YHWH) is our God, the Lord (YHWH) alone” ?
You are correct, Abraham is not talking to the Father. He is talking to YHVH however
He is talking to God the Father, but through the Son or Angel of YHWH.
Do you not understand. If you see the Son you see the Father.
Not all instances say Angel of the LORD. But some say The Angel in the New Testament because they understand what is going on.
Moses saw God face to face. But in the New Testament it says the Angel. Let’s imagine it didn’t say that in that instance. Then you would say it was the literally God himself with a body.
Not so though.
God made the universe through the Son and again you are confused and make Jesus the creator. If you don’t understand that the one true God is invisible and has a Son who is the express image of this God, and a personal form of Binity or Trinity is the only way your mind can understand, then only you can help yourself by letting God teach you via his Spirit.
You then hinge your philosophy on one quote in scripture that says ‘o god’ and ignore all the clear scriptures and teaching that shows us clearly that there is one true God and that he has a Son whom he sent into the world.
Clearly your bias is what draws your conclusions hence why no one takes you seriously. Remember that those who reject the Son reject God so be careful with your teaching and doctrine. Again, there is God and he has a Son. Antichrists deny the Son. Many doctrines there are that deny the Son.
LU: …the Hebrew wouldn’t put an ‘s after a family name. So Flintstone’s is the English way of including the whole family with the last name of Flintstone but not the Hebrew way.
Really? So because we use an “s”, while the Hebrews used an “im” or “oth” suffix to denote plurality, the case is solved? Come on now, Kathi. Let’s try this again. In English, when talking about the plural family of Flintstones, we would NEVER say…
The Flintstones got in HIS car and HE drove to the drive-in where HE ordered dino ribs.
But if we were talking ONLY about the single person Fred Flintstone, we WOULD say…
Flintstone got in HIS car and HE drove to the drive-in where HE ordered dino ribs.
Are you with me so far?
So what I’m expecting from you is a scripture that supports your doctrine by saying something like…
WE are the Yahwehs (or “Yahwehim” if you insist) your GODS (or “Godim” if you insist) and CREATORS. WE are jealous GODS, and WE require your worship to go only to US.
Is there anything like that in scripture to support your doctrine? Because all I see is stuff like…
I am Yahweh, your God and Creator. I am a jealous God and I require your worship to go only to ME.
Do you see it now? Your doctrine is that THEY are YahwehS our GODS, and THEY created us and we owe THEM our worship. But scripture says that HE is Yahweh our GOD, and HE created us and we owe HIM our worship.
Your doctrine is completely against the scriptures, and the only recourse you have is to find rare and ambiguous technicalities that are commonly associated with the translating of one language into another, and try to capitalize on them in the most nonsensical ways possible.
Scripture: We have ONE Creator. HIS name is Yahweh. HE is the ONE Most High God, and we worship HIM.
LU’s Doctrine: We have TWO CreatorS. THEIR names are both Yahweh. THEY are the TWO Most High GodS, and we worship THEM.
Kathi, scripture reveals that we have a Creator. Who is our Creator?
LU: Prov 8
22Jehovah possessed me — the beginning of His way, Before His works since then.
23From the age I was anointed, from the first, From former states of the earth.
24In there being no depths, I was brought forth, In there being no fountains heavy [with] waters,
25Before mountains were sunk, Before heights, I was brought forth.
- You admit then that Jesus is a POSSESSION of Jehovah. That is good. Jesus is, has been, and always will be Jehovah’s holy servant who faithfully does the will of his and our God, Jehovah. We strive to become spiritual children of Jehovah, and spiritual SIBLINGS of, and JOINT HEIRS with, Jehovah’s holy servant Jesus.
- God never has been, nor will ever be ANOINTED by anyone else. There is nobody higher than God that can anoint Him to any thing. Therefore, this one who was anointed cannot possibly be God.
- I notice that you didn’t bold the phrases “brought forth” in verses 24 and 25. Why not? Is it because you know what it signifies? Here are the 25 Trinitarian NET scholars to make it clear to everyone else what you already know…
The third parallel verb is חוֹלָלְתִּי (kholalti), “I was given birth.” Some (e.g., KJV, NAB, NASB, NRSV) translate it “brought forth” – not in the sense of being presented, but in the sense of being “begotten, given birth to.” Here is the strongest support for the translation of קָנָה (qanah) as “created” in v. 22.
But you already knew that, didn’t you? I can’t make you stop hiding from scriptural truth. I can only keep reminding you of it in the hope that someday you’ll let it find you.
LU: Paul understands the Father is also our “kurios” Lord, and Paul understands that Jesus is also our theos. In the context of 1 Cor 8:6, Paul is identifying two persons who are our God and Lord. In the NT when the context is speaking about the Father and the Son, they are typically distinguished as God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. That doesn’t mean that the Father is never referred to as Lord or the Son is never referred to as God.
Then we are in agreement that Jesus ISN’T “the Lord part of Yahweh” while the Father is “the God part of Yahweh”. Good. We agree that the Father is also our Lord. Good.
Now, is it possible that Paul was listing them in a hierarchical manner, such as: “Our hierarchy consists of the head boss, the Father, then the second most high in command, Jesus…” ?
Because if that’s even a remote possibility (which of course you can’t deny), then you’d have to agree that it would align PERFECTLY with this other teaching from Paul…
1 Corinthians 11:3
But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.
So could it be that the same author was conveying the same message in 1 Cor 8:6?
LU: But what is even more striking is how the Father, Himself, identifies the Son as the YHVH who laid the foundation of the earth and the heavens are the works of His hands. Wrestle with that.
The only one wrestling here is you… against the scriptures. You’re doing just what I said you always do 2 posts ago. You cling to a few obscure and AMBIGUOUS words in the Bible, and try to force them into teaching your bizarre doctrine.
In this case, you take ONE scripture that doesn’t even say “the Father said this thing about the Son”, and try to squeeze a doctrine from it. But in doing so, you make this one scripture contradict a hundred other ones. For example, the prayer by the Apostles in Acts 4 isn’t ambiguous. There is no guesswork involved. They clearly pray to the ONE who created the heaven, the earth, the sea, and everything in them, right? And then they clearly identify Jesus – not as that ONE – but as the holy servant OF that ONE, right?
So your new understanding of Heb 1:8 completely contradicts the prayer of the Apostles. And it contradicts Jesus himself, who clearly said that God created the world, right?
Mark 13:19-20
…because those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now—and never to be equaled again. If the Lord had not cut short those days, no one would survive. But for the sake of the elect, whom he has chosen, he has shortened them.
So Jesus says God created the world. You use an ambiguous verse to say Jesus created the world. Should we believe you? Or Jesus? Also note that Jesus refers to his and our God as “Lord” – which lends further credence to the fact that Paul was simply listing the hierarchy for us in 1 Cor 8:6. And finally, note that Jesus isn’t including himself in the “God” who created the world, because Jesus clearly refers to that God as “he”, ie: somebody other than himself.
Of course I could keep going through dozens of other scriptures to prove my point, but instead I’ll ask you (and Berean) again…
Who is our Creator?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
