- This topic has 25,869 replies, 115 voices, and was last updated 6 hours, 22 minutes ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (david @ Nov. 06 2008,17:50) If someone is constantly referred to as God, and someone else very very rarely has that word applied to them, this should at least make you wonder enough to try to understand what that word means, how it is used in all the scriptures (including the unique ones where it is applied to Jesus, angels, human judges, etc)
It's funny how obvious that is, but rarely do people see it.If a person can't see the obvious, then they have a form of blindness.
Bias, indoctrination, institutions, pride of the learned, all play their part.
T8…..i agree with you on that, I think Jeff Benner's explanation of who the Hebrews viewed the word GOD fits most all scriptures it simply means (POWERS) and if we say LORD GOD , we are saying HE EXIST WITH POWERS> Notice when Jesus quoted ,'The LORD our GOD (POWER) is ONE (LORD), he did not say one GOD. If we view John 1:1 with that in mind we can get that John was trying to say the word was with power and was power. Remember the LORD spoke (words) everything into existence. John 1:1 is the major text trinitarians use to justify their false Doctrine of the TRINITY.
peace to you and yours…………………gene
to all,
people are going astray by bringing certain supposed words into scripture and being perverted.someone speaks of articles, someone speaks of plan etc..on john 1:1. grace=God,holy spirit=God,love=God as these are features of God.Similarly son is also a feature of God
9as your son will be of your features only)therefore, son=God.All features above in together including son make complete GZod.
babupeople are going astray by bringing certain supposed words into scripture and being perverted.someone speaks of articles, someone speaks of plan etc..on john 1:1. grace=God,holy spirit=God,love=God as these are features of God.Similarly son is also a feature of God
(as your son will be of your features only)therefore, son=God.All features above in together including son make complete God.
babuQuote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 21 2008,13:31) WJ….Jesus is indeed my lord but he is (NOT) my GOD. His GOD is MY GOD and we have the same Father who is GOD. The Fathers Presence was in Jesus via the Holy Spirit , but was not Him, Just as the Fathers Spirit can be in us, but not us. Remember Jesus said He could do (NOTHING) Himself and went to say the (FATHER) in me, He doth the works. God was in Jesus reconciling the world unto Himself, but being in Jesus does not make him Jesus. Why would Jesus say He was going to the Father if He was the Father. Didn't he Quote ” Hear O Israel the LORD our GOD is (ONE) LORD”. The (OUR) included Him also. Peace………. gene
the only reason Jesus said that He could do nothing apart from the Father was because He would not want to. His and the Father's will are one….. again, just as in the “Father is greater than I” type of passages that some people might want to appeal to as some kind of evidence that the Son is a lesser ontological being than the Father, they do so at the expense of good exegesis and by taking passages out of their context to make them say something that they do not say. The 3 “do nothing” passages are:ESV Jn 5:19 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise.
———————————————————————-
ESV Jn 5:30 “I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me.
———————————————————————-
ESV Jn 8:28 Jesus said to them, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he, and that I do nothing on my own authority, but speak just as the Father taught me.———————————————————————-
Tolle Lege:
“The principal thrust of v. 19 is that whatever ‘making himself equal with God’ (v. 18) might mean, for Jesus it does not mean complete or even partial independence from his Father (cf. 7:18). The truth is that the Son can do nothing by himself—or, better, ‘on his own initiative’ (aph’ heautou, lit. ‘from himself’). Though he is the unique Son of God (cf. notes on 1:49), and may truly be called God (1:1, 18; 20:28) and take to himself divine titles (e.g. 8:58) and, as in this context, divine rights (5:17), yet is he always submissive to the Father. Not only does the Son always do what pleases the Father (8:29), but he can do only what he sees his Father doing.….. The Greek text of verses 19–23 is structured around four gar (‘for’ or ‘because’) statements. The first introduces the last clause of v. 19. The thought runs like this: It is impossible for the Son to take independent, self-determined action that would set him over against the Father as another God, for all the Son does is both coincident with and coextensive with all that the Father does. ‘Perfect Sonship involves perfect identity of will and action with the Father’ (Westcott, 1. 189). It follows that separate, self-determined action would be a denial of his sonship. But if this last clause of v. 19 takes the impossibility of the Son operating independently and grounds it in the perfection of Jesus’ sonship, it also constitutes another oblique claim to deity; for the only one who could conceivably do whatever the Father does must be as great as the Father, as divine as the Father.
Carson, D. A. (1991). The Gospel according to John (251). Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Inter-Varsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans.“The passage under discussion (Jn 5:19) may be paraphrased as follows.
“Do you Jews accuse me of transgressing the Father’s sabbath-ordinance and of blaspheming his name by claiming equality with him? The charge is absurd, for in that case the will of the Son would be separate (not merely distinct) from the will of the Father and would even oppose the latter. But as a matter of fact the Son can do nothing whatever (οὐ δύναται … ποιεῖν … ουδέν) of himself, but only what he sees the Father doing; for here, indeed, is the perfect pattern of that which is so often seen on earth; namely, that whatever he (the Father) does that the Son does likewise (here, indeed, there is flawless correspondence).
Hendriksen, W., & Kistemaker, S. J. (1953-2001). Vol. 1-2: New Testament commentary : Exposition of the Gospel According to John. Accompanying biblical text is author's translation. New Testament Commentary (1:198). Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.“Although the Jews had focused their hostility on the equality aspect of Jesus’ relation to the Father (5:18), Jesus countered their anger by highlighting his dependency on the Father (5:19). Here then are two perspectives about Jesus: the powerful divine Son of God and the humble Messenger of God. Christian theology always struggles with these two aspects (sometimes called the two personae) of Jesus. The dangerous tendency today of some is to de-emphasize the divine exalted nature, and the tendency of others is to de-emphasize the self-effacing human nature of Jesus. The key is to find the balance between the two.—New American Commentary
“Jesus explains his relationship with the Father through a series of four explanatory clauses (John 5:19-23), each headed by the conjunction gar (variously translated in the NIV). He begins by saying he can only do what he sees the Father doing because [gar] whatever the Father does the Son also does (v. John 5:19). Here the same unity of action is stated, yet it is not in terms of limitation (the Son can only do what he sees the Father doing), but through a mind-boggling claim of completeness. He does everything (ha gar an, translated whatever) the Father does. That is, not only is everything in Jesus' life reflective of God the Father, but also everything the Father does is reflected in Jesus' life. Jesus is claiming to be the full revelation of the Father (cf. John 15:15; John 16:13, John 16:15; John 17:10).
—The IVP New Testament Commentary SeriesLastly, in regard to
Quote Why would Jesus say He was going to the Father if He was the Father. Well, because Jesus is not the Father! Pretty simple ehhhh? This fundamental superficial elementary error is really beneath you Gene…. state your objections, fine, but please do not stoop, as so many others seem to do, the JW at your door trying to get in a quick cheeky apparently to them anyway 'profound” objection to the Trinity by saying ridiculous things like “if Jesus is God, who ran heaven while Jesus was dead for 3 days?” or “if Jesus is God, then He was the Father, if He was the Father, how could He be going to the Father” such silly, infantile (really this is the best thing that can be said of them) “objections” are not really objections at all, but fundamental misunderstanding of what the trinity teaches, in other words, its a straw man, a caricature, a tilting at windmills by arguing against a position that no Trinitarian believes, or at least, they ought not believe. Jesus is not the Father, OK? The Father is not the Son who is not the Holy Spirit…. etc
Selah
blessings,
KenQuote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 22 2008,18:19) Quote (david @ Oct. 21 2008,19:29) Quote And Thomas answered and said unto him, “My Lord and my God”. John 20:28 From Simeon Peter, a slave and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who through the righteousness of “our God and Savior, Jesus Christ”, have been granted a faith just as precious as ours. 2 Peter 1:1
while we look forward to that wonderful event when the glory of 'our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,” will be revealed. Titus 2:13
Out of the 7 or 9 scriptures trinitarians take to understand that Jesus is being called God, why is it that 7 or 8 of them are like this, with the word “and” in the middle, as though it could be speaking of God “and” Jesus?
Doesn't it bother you that there are literally a thousand scriptures that say in no uncertain terms that Jehovah is God, and yet, almost all the scriptures trinitarians use to support Jesus is God, could be taken more than one way? It seems we're just playing with comma's here.
It seems there should be more scriptures that say: “our God Jesus.” or, “Jesus, our God.” Instead, we find these Jesus “and” God scriptures.
I'm not saying Jesus is never called God. I'm saying that he is only called “god” in no uncertain terms a few times in scripture. (And of course, that word fits him.)
David,
Thank you for putting into words what I have been unable to for some reason? I copying this post for future reference.Love,
Mandy
I wouldn't know why, its not any objection at all…. see above….blessings,
KenQuote (pulivarthy @ Oct. 22 2008,22:24) Hi, Mandy, pl. see this :
Data element One: The use of a “composite unity” word for 'one' in the Shema of Deut 6.4-5.This is the older translation of the famous Shema: “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.” There are two words for 'one' in Biblical Hebrew: 'ehad ('one', 'alone', 'unity from parts') and 'yahid' (always means uniqueness/solitary-only one of its kind [cf. used of only son and only daughter, Gen 22.2,12,16; Jer 6.26; Judges 11.34]…not the same word as 'yahad' that often means 'in complete unity, together,united' cf. Deut 33.5, Ps 133.1). This verse is sometimes used by a few groups within the Jewish tradition to assert the numerical unity of God's nature, over against what they perceive as a 'Christian' notion of plurality-in-unity. But this verse either doesn't support their position (i.e., it doesn’t talk about God's nature at all); or actually does the opposite (i.e., by leaving a door open to 'composite unity'). Instead of using YAHID, which MIGHT be of some support to their position, it uses 'EHAD, which lends itself to the plurality position (or certainly allows it). Consider some other passages in which 'EHAD is used:
Gen 2.24–the man and his wife will be one (ehad) flesh–clearly a composite unity.
Ex 26:6, 11–the fifty gold clasps are used to hold the curtains together so that the tent would be a unit (ehad).
2 Samuel 2:25–many soldiers made themselves into 'one group' (ehad)
Gen 34:16 –the men of Shechem suggest intermarriage with Jacob's children in order to become 'one(ehad) people'.
Joshua 9.2 — the western kings agree to fight Joshua as “one (ehad) force”
Josh 10.42– “And Joshua captured all these kings and their lands at one (ehad) time” (NAS) or “All these kings and their lands Joshua conquered in one (ehad) campaign” (NIV)
Ex 24.3 –“Then Moses came and recounted to the people all the words of the Lord and all the ordinances; and all the people answered with one (ehad) voice, and said”
2 Chr 5.12–“and all the Levitical singers, Asaph, Heman, Jeduthun, and their sons and kinsmen, clothed in fine linen, with cymbals, harps, and lyres, standing east of the altar, and with them one hundred and twenty priests blowing trumpets 13 in unison when the trumpeters and the singers were to make themselves heard with one (ehad) voice to praise and to glorify the Lord”
Gen 11.6–“And the Lord said, “Behold, they are one (ehad) people, and they all have the same language.”
So, from the usage data ALONE, 'ehad could at least ALLOW a plurality-within-a-strict-unity (i.e. Trinity).
As light is made of 7 colours and then becomes a complete/whole light(definition of light), God is one only made of spiriit annd son also.
pulivarthy
yep …. great point….. just love Glenn Miller over at A christian Thinktank 😉blessings,
KenQuote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 23 2008,02:09) Quote (david @ Oct. 21 2008,19:29) Quote And Thomas answered and said unto him, “My Lord and my God”. John 20:28 From Simeon Peter, a slave and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who through the righteousness of “our God and Savior, Jesus Christ”, have been granted a faith just as precious as ours. 2 Peter 1:1
while we look forward to that wonderful event when the glory of 'our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,” will be revealed. Titus 2:13
Out of the 7 or 9 scriptures trinitarians take to understand that Jesus is being called God, why is it that 7 or 8 of them are like this, with the word “and” in the middle, as though it could be speaking of God “and” Jesus?
Doesn't it bother you that there are literally a thousand scriptures that say in no uncertain terms that Jehovah is God, and yet, almost all the scriptures trinitarians use to support Jesus is God, could be taken more than one way? It seems we're just playing with comma's here.
It seems there should be more scriptures that say: “our God Jesus.” or, “Jesus, our God.” Instead, we find these Jesus “and” God scriptures.
I'm not saying Jesus is never called God. I'm saying that he is only called “god” in no uncertain terms a few times in scripture. (And of course, that word fits him.)
David…. Trinitarians and preexistences both use vague and unclear scriptures to support their positions. You can not get one absolute clear statement to Justify either positions, and you would think they would have a CLEAR and UNAMBIGUOUS ones to justify such an important thing as Jesus' preexistence or his position in the GOD Head. imopeace to you and yours…………….gene
there are clear references… John 1:1 says that Jesus is God…. pretty straightforward isn't it? Hebrews 1:8 specifically calls the Son “God”…. its not the Trinitarians who are making things complicated, its the anti-Trinitarians who want to deny the plain clear teaching of Scripture…. if the bible says that Jesus is God, I believe it… what about you?
blessings,
KenQuote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 23 2008,05:44) Hi PV,
Trinity is not written.
We do not add to what is written.
No excuses allowed.
sure you do… every time you describe your beliefs without using words that appear in the bible you are adding words…. so if the trinitarians are “guuilty of doing this, so is everyone else who appeals to the Scriptures to support their beliefs. I am not sure how many time you have to be told this Nick. This remark is not some profound objection, its not an especially puious objection, so i am not sure what you think you are trying to prove by saying it over and over. Now I realizr tyhat you may be doing just as Hitler said, which was that repeating a lie often enopugh makes people believe it…. I don't know. But I have already shown you that the fact is,1) the Scriptures were written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, the very translation you appeal to in support of your belief, WHATEVER those beliefs may be, has words “added” to it, because there is not a one to one correspondence in language from Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek to English. So every time you quote the Bible in English, you are appealing to words that are either not there in the original, or are a person or group of persons opinion as to what English word or words best reanslates the Hebrew, Aramaic or Greel words into English. Got that? Its not difficult Nick.
2) every time you explain your beliefs to others in your own words, you are simply doing what Trintarians do; eg using words that may not necessarily be found in the English translation of the Bible to convey your understanding of various biblical teachings to others. Otherwise, if this were not the case, and you were not hypocritically insisting that Trinitarians follow a standard for communication that you do not yourself adhere to, you would be quoting biblical verses, AND BIBLICAL VERSES ONLY every single time you communicate. But you don't do this, do you Nick? (this is not a rhetorical question only…. I would really like a straightforward yes or no answer, not another red herring of answering questions with other questions…. sop lets see if you have the capacity to answer questions in this fashion Nick….
Please show some backbone and integrity here, if an objection has been shown to be faulty, and this has been pointed out to you, REPEATEDLY, to continue to voice this objection shows that you either are being dishonest, or don't really know how to read or understand what you are reading. I don't think its the latter. So do yourself a favor and stop parroting the stupid inane so-called objection “I don't believe in the Trinity because the word “Trinity” is not 'written'.”
So what is YOUR excuse anyway?
blessings,
KenQuote (t8 @ Nov. 06 2008,20:09) Quote (david @ Nov. 06 2008,17:50) If someone is constantly referred to as God, and someone else very very rarely has that word applied to them, this should at least make you wonder enough to try to understand what that word means, how it is used in all the scriptures (including the unique ones where it is applied to Jesus, angels, human judges, etc)
It's funny how obvious that is, but rarely do people see it.If a person can't see the obvious, then they have a form of blindness.
Bias, indoctrination, institutions, pride of the learned, all play their part.
Yeah… funny…. I say exactly the same sorts of things about poeple like you…. especially things like “If a person can't see the obvious, then they have a form of blindness. Bias, indoctrination, institutions, pride of the learned, all play their part.” In fact, I would even go so far as to say that I know how this blindness is caused:2 Corinthians 4:4 (ESV) In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
blessings,
KenQuote Yeah… funny…. I say exactly the same sorts of things about poeple like you…. especially things like “If a person can't see the obvious, then they have a form of blindness. Bias, indoctrination, institutions, pride of the learned, all play their part.” Eppy, we're just looking at the math.
Jehovah–Called God 6 or 7 thousand times.
Jesus–called God between 3 and 8 times.
holy spirit–zero times.And yet all are equally god?
Quote (epistemaniac @ Nov. 08 2008,04:00) Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 21 2008,13:31) WJ….Jesus is indeed my lord but he is (NOT) my GOD. His GOD is MY GOD and we have the same Father who is GOD. The Fathers Presence was in Jesus via the Holy Spirit , but was not Him, Just as the Fathers Spirit can be in us, but not us. Remember Jesus said He could do (NOTHING) Himself and went to say the (FATHER) in me, He doth the works. God was in Jesus reconciling the world unto Himself, but being in Jesus does not make him Jesus. Why would Jesus say He was going to the Father if He was the Father. Didn't he Quote ” Hear O Israel the LORD our GOD is (ONE) LORD”. The (OUR) included Him also. Peace………. gene
the only reason Jesus said that He could do nothing apart from the Father was because He would not want to. His and the Father's will are one….. again, just as in the “Father is greater than I” type of passages that some people might want to appeal to as some kind of evidence that the Son is a lesser ontological being than the Father, they do so at the expense of good exegesis and by taking passages out of their context to make them say something that they do not say. The 3 “do nothing” passages are:ESV Jn 5:19 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise.
———————————————————————-
ESV Jn 5:30 “I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me.
———————————————————————-
ESV Jn 8:28 Jesus said to them, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he, and that I do nothing on my own authority, but speak just as the Father taught me.———————————————————————-
Tolle Lege:
“The principal thrust of v. 19 is that whatever ‘making himself equal with God’ (v. 18) might mean, for Jesus it does not mean complete or even partial independence from his Father (cf. 7:18). The truth is that the Son can do nothing by himself—or, better, ‘on his own initiative’ (aph’ heautou, lit. ‘from himself’). Though he is the unique Son of God (cf. notes on 1:49), and may truly be called God (1:1, 18; 20:28) and take to himself divine titles (e.g. 8:58) and, as in this context, divine rights (5:17), yet is he always submissive to the Father. Not only does the Son always do what pleases the Father (8:29), but he can do only what he sees his Father doing.….. The Greek text of verses 19–23 is structured around four gar (‘for’ or ‘because’) statements. The first introduces the last clause of v. 19. The thought runs like this: It is impossible for the Son to take independent, self-determined action that would set him over against the Father as another God, for all the Son does is both coincident with and coextensive with all that the Father does. ‘Perfect Sonship involves perfect identity of will and action with the Father’ (Westcott, 1. 189). It follows that separate, self-determined action would be a denial of his sonship. But if this last clause of v. 19 takes the impossibility of the Son operating independently and grounds it in the perfection of Jesus’ sonship, it also constitutes another oblique claim to deity; for the only one who could conceivably do whatever the Father does must be as great as the Father, as divine as the Father.
Carson, D. A. (1991). The Gospel according to John (251). Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Inter-Varsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans.“The passage under discussion (Jn 5:19) may be paraphrased as follows.
“Do you Jews accuse me of transgressing the Father’s sabbath-ordinance and of blaspheming his name by claiming equality with him? The charge is absurd, for in that case the will of the Son would be separate (not merely distinct) from the will of the Father and would even oppose the latter. But as a matter of fact the Son can do nothing whatever (οὐ δύναται … ποιεῖν … ουδέν) of himself, but only what he sees the Father doing; for here, indeed, is the perfect pattern of that which is so often seen on earth; namely, that whatever he (the Father) does that the Son does likewise (here, indeed, there is flawless correspondence).
Hendriksen, W., & Kistemaker, S. J. (1953-2001). Vol. 1-2: New Testament commentary : Exposition of the Gospel According to John. Accompanying biblical text is author's translation. New Testament Commentary (1:198). Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.“Although the Jews had focused their hostility on the equality aspect of Jesus’ relation to the Father (5:18), Jesus countered their anger by highlighting his dependency on the Father (5:19). Here then are two perspectives about Jesus: the powerful divine Son of God and the humble Messenger of God. Christian theology always struggles with these two aspects (sometimes called the two personae) of Jesus. The dangerous tendency today of some is to de-emphasize the divine exalted nature, and the tendency of others is to de-emphasize the self-effacing human nature of Jesus. The key is to find the balance between the two.—New American Commentary
“Jesus explains his relationship with the Father through a series of four explanatory clauses (John 5:19-23), each headed by the conjunction gar (variously translated in the NIV). He begins by saying he can only do what he sees the Father doing because [gar] whatever the Father does the Son also does (v. John 5:19). Here the same unity of action is stated, yet it is not in terms of limitation (the Son can only do what he sees the Father doing), but through a mind-boggling claim of completeness. He does everything (ha gar an, translated whatever) the Father does. That is, not only is everything in Jesus' life reflective of God the Father, but also everything the Father does is reflected in Jesus' life. Jesus is claiming to be the full revelation of the Father (cf. John 15:15; John 16:13, John 16:15; John 17:10).
—The IVP New Testament Commentary SeriesLastly, in regard to
Quote Why would Jesus say He was going to the Father if He was the Father. Well, because Jesus is not the Father! Pretty simple ehhhh? This fundamental superficial elementary error is really beneath you Gene…. state your objections, fine, but please do not stoop, as so many others seem to do, the JW at your door trying to get in a quick cheeky apparently to them anyway 'profound” objection to the Trinity by saying ridiculous things like “if Jesus is God, who ran heaven while Jesus was dead for 3 days?” or “if Jesus is God, then He was the Father, if He was the Father, how could He be going to the Father” such silly, infantile (really this is the best thing that can be said of them) “objections” are not really objections at all, but fundamental misunderstanding of what the trinity teaches, in other words, its a straw man, a caricature, a tilting at windmills by arguing against a position that no Trinitarian believes, or at least, they ought not believe. Jesus is not the
Father, OK? The Father is not the Son who is not the Holy Spirit…. etcSelah
blessings,
Ken
Hi KenVery good points put forth in a better way than I ever could myself though I have spoken the same truths many times before.
It seems that so many do not look at the whole council of God, by taking all scriptural data together as one.
Instead they ignore or carry a bottle of white out concerning scriptures as you have so beautifully explained and of which our forefathers also taught.
I appreciate your stand on the truth and your willingness to take the lonely road here.
Blessings!
WJ
Quote (david @ Nov. 08 2008,11:49) Quote Yeah… funny…. I say exactly the same sorts of things about poeple like you…. especially things like “If a person can't see the obvious, then they have a form of blindness. Bias, indoctrination, institutions, pride of the learned, all play their part.” Eppy, we're just looking at the math.
Jehovah–Called God 6 or 7 thousand times.
Jesus–called God between 3 and 8 times.
holy spirit–zero times.And yet all are equally god?
Hi DavidThe Spirit does not speak of himself.
However, God is Spirit, God is Holy, and there is only “One Spirit”.
The Lord is that Spirit!
Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there [is] liberty. 2 Cor 3:17 KJV
Now Jehovah is the Spirit; and where the spirit of Jehovah is, there is freedom. 2 Cor 3:17 NWT
David, even your own Bible says YHWH is the Spirit.
So what are you going to do with this scriptural data.
As far as Yeshua and Jehovah being mentioned as God.
As Ken has said, 1 scripture calling Yahshua God especially with the definite article should be enough.
So when you open your eyes by taking off the Arian glasses and start with the premises that the Father cannot be seen by the human eye and yet God/YHWH/Jehovah was seen by men, then you will know that Yeshua also is YHWH spoken of in the OT scriptures that appeared to men.
You might want to start Here.
And also Here!
Yayshua also claimed to be God as Ken has pointed out, another place is here…
If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? John 14:7-9
WJ
PS, I lack for time. Since your post is so long on the Coptic thread I will be responding soon to your comments.
Quote However, God is Spirit, God is Holy, and there is only “One Spirit”. The Lord is that Spirit!
“But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit.”
“As the one dies, so the other dies; and they all have but one spirit,”
“to another faith by the same spirit, to another gifts of healings by that one spirit, “
“For truly by one spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink one spirit.”
“because through him we, both peoples, have the approach to the Father by one spirit.”
“One body there is, and one spirit,”
“that YOU are standing firm in one spirit, with one soul striving side by side for the faith of the good news,”
Quote Quote However, God is Spirit, God is Holy, and there is only “One Spirit”. The Lord is that Spirit!
“Making his angels spirits,” (Ps 104:4)
“So the angel answered and said to me: “These are the four spirits of the heavens….” (Zech 6:5)
“gave them authority over unclean spirits” (Mat 10:1)JOHN 4:24
“God is a Spirit, and those worshiping him must worship with spirit and truth.””
True, God is a spirit. He creatured multitudes of spirit creatures.The word spirit has many meanings, which you confuse. When they were “made to drink one spirit” was it the “one spirit” God?
Quote David, even your own Bible says YHWH is the Spirit.
I'm not sure which scripture you are referring to when you say “the spirit” as if there is “only one spirit”?
You never quoted it. Yes, my Bible and yours say Jehovah is “The Spirit.” Sure. Ok. And? How is that connected to what you quoted:Jehovah–Called God 6 or 7 thousand times.
Jesus–called God between 3 and 8 times.
holy spirit–zero times.And yet all are equally god?
[/QUOTE]As Ken has said, 1 scripture calling Yahshua God especially with the definite article should be enough.
Quote Sure, if you close your eyes to the fact that words have meaning, I suppose. I just think it's odd that if they are equally God, why is this so unproportionally unclear.
Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? John 14:7-9
Quote
And, continuing on… we see what he meant:
“Do you not believe that I am in union with the Father and the Father is in union with me? The things I say to YOU men I do not speak of my own originality; but the Father who remains in union with me is doing his works. 11 Believe me that I am in union with the Father and the Father is in union with me;”PS, I lack for time. Since your post is so long on the Coptic thread I will be responding soon to your comments.
I'm gone for the weekend. So, this should give you some time, WJ. I'm hoping you can find more information on the Coptic. I'm surprised I hadn't found that last article you posted.
Quote (david @ Nov. 08 2008,11:49) Quote Yeah… funny…. I say exactly the same sorts of things about poeple like you…. especially things like “If a person can't see the obvious, then they have a form of blindness. Bias, indoctrination, institutions, pride of the learned, all play their part.” Eppy, we're just looking at the math.
Jehovah–Called God 6 or 7 thousand times.
Jesus–called God between 3 and 8 times.
holy spirit–zero times.And yet all are equally god?
here is the way the math works…. if the holy, inspired, infallible Scriptures call Jesus “God” 1 time, He is God. what…. lol… you think that the number of times a being is called “god” increases or decreases their “godness” ROFLOL!!!blessings,
KenQuote (david @ Nov. 08 2008,11:49) Eppy, we're just looking at the math. Jehovah–Called God 6 or 7 thousand times.
Jesus–called God between 3 and 8 times.
holy spirit–zero times.And yet all are equally god?
Not to mention the judges of Israel and angels being called theos.The Trinity Doctrine is a false conclusion to what scripture says about God and the way scripture uses theos and elohim.
John 1:1 doesn't teach a Trinity. It mentions 2, the Logos and God.
People should just let scripture have its say instead of intermingling vain imaginations and doctrines of devils.
Quote (epistemaniac @ Nov. 08 2008,04:41) Yeah… funny…. I say exactly the same sorts of things about poeple like you…. especially things like “If a person can't see the obvious, then they have a form of blindness. Bias, indoctrination, institutions, pride of the learned, all play their part.” In fact, I would even go so far as to say that I know how this blindness is caused:2 Corinthians 4:4 (ESV) In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
blessings,
Ken
Hi Ken.In a different time and different politics, I wonder if you would approve of me being burned at the stake for my words and belief?
Quote (epistemaniac @ Nov. 08 2008,18:13) here is the way the math works…. if the holy, inspired, infallible Scriptures call Jesus “God” 1 time, He is God. what…. lol… you think that the number of times a being is called “god” increases or decreases their “godness” ROFLOL!!! blessings,
Ken
OK, then what about the judges of Israel and angels?Or are they the exception to the rule? If they are the exception to the rule, then your statement makes no sense whatsoever.
You said if Jesus is called God/theos once, then he is God. Well Jesus is not the only one who was called theos/god.
Maths has a funny way of showing up things that don't add up.
ken ,
though trinity is not there in the bible, jesus is the truth,jesus is life.therefore, in this defective world no one could be truthful other than God no one could be a life giver except God.therefor jesus is my lord and my God.change your suppositions.
peace and happiness
babu
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
