Justaskin vrs worshippingjesus

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Quote (princess @ Jan. 21 2011,14:08)

historically speaking, triad worship was in place before christianity took hold of it. it seems the copy/paste method was used with earlier texts that proclaimed the same, they just changed the names. however, it was not to protect the innocent.

First, animal sacrifices were in place before God ordered the Hebrews to offer them. I guess God is a pagan.

Second, triad and trinity are not the same thing. In the triad the god is one person. In the trinity the God is three unified persons.

KJ Jr.

[Proclaimer]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 21 2011,05:45)

Hi All The topic of this debate was is their a “Trinity” in the Bible. Matthew 28:19 is proof itself that Jesus spoke himself of the three (a trinity). This debate is now open to anyone else that wants to respond to it. If anyone else has any input feel free to post here concerning Matthew 28:19 or if there is a Trinity found in the Bible. Blessings!  Keith

There is no Trinity in the bible. (Trinity as in what the Trinity Doctrine states.)

But there are quite a number of instances where bunches of things and persons come in three's, so if that is what youy mean by Trinity, then there are quite a number of trinities, just as there are quite a number of two's (binities) and fours (quadrinities), although the latter is probably less mentioned.

Three (trinities)
God, Jesus, Spirit
God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels
Paul, James, John

Two (binities)
God, Jesus
Adam, Eve
Saul, Paul
Joseph, Mary

So taking one version of a bunch of three words and saying that this teaches the Trinity is about as compelling as taking one of the examples under the 'two' heading and saying that this teaches the Binity.

I am sure that I could easily compile a list of fours and make an argument for Quadrinities or I might even find proof of a Octinity if I start with the Octinity Doctrine first, and then hunt for the eights in a similar fashion that ED finds his numbers.

But I don't think I need to demonstrate that as my point is made clear enough.

[Ed J]

Quote (t8 @ Jan. 21 2011,21:04)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 21 2011,05:45) Hi All The topic of this debate was is their a “Trinity” in the Bible. Matthew 28:19 is proof itself that Jesus spoke himself of the three (a trinity). This debate is now open to anyone else that wants to respond to it. If anyone else has any input feel free to post here concerning Matthew 28:19 or if there is a Trinity found in the Bible. Blessings!  Keith There is no Trinity in the bible. (Trinity as in what the Trinity Doctrine states.) But there are quite a number of instances where bunches come in three's, so if that is what youy mean by Trinity, then there are quite a number of trinities, just as there are quite a number of two's (binities) and fours (quadrinities), although the latter is probably less mentioned. Three (trinities) God, Jesus, Spirit God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels Paul, James, John Two (binities) God, Jesus Adam, Eve Saul, Paul Joseph, Mary So taking one version of a bunch of three words and saying that this teaches the Trinity is about as compelling as taking one of the examples under the 'two' heading and saying that this teaches the Binity. I am sure that I could easily compile a list of fours and make an argument for Quadrinities or I might even find proof of a Octinity if I start with the Octinity Doctrine first, and then hunt for the eights in a similar fashion that ED finds his numbers. But I don't think I need to demonstrate that as my point is made clear enough.

Hi T8,

If “a trinity” is a pattern of three, what would you call “A Pattern of Five”?

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Jan. 21 2011,20:20)

Second, triad and trinity are not the same thing. In the triad the god is one person. In the trinity the God is three unified persons.

What about 1 Timothy 5:21
“I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels.”

Is this a Trinity or Triad, or a new kind of Tri?
And why was the Holy Spirit missed out of this verse?

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 21 2011,21:11)

If “a trinity” is a pattern of three, what would you call “A Pattern of Five”? God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

Pentinity I think.

There is some evidence for a Pentinity.

You can run a program through scripture to bring up all instances of bunches of five. The Pentinity is in there somewhere. Just need to dig deep.

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

WJ said to SF:

Quote

The bottom line is all Trinitarians that I know of believe that the “essence” or that which makes God God or the Divine nature of the Father and the Son and the Councelor are shared as One God or One Spirit or a class of being, just as all humanity share the same essence of flesh as One humanity or a class of being.

Bingo!

[SimplyForgiven]

Quote (t8 @ Jan. 21 2011,15:04)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 21 2011,05:45) Hi All The topic of this debate was is their a “Trinity” in the Bible. Matthew 28:19 is proof itself that Jesus spoke himself of the three (a trinity). This debate is now open to anyone else that wants to respond to it. If anyone else has any input feel free to post here concerning Matthew 28:19 or if there is a Trinity found in the Bible. Blessings!  Keith There is no Trinity in the bible. (Trinity as in what the Trinity Doctrine states.) But there are quite a number of instances where bunches of things and persons come in three's, so if that is what youy mean by Trinity, then there are quite a number of trinities, just as there are quite a number of two's (binities) and fours (quadrinities), although the latter is probably less mentioned. Three (trinities) God, Jesus, Spirit God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels Paul, James, John Two (binities) God, Jesus Adam, Eve Saul, Paul Joseph, Mary So taking one version of a bunch of three words and saying that this teaches the Trinity is about as compelling as taking one of the examples under the 'two' heading and saying that this teaches the Binity. I am sure that I could easily compile a list of fours and make an argument for Quadrinities or I might even find proof of a Octinity if I start with the Octinity Doctrine first, and then hunt for the eights in a similar fashion that ED finds his numbers. But I don't think I need to demonstrate that as my point is made clear enough.

T8,
What do you define as Trinity in the first place?
because it seems that your arguements are based on the numerical value.

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Quote (t8 @ Jan. 21 2011,21:12)

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Jan. 21 2011,20:20) Second, triad and trinity are not the same thing. In the triad the god is one person. In the trinity the God is three unified persons. What about  1 Timothy 5:21 “I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels.” Is this a Trinity or Triad, or a new kind of Tri? And why was the Holy Spirit missed out of this verse?

My original statement on the word “triad” was incorrect.

Quote

The doctrine of the Trinity has often caused confusion among Christians.  Some people have mistakenly seen the Trinity as a Triad.   What is the difference? The Trinity is the teaching that there exists only one God in all the universe, none before and none after Him (Isaiah 44:6,8) and that God consists of three persons:  Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.   The Father is not the same person as the Son who is not the same person as the Father, who is not the same person as the Holy Spirit.  Yet, there are not three gods, but one. In contrast to the trinity, a Triad is three separate gods.   Each is a god.  Therefore, in the doctrine of the triad, the Father is a god, the Son is a god, and the Holy Spirit is a god.  This is not the doctrine of the Trinity and it is not biblical.

http://carm.org/questions/about-doctrine/god-trinity-or-triad

t8:

Quote

What about  1 Timothy 5:21 “I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels.”

Quote

God, the Father, and the Lord. Jesus Christ Paul's letters generally followed the literary patterns of that day. … Paul followed contemporary epistolary practice by including certain stereotyped forms in his introductory formulae, thanksgivings, and farewells. In these sections he often utilized the formula, `God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,' or a variation of it. … Thus, his typical salutation read: `Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ' … Paul designated both God the Father and the Lord Jesus as dispensers of grace and peace to the Church. … God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ bring these blessings into men's lives by faith. They are UNIFIED IN FUNCTION. Such a connection is possible only if God and the Lord RESIDE AT THE SAME LEVEL in Paul's thought … One final factor needs to be mentioned. The phrase `God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ,' present in Paul's salutations, thanksgivings, and other doxological passages, indicates a FUNCTIONAL IDENTITY between the Father and the Lord. They are JOINTLY THE SOURCE OF GRACE AND PEACE. Praise, thanksgiving, and blessing belong to them.” (Capes, D.B., 1992, “Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul's Christology,” J.C.B. Mohr: Tübingen, Germany, pp.62-64, 68). “[Gal 1:3] This grace and peace come from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ. It is probable that by the common construction known as chiasmus (which could be translated as an 'x-shaped' construction), the source of grace is seen as Christ, and the source of peace as God the Father. Again, however, the main theological point is the close association of Christ with God. Indeed, the use of the word Kyrios, 'Lord', as a title of Christ would in itself be sufficient to assure this. Much study has been devoted to this Greek word, the one chosen by the early translators into Greek of the Hebrew Bible to stand for the divine name YHWH, which might not be pronounced by the pious Jew, and for which the Hebrew adonai, 'my Lord', had already been substituted. Kyrios varied in meaning from the polite 'sir', used in formal address to a stranger, to the full sense of 'Lord', in confession of the deity of Christ. When the early Christians used the phrase, 'Jesus is Lord' [Rom 10:9; 1Cor 12:3], as a baptismal confession, they cannot have meant less than this.” (Cole, R.A., 1989, “The Letter of Paul to the Galatians: An Introduction and Commentary,” The Tyndale New Testament commentaries, [1965], Inter-Varsity Press Leicester: UK, Second edition, p.70). “[1Th 1:1] God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. The combination of both terms (a. God the Father, b. the Lord Jesus Christ) after one preposition (in; that is grounded in) would seem to indicate that the two are entirely co-ordinate, that is, that the reference is to the first and to the second person of the Holy Trinity. Note also the trinitarian character of verses 3-5. Hence, the third person (Holy Spirit), mentioned in verse 5, is implied already in verse 1. Paul often mentions the three together in series of closely connected passages (II Thess. 2:13, 14; I Cor. 12:4-6; II Cor. 13:14; Eph. 2:18; 3:2-5; 3:14-17; 4:4-6; 5:18-20). In referring to the second person the full name is used here: the Lord Jesus Christ. In the LXX the name Lord (kurios) translates Jehovah, the God of Israel. It is more often the rendering of Jehovah than of anything else. (At times it is the equivalent of Adon, Adonai, Baal, etc.) Now the Jews were strict monotheists. Yet Paul, though himself a Jew, again and again gives to Jesus the title Lord. This shows that, in the thinking of the apostle, Jesus is just as fully divine as is God the Father: one and the same essence is possessed by the Father and by the Son (also by the Spirit, II Cor. 13:14).” (Hendriksen, W., 1955, “1 & 2 Thessalonians,” New Testament Commentary, Banner of Truth: Edinburgh UK, British edition, 1972, pp.40-41. Emphasis original). “But there was a far stronger reason for the application of the Greek term `Lord' to Jesus than that which was found in its general currency among Greek-speaking peoples. The religious use of the term was not limited to the pagan cults, but appears also, and if anything even more firmly established, in the Greek Old Testament. The word `Lord' is used by the Septuagint to translate the `Jahwe' of the Hebrew test. It would be quite irrelevant to discuss the reasons which governed the translators in their choice of this particular word. No doubt some word for `Lord' was required by the associations which had already clustered around the Hebrew word. And various reasons may be suggested for the choice of `kyrios' rather than some other Greek word meaning `lord' [As, for example, despotes] Possibly the root meaning of `kyrios' better expressed the idea which was intended; perhaps, also, a religious meaning had already been attached to `kyrios,' which the other words did not possess. At any rate, whatever may have been the reason, `kyrios' was the word which was chosen. And the fact is of capital importance. For it was among the readers of the Septuagint that Christianity first made its way. The Septuagint was the Bible of th e Jewish synagogues, and in the synagogues the reading of it was heard not only by Jews but also by hosts of Gentiles, the `God-fearers' of the Book of Acts. It was with the `God-fearers' that the Gentile mission began. And even where there were Gentile converts who had not passed at all through the school of the synagogue in the very earliest period perhaps such converts were few-even then the Septuagint was at once used in their instruction. Thus when the Christian missionaries used the word `Lord' of Jesus, their hearers knew at once what they meant. They knew at once that Jesus occupied a place which is occupied only by God. For the word `Lord' is used countless times in the Greek scriptures as the holiest name of the covenant God of Israel, and these passages were applied freely to Jesus.” (Machen, J.G., 1925, “The Origin of Paul's Religion: The James Sprunt Lectures Delivered at Union Theological Seminary in Virginia,” Eerdmans: Grand Rapids MI, Reprinted, 1965, pp.307-308). “[1Th 1:1] Also peculiar to these Epistles is the phrase in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (Paul usually says 'in Christ'). It is striking (a) that he speaks of the Father and the Lord in one breath (no-one else could be linked with the Father in this way), (b) that he joins the two under one preposition in, and © that he expresses the closeness of the tie linking the Thessalonians with their God in terms of Christ as well as the Father. 'The association could hardly be closer' (Ward). This high view of Jesus is continued with the use of Lord and Christ. Lord was used in LXX as the translation of the divine name and it was commonly used of deity in other religions (as well as having less significant uses). It points to a very high place. Christ means 'anointed' and is equivalent to 'Messiah'. And all this in a letter written only about twenty years after the crucifixion. From very early times Jesus was seen to have the highest place.” (Morris, L.L., 1984, “The Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians: An Introduction and Commentary,” Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, [1956], Inter-Varsity Press: Leicester UK, Second Edition, p.41). “[1Th 1:1] In God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (en theoi patri kai kurioi Jesou Christoi). This church is grounded in (en, with the locative case) and exists in the sphere and power of God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. No article in the Greek, for both theoi patri and kurioi Jesou Christoi are treated as proper names. In the very beginning of this first Epistle of Paul we meet his Christology. He at once uses the full title, `Lord Jesus Christ,' with all the theological content of each word. The name `Jesus' (Saviour, Matt. 1:21) he knew, as the `Jesus of history,' the personal name of the Man of Galilee, whom he had once persecuted (Acts 9:5), but whom he at once, after his conversion, proclaimed to be `the Messiah,' (ho Christos, Acts 9:22). This position Paul never changed. In the great sermon at Antioch in Pisidia which Luke has preserved (Acts 13:23) Paul proved that God fulfilled his promise to Israel by raising up `Jesus as Saviour' (sotera Iesoun). Now Paul follows the Christian custom by adding Christos (verbal from chrio, to anoint) as a proper name to Jesus (Jesus Christ) as later he will often say `Christ Jesus' (Col. 1:1). And he dares also to apply kurios (Lord) to `Jesus Christ,' the word appropriated by Claudius (Dominus, Kurios) and other emperors in the emperor-worship, and also common in the Septuagint for God as in Psa. 32:1f. (quoted by Paul in Rom. 4:8). Paul uses Kurios of God (I Cor. 3:5) or of Jesus Christ as here. In fact, he more frequently applies it to Christ when not quoting the Old Testament as in Rom. 4:8. And here he places `the Lord Jesus Christ' in the same category and on the same plane with `God the father.' There will be growth in Paul's Christology and he will never attain all the knowledge of Christ for which he longs (Phil. 3:10-12), but it is patent that here in his first Epistle there is no `reduced Christ' for Paul. He took Jesus as `Lord' when he surrendered to Jesus on the Damascus Road: `And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said to me' (Acts 22:10). It is impossible to understand Paul without seeing clearly this first and final stand for the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul did not get this view of Jesus from current views of Mithra or of Isis or any other alien faith. The Risen Christ became at once for Paul the Lord of his life.” (Robertson, A.T., 1931, “Word Pictures in the New Testament: Volume IV: The Epistles of Paul,” Broadman Press: Nashville TN, p.6. Emphasis original). “[2Th 1:2] From God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (apo theou patros kai Kuriou lesou Christou). … Note absence of article both after en and apo, though both God and Lord Jesus Christ are definite. In both cases Jesus Christ is put on a par with God, though not identical. See on I Thess. 1:1 for discussion of words, but note difference between en, in the sphere of, by the power of, and apo, from, as the fountain head and source of grace and peace.” (Robertson, 1931, p.41. Emphasis original).

http://jesusisyhwh.blogspot.com/2010….on.html

Roo

[SimplyForgiven]

Quote (t8 @ Jan. 21 2011,15:12)

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Jan. 21 2011,20:20) Second, triad and trinity are not the same thing. In the triad the god is one person. In the trinity the God is three unified persons. What about  1 Timothy 5:21 “I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels.” Is this a Trinity or Triad, or a new kind of Tri? And why was the Holy Spirit missed out of this verse?

If the Trinitarians are claiming that the Trinity that is composed of son, holy spirit, and the Father are all ONE God, than shouldnt the focused if Jesus is really God or not?

Or in other words the focus shouldnt be in numerical value but why they are mentioned togethor and does it prove anything?

For example Why does Paul ALWAYS mentions Jesus in his greetings.
and not exclude him.

I think if we take a closer look at these verses the context clues give the answer away.

[princess]

jack, jack

Definition of TRIAD
1: a union or group of three : trinity
2: a chord of three tones consisting of a root with its third and fifth and constituting the harmonic basis of tonal music

Synonyms: threesome, trifecta, trinity, trio, triple, triplet, triumvirate

merriam-webster

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Quote (princess @ Jan. 22 2011,05:06)

jack, jack Definition of TRIAD 1: a union or group of three : trinity 2: a chord of three tones consisting of a root with its third and fifth and constituting the harmonic basis of tonal music Synonyms: threesome, trifecta, trinity, trio, triple, triplet, triumvirate merriam-webster

p,

Did you see that I gave a correction? Please see my entire post to t8.

Jack

[princess]

jack,

[princess]

take two…………

jack,

even so,
you bring trinity right back where you started from.

the context of the matter is that jesus is god, manifested in flesh. since we are to refer to your post.

however, i must admit, i thought you were beyond learning any further then what you know. this is good to see.

take care jack, much love to you and the ones you love.

[Proclaimer]

It is really not that hard.

For us there is one God the Father.
For others there are others WHO are God.

Scripture is clear. The Father is the one true God.
All others that are called God/gods are called that in a qualitative sense. i.e., only one is IDENTIFIED as the one true God. He is the originator of all, the Father of spirits.

Just as there is one Devil and qualitatively speaking there are many devils, even Judas was called 'devil' qualititaively.

If you understand that, then all the confusion goes away and there are no contradictions in scripture regarding that. If you cannot grasp the simple usage of the word God/Theos/Elohim then you are left scratching around for a doctrine that tries to explain everything and in the end you will conclude that even your explanation is beyond understanding.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 20 2011,20:59)

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Jan. 21 2011,09:56) Keith, JA ran out of arguments. Rather than be humble and concede he hurled insults. jack Similar to the way YOU do things, huh?

Mike

Was that needed?

WJ

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 20 2011,21:02)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 21 2011,05:45) Hi All The topic of this debate was is their a “Trinity” in the Bible. Matthew 28:19 is proof itself that Jesus spoke himself of the three (a trinity). This debate is now open to anyone else that wants to respond to it. If anyone else has any input feel free to post here concerning Matthew 28:19 or if there is a Trinity found in the Bible. Blessings!  Keith Hi Keith, Perhaps were you discussing whether there is a trinity GOD in the Bible instead of any old three things mentioned together in scripture, I might be entertained to join in the discussion. Because if that is your criteria, then there are many trinities in the Bible. And D has me intrigued………….What exact trinity doctrine does KEITH believe in? Co-equal?  Co-eternal?  Son begotten when?  Etc, etc. Do you mind, Keith?  Tell us.   peace and love, mike

Mike

You are not interested in discussing whether there is a Trinity God in the scriptures, because if we take the literal meaning of the scriptures then the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit are God.

The singular name and the definite articles is proof enough to prove my point with JA and the title of this thread.

WJ

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (t8 @ Jan. 21 2011,05:04)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 21 2011,05:45) Hi All The topic of this debate was is their a “Trinity” in the Bible. Matthew 28:19 is proof itself that Jesus spoke himself of the three (a trinity). This debate is now open to anyone else that wants to respond to it. If anyone else has any input feel free to post here concerning Matthew 28:19 or if there is a Trinity found in the Bible. Blessings!  Keith There is no Trinity in the bible. (Trinity as in what the Trinity Doctrine states.) But there are quite a number of instances where bunches of things and persons come in three's, so if that is what youy mean by Trinity, then there are quite a number of trinities, just as there are quite a number of two's (binities) and fours (quadrinities), although the latter is probably less mentioned. Three (trinities) God, Jesus, Spirit God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels Paul, James, John Two (binities) God, Jesus Adam, Eve Saul, Paul Joseph, Mary So taking one version of a bunch of three words and saying that this teaches the Trinity is about as compelling as taking one of the examples under the 'two' heading and saying that this teaches the Binity. I am sure that I could easily compile a list of fours and make an argument for Quadrinities or I might even find proof of a Octinity if I start with the Octinity Doctrine first, and then hunt for the eights in a similar fashion that ED finds his numbers. But I don't think I need to demonstrate that as my point is made clear enough.

t8

Your points are evasive and do not address the point of this thread.

Sure you can name many trinitys, binities etc, but can you put them together as sharing all authority and power, and all having the same attributes and characteristics and all sharing the same name? That is what the scriptures teach.

Jesus gave the great commision to be done in the “Name” (singular) of the three and that makes them equal doesn't it?

So your points are moot aren't they?

WJ

[Worshipping Jesus]

Hi t8

Quote (t8 @ Jan. 21 2011,15:45)

It is really not that hard. For us there is one God the Father.

Yes and for us there is but “One Lord! Do you not consider the Father Lord? If So why do you exclude Jesus from being God?

Quote (t8 @ Jan. 21 2011,15:45)

for others there are others WHO are God.

Are you saying Jesus is not “a God”? Please don't play the word games because he is either God or he is not God at all.

So if you say for others there are others who are God. Then that must mean to you Jesus is not “God” right? But if you say Jesus is “a god” then you are one of the others that believes in other gods, right?

Quote (t8 @ Jan. 21 2011,15:45)

Scripture is clear. The Father is the one true God.

So then this must mean that there are no other gods, right?

You said “One True God“, what does “Only” or “One” mean?

Quote (t8 @ Jan. 21 2011,15:45)

All others that are called God/gods are called that in a qualitative sense. i.e., only one is IDENTIFIED as the one true God.

OK good, now in what sense “qualitatively” is Jesus not God?

If Jesus has all the qualities of the “One True God” then that means that he is “The One True God” and should be identified that way, right?

Quote (t8 @ Jan. 21 2011,15:45)

He is the originator of all, the Father of spirits.

The scriptures say “without Jesus nothing came into being”, isn't that saying he is the origin of all, after all by him all things consist?

Is the Father the Father of satan? He is a Spirit isn't he? Didn't Jesus say that they were of their Father the devil?

Quote (t8 @ Jan. 21 2011,15:45)

Just as there is one Devil and qualitatively speaking there are many devils, even Judas was called 'devil' qualititaively.

Then the Father of Spirits is not the Father of their spirits is he? The qualitative thing doesn't help you t8 since Jesus is the radiance of the Fathers Glory, the essence of his person, and the visible image of the invisible God.

Wouldn't you say that Jesus is qualitatively exactly as the Father? If not why not?

Quote (t8 @ Jan. 21 2011,15:45)

If you understand that, then all the confusion goes away and there are no contradictions in scripture regarding that. If you cannot grasp the simple usage of the word God/Theos/Elohim then you are left scratching around for a doctrine that tries to explain everything and in the end you will conclude that even your explanation is beyond understanding.

The confusion is created when you claim there is “ONLY ONE TRUE GOD,  but then claim there are “OTHER TRUE GODS“.

Blessings WJ

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

WJ said to t8:

Quote

The qualitative thing doesn't help you t8 since Jesus is the radiance of the Fathers Glory, the essence of his person, and the visible image of the invisible God.

Yes Keith! As the RADIANCE of God's glory Jesus IS God touching people as the radiance of the sun IS the sun touching things.

Radiance of God = God

Jack

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Jan. 21 2011,17:09)

WJ said to t8: Quote The qualitative thing doesn't help you t8 since Jesus is the radiance of the Fathers Glory, the essence of his person, and the visible image of the invisible God. Yes Keith! As the RADIANCE of God's glory Jesus IS God touching people as the radiance of the sun IS the sun touching things. Radiance of God = God Jack

Jack

This idea that t8 has created about “identity” and “quality” is only a smoke screen to allow for the definition of other “True Gods”, the scriptures say there is “Only One True God”. Since Jesus fits the bill in everyway of what defines God qualitatively, then he is God.

Unless t8 can show us in what way Jesus is not exactly as the Father “qualitatively” then it is a moot point.

If John would have thought the Word that was with God (John 1:1b) and was God (John 1:1c) was different in quality then he would have used another word instead of “theos”, God. He could have used the Greek word for divine, but he didn't. The word “divine” is not found in the definition of “Theos” though there is “Only One Divine One”.

This is explained very well Here!

Blessings WJ

[Author]

Posts