- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 07 2011,10:58) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 04 2011,14:03) Bump for Kathi, invite for Paul: Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 06 2011,08:18) Jehovah is both God and Lord, Irene.
Psalm 110:1
Jehovah says to my Lord:
“Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet.”Kathi, if Jesus is a part of "Jehovah", then who is the "Lord" to whom JEHOVAH said, "Sit at my right hand………."?
David understood that Jesus, who is also his Lord, is somebody OTHER THAN "Jehovah". Why can't you?
mike
The Lord here is the Jehovah the Son as David envisioned Him, by the Spirit, incarnated as man to be Jehovah our Righteousness.Kathi
So what David really meant was, "Jehovah #1 said to Jehovah #2, sit at my right hand…………"? I though "Jehovah" was a compound unity of the Father AND the Son, Kathi. How can the compound unity of "Jehovah" sit at the right hand of the compound unity of "Jehovah"?Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 07 2011,11:54) Mike,
The root is the pre-existent Son, the 'sprout' is the human Son, together they are the incarnation of the begotten God and flesh man.Jehovah in the fullest sense is the unity of the Father and Son and their Spirit
Each member of this unity is also called Jehovah, one as the Father and one as the Son.
Context will help.John Gill is a good commentator if you want to know more.
http://bible.cc/zechariah/6-12.htm
Mike,
Like I just said in the post I bumped:Jehovah in the fullest sense is the unity of the Father and Son and their Spirit
Each member of this unity is also called Jehovah, one as the Father and one as the Son.
Context will help.Jehovah the Father was talking to Jehovah our Righteousness (the Son).
Kathi
"Jehovah in the fullest sense"?
Okay. But you need to change your signature then. What you say there conflicts with what you say now.
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 12 2011,13:54) Jehovah the Father was talking to Jehovah our Righteousness (the Son).
Kathi,Are you positive that Psalm 110 is not just a matter of our ONE God Jehovah offering His Son, Servant, Lamb, Angel, Word, and Prophet the most esteemed position at the right hand of the Most High God?
Is there any particular scripture that would be in conflict if we had only ONE God named Jehovah, and Jesus was that God's Son?
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 13 2011,06:54) Jehovah in the fullest sense is the unity of the Father and Son and their Spirit
That is false Kathi.Jehovah (YHWH) is the only God and in the New Testament, this God not only has a son, but is the true God and Father of us all, even of Jesus Christ.
You are not speaking truth on this topic Kathi.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 12 2011,20:26) "Jehovah in the fullest sense"? Okay. But you need to change your signature then. What you say there conflicts with what you say now.
Why is that conflicting with my signature. How should I word my signature to better express this?Kathi
Quote (t8 @ Sep. 12 2011,23:51) Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 13 2011,06:54) Jehovah in the fullest sense is the unity of the Father and Son and their Spirit
That is false Kathi.Jehovah (YHWH) is the only God and in the New Testament, this God not only has a son, but is the true God and Father of us all, even of Jesus Christ.
You are not speaking truth on this topic Kathi.
t8,
Jesus was in existence before He was lower than the angels and had a God/man relationship with His Father. He wasn't always lower than the angels.Kathi
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 12 2011,20:34) Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 12 2011,13:54) Jehovah the Father was talking to Jehovah our Righteousness (the Son).
Kathi,Are you positive that Psalm 110 is not just a matter of our ONE God Jehovah offering His Son, Servant, Lamb, Angel, Word, and Prophet the most esteemed position at the right hand of the Most High God?
Is there any particular scripture that would be in conflict if we had only ONE God named Jehovah, and Jesus was that God's Son?
Mike,
Our one Jehovah, God the Father does speak to the one Jehovah, God the Son incarnate to sit at His right hand.There is only one Jehovah, God the Father but there is also only one Jehovah, Begotten God, the Son. Together they form the unity as the one Jehovah our God in the fullest sense.
I can immediately think of some verses that would be in conflict with there being only one called Jehovah but there are more. Gen 18 and Gen 19 and also the one who Jacob wrestled with. No one has heard the voice of the Father or seen Him. If there were one Jehovah, then there is a conflict because Abraham saw and spoke to Jehovah, face to face. Jacob physically wrestled one called Jehovah until He blessed him and even changed Jacob's name.
Kathi
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 14 2011,19:16) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 12 2011,20:26) "Jehovah in the fullest sense"? Okay. But you need to change your signature then. What you say there conflicts with what you say now.
Why is that conflicting with my signature. How should I word my signature to better express this?Kathi
Hi Kathi,You need to change this part:
Together with their Holy Spirit, they make up the compound unity called Jehovah.
Because you now claim that the Son alone can be "Jehovah", and the Father alone can be "Jehovah". You must lose the stipulation that they TOGETHER form "Jehovah".
Perhaps you could say that while each are known as "Jehovah", together they form "Jehovah in the FULLEST SENSE".
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 14 2011,19:38)
Our one Jehovah, God the Father does speak to the one Jehovah, God the Son incarnate to sit at His right hand.
So our ONE Jehovah God speaks to our ONE Jehovah God? What you mean to say is that our ONE Jehovah God speaks to YOUR "other" Jehovah God. Which only shows that YOU ALONE have TWO Jehovah Gods.Kathi, do you know of anyone else in your life that openly worships TWO different Gods?
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 14 2011,19:38)
I can immediately think of some verses that would be in conflict with there being only one called Jehovah but there are more. Gen 18 and Gen 19 and also the one who Jacob wrestled with. No one has heard the voice of the Father or seen Him. If there were one Jehovah, then there is a conflict because Abraham saw and spoke to Jehovah, face to face. Jacob physically wrestled one called Jehovah until He blessed him and even changed Jacob's name.
And in most instances of a VICE REGENT OF Jehovah being called by God's personal Name, the scriptural context makes it clear that it is an ANGEL OF God who is being called "Jehovah". In every other instance of this occurance, the commentators will tell you that these also refer to an ANGEL OF Jehovah.But give it a try, Kathi. List one of your scriptures, and show me how it is impossible for there to be only one Jehovah. I'll show you it's not, using the scriptures and your buddies Gill and Barnes and company.
Ready, set, GO!
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 14 2011,19:56) Ok Mike,
Done!
Well, it's still just as unscriptural as it was before. But at least it is evolving and changing right along with your doctrine.
Mike,
As I understand it, every trinitarian thinks that each of the three 'persons' is 100% God and form one unity as God. They also believe in a compound unity. The early church father's did too. It is just symantics. They will say that each are equally God in nature yet they are not three Gods but one God.Gen 18 and 19 does not clarify any vice regents. One of the Son's roles was to be the Word of God and is called at times the Angel of God because of that. He is not one of the created angels though.
Mike,
I have been saying that all along since I started focusing on Deut 10:17. I'm glad you are catching up thoughI don't know what this last post is in reference to. But remember that Trinitarians worship only ONE God, and are very adamant about having only ONE God. (I agree it is semantics, and that they really have THREE Gods they confusingly meld into the one God)
But my question was do you know anyone else who openly admits the worship of TWO separate Gods. Do you?
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 14 2011,20:08) Gen 18 and 19 does not clarify any vice regents. One of the Son's roles was to be the Word of God and is called at times the Angel of God because of that. He is not one of the created angels though.
So post Gen 18, and show me how it's impossible to have only ONE Jehovah because of this scripture. I'll show you it is not.Also, Jesus isn't an angel, servant, Lamb, Son, prophet and Priest of merely "Jehovah the Father". He is all of these things of "GOD".
Like I keep trying to tell you, if one is the Son OF the Most High God, then he is not the Most High God he is the Son OF.
And there is only ONE "Most High God", Kathi. Hence the title "MOST High".
Mike,
Everyone I go to church with appears to openly worship the Father as God and the Son as God and they believe they are two distinct persons. As I understand it, trinitarians believe in the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit are a compound unity as one God, yet each person is 100% God by nature.Kathi,
You are skirting the issue. Will any of your brothers or sisters at church stand beside you and boldly proclaim that they worship TWO completely separate Gods?
Mike,
Quote So post Gen 18, and show me how it's impossible to have only ONE Jehovah because of this scripture. I'll show you it is not. We have been over and over Gen 18. All you can say is the vice regent argument…I have heard it many times…I disagree. Do you have anything besides that?
Quote Also, Jesus isn't an angel, servant, Lamb, Son, prophet and Priest of merely "Jehovah the Father". He is all of these things of "GOD". He is 'of' God and also part of God. Like a person can be the pastor/teacher 'of' the church and still be 'part' OF the church.
Quote Like I keep trying to tell you, if one is the Son OF the Most High God, then he is not the Most High God he is the Son OF. And there is only ONE "Most High God", Kathi. Hence the title "MOST High".
There is only ONE 'Most High God' unity, and ONE 'Most High God, the Father' and ONE 'Most High God, the Son.' I agree that the Most High God, the Son, is not the Son of the Most High God, the Son. He is the Son of the Most High God, the Father. He also is the Son of, as in part of, the Most High God unity called Jehovah, in the fullest sense of that name.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 14 2011,21:57) Kathi, You are skirting the issue. Will any of your brothers or sisters at church stand beside you and boldly proclaim that they worship TWO completely separate Gods?
When you say separate Gods, you give the wrong impression. God the Father and God the Son are not God to us separately but interdependently. I do believe that they agree with me here.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
