- This topic has 19,164 replies, 120 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hi not3,
Whose powers did Jesus show? His own?
What difference did the anointing make to the carpenter of Capernaum?Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 06 2007,19:16) Hi not3,
Unless you know that the works done through Christ were that of God within him you are wasting your time.2 Corinthians 8:9
For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that you through his poverty might become rich.He who was glorious became an ordinary man and was transformed by Grace.
Nick,
I believe that God worked through his Son. Jesus was God's literal Son, this is true, but that doesn't mean he had special powers on his own. Only God could raise the dead, for instance.Glorious spirit son – ordinary man – transformed (again, for the, let's see……second time?) by grace – then glorified again. Hmmmm. I'll have to give this more thought.
I haven't read where Jesus was a glorious son before he was born.
A Prince is still rich even though he choses to live among the common folk. A Prince will always be a Prince because his Daddy is King.
We are on vacation starting tomorrow and will not be back until later next week……I'll check back then. Thanks for the chat.
If you want to organise a debate with another member regarding this subject, then you can contact them by PM or another method, and if they are in agreement, post the rules or format of the debate for the benefit of the readers and go to it.
I will move this discussion to “Scripture & Biblical Doctrine” as it seems like an ordinary discussion about a particular scripture.
Feel free to start a debate if you have a willing opponent, but I will keep this discussion going as it is titled John 1:1-14 and the discussion should be about that scripture only. If this discussion moves away from John 1:1-14 and into a general discussion about pre-existence, then I will close the topic down as we already have one of those in “Truth and Tradition”.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 06 2007,17:03) Kejonn
Again, John 17:3 is ambiguous as far as saying Jesus is not God. In my opinion the scripture is more supportive of Jesus Deity than not. Why did Jesus just slip his name right along with the Father and state as a prerequisite to having eternal life is to know the Father the “True God” “And” Jesus Christ whom he has sent?This is would be a bombshell to strict Monotheistic Jews!
This passage aligns beautifully with John 1:1 and John 20:28 and 1 John 5:20!
If John understood what you say about John 17:3, would he have used “Theos” in these passages? I think not.
I hate to say it, but you're hanging on to an odd interpretation of these scriptures merely because you absolutely refuse to see anything but the Trinitarian view. I can get that, I've been a closet Trinitarian for 20 years. That is, I was always taught it was true and I accepted it. I rarely though about it because most people outside of places such as this board RARELY bring it up. There is good reason for that.Now let me ask you, is it not essential to salvation that we know who Jesus Christ is? Is the name Jesus Christ enough for those who have little knowledge? No, that is why verse like John 3:16 are among the most popular, it gives us the relationship of Jesus the Son and God the Father. If Jesus had come from any other then he would not have the authority to save. So salvation is knowing both God the Father and His Son Jesus. Of course there is more to salvation than merely knowing, but that connection is ultimately the most important piece. So how would this make John 17:3 anything more than it is?
Do a search for the phrase “Son of God” in any Bible software. Very common in the NT. How then does John 17:3 attribute any more Jesus than the verses that call him “Son of God”? Son of God is Son of God is Son of God.
Anyway, you keep bringing up monotheistic like it has some kind of power. You yourself said that the Gospel of John was the oldest (in the viewpoint of the 1st century people). It looks to have been written about 90-100 AD according to most scholars. Christianity was sweeping the area by then so John, who many say is the Beloved Disciple, would feel less of a fear of making a stronger association of Jesus with God.
Also worth noting is the view that The Gospel of John advanced more of an anti-semitic theme when it covered the Crucifixion. So I don't think John was awfully concerned what the Jews thought at this point. After all, it was likely John who sat with Mary, the mother of Jesus, and watched Jesus die on the cross (John 19:26-27). Do you know that the Gospel of John is the only Gospel that speaks of the “disciple whom He loved”? And John appears to be the first Apostle to get to the empty tomb (John 20:4-5).
Hmmm, the strongest verses towards the Deity of God, all written by the Beloved Disciple. There are implications here I'd rather not touch at the moment.
And I've shown you where you err with 1 John 5:20. All you need to do is follow the usage of the masculine pronoun. All were used to describe God. The last phrase “He is the true God” fits right in with this pronoun usage. “Him” (God), “Him” (God), “His” (God), “He” (God).
Quote Show me anyplace in the NT scriptures where the word “Theos” was ascribed in a “True” or “Positive” sence to any being other than the Father and Yahshua! 1 Thessalonians 1:9 – For they themselves report about us what kind of a reception we had with you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve a living and true God
Quote You assume that because Jesus calls his Father God that Jesus is not God. John would differ with you in John 1:1. And over 600 Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic scholars would disagree with you. A good exegisis is found here…
This verse is the life blood of the Trinitarian viewpoint. Problem is…where does the Holy Spirit come in as God here? If I take your view, I only see Duality.Quote In fact the Father himself calls Jesus God. I think the Father considers Jesus to be “True God”, wouldn’t you? Does He? I would assume so, just as he called the judges appointed to be His representative “gods” (Psalm 82:6). If God called them “gods” then they must not be false either because He appointed them. Who better to represent God on earth than His only begotten Son?
In fact, it was Jesus who brought this very relationship up in John 10:34. Odd that he would equate himself with the judges of the OT, mere men appointed by God to represent Him. That's a point worth noting, and it was Jesus speaking on his own behalf, not John saying it of him. Yes, very noteworthy indeed.
Quote Heb 1:8
But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
Covered in a prior response to you. Move that horse out of the way, please.Quote Again, a real shocker here for a strict Monotheistic Jew. 1 John 5:20 KJV
And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.NLT
And we know that the Son of God has come, and he has given us understanding so that we can know the true God. And now we are in God because we are in his Son, Jesus Christ. He is the only true God, and he is eternal life.NIV
We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true–even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.ESV
And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.21Little children, keep yourselves from idols.NASB
And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding so that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.You say…
Quote Who is the true God? “He” is. Who is “He”? Different versions, same God. What is your point?
Quote True, but who is the he? The one who gives us an understanding or the one that is “Eternal life”. 1 John 1:1,2 says Yahshua is the “Eternal life” that was with the Father, again perfectly aligning with John 1:1 And 17:3.
My contention is that John in 5:20 meant both the Father and the Son is the True God.
The contention of a die-hard Trinitarian is duly noted. Nevermind that he seems to ignore grammatical structure to make the conclusion.to all..> who is this Man of Sin spoken of by the apostle Paul in 2 thes
who some think is the Antichrist spoken of by John. lets go through the scriptures and see if we can put it together.
2thes 2:1- now, brethern, concerning the comming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to him, we ask you not to be soon shaken in mind or to be disturbed, neither by spirit nor by word nor by letter as if from us that has come the day of Christ. Let not anyone decieve you by any means; because if not comes the Apostasy first and is revealed the Man of Sin who is opposing and exalting himself over everything being called god or object of worship, so that he in the temple of GOD as GOD to sit down, displaying himself that he is GOD.question 1.> does it not show that the man of sin and the apostasy would develope at the same time . apostasy is the falling away from the true God, and it was starting at the time of the apostles.
question 2.> who is Now sitting in the the temple of God? is it not Jesus and is he not being displayed a very GOD himself. This false image of Jesus being God did not come from him or the apostles, but from apostased Christanity and was starting at the very beginning, the apostles were holding back this false teaching when they were alive but when thay died it crept in and came to full reality at the council nacia 325 A.D. when the pagan ruler Constantine declared christanty the state religion. and coined the word (Homoousios) God from God. thsi was the final act of turning the flesh and blood man Jesus Christ into very God himself.
2thes2:8 and then the lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord will destory with the breath of his mouth with the brightness of His comming.
question. > why with the breath of His mouth, because it is not a real person, it's a LIE about He Himself as being very God that He will Distory. It's a false IMAGE of Jesus created by a fallen (apostasysed)church and has existed for over 17 hundred years.under the name of “christanity” a religion started by pagans and full of pagan practices like Easter (the pagan sex goddess whose symboles are bonnie rabbits and Easter eyges) and changing the sabbath worship to the sun God day of the pagans as well as christmass another pagan worshiping day.
all these thing can be easly proven just look at any encyclepedia.2thes2:11.> and for this reason (GOD) will send them (STRONG DELUSION) in order for them to believe (THE LIE) .
the article (the) means it's just not any LIE but a particular LIE the going to believe, and I mean they really believe it and thats why over the past 17 hundred years the Catholic church and her daughters have killed and torchered millions of people who stood against the trenitarian teachings and could even happen again.
I have a complete article on the Man of Sin if you would like ton read it, just let me know how i can get it to you. thanks…Gene.
Hi GB,
You ask
“to all..> who is this Man of Sin spoken of by the apostle Paul in 2 thes
who some think is the Antichrist spoken of by John. lets go through the scriptures and see if we can put it together.
2thes 2:1- now, brethern, concerning the comming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to him, we ask you not to be soon shaken in mind or to be disturbed, neither by spirit nor by word nor by letter as if from us that has come the day of Christ. Let not anyone decieve you by any means; because if not comes the Apostasy first and is revealed the Man of Sin who is opposing and exalting himself over everything being called god or object of worship, so that he in the temple of GOD as GOD to sit down, displaying himself that he is GOD.question 1.> does it not show that the man of sin and the apostasy would develope at the same time . apostasy is the falling away from the true God, and it was starting at the time of the apostles.”
No I don't think so. It just means to me that the apostasy had not taken place at the time of writing.
nick..You are right it hadn't come to fullition yet but it was trying to form , Paul said “for the mystery of lawlessness was already at work”
lawlessness means breaking God's law, and didn't God say “you shall have no other God Besides Me”.
Nick everthing fits.>read 2thes2 and think about it. blessings .Gene
Quote (kejonn @ July 07 2007,00:35) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 06 2007,17:03) Kejonn
Again, John 17:3 is ambiguous as far as saying Jesus is not God. In my opinion the scripture is more supportive of Jesus Deity than not. Why did Jesus just slip his name right along with the Father and state as a prerequisite to having eternal life is to know the Father the “True God” “And” Jesus Christ whom he has sent?This is would be a bombshell to strict Monotheistic Jews!
This passage aligns beautifully with John 1:1 and John 20:28 and 1 John 5:20!
If John understood what you say about John 17:3, would he have used “Theos” in these passages? I think not.
I hate to say it, but you're hanging on to an odd interpretation of these scriptures merely because you absolutely refuse to see anything but the Trinitarian view. I can get that, I've been a closet Trinitarian for 20 years. That is, I was always taught it was true and I accepted it. I rarely though about it because most people outside of places such as this board RARELY bring it up. There is good reason for that.Now let me ask you, is it not essential to salvation that we know who Jesus Christ is? Is the name Jesus Christ enough for those who have little knowledge? No, that is why verse like John 3:16 are among the most popular, it gives us the relationship of Jesus the Son and God the Father. If Jesus had come from any other then he would not have the authority to save. So salvation is knowing both God the Father and His Son Jesus. Of course there is more to salvation than merely knowing, but that connection is ultimately the most important piece. So how would this make John 17:3 anything more than it is?
Do a search for the phrase “Son of God” in any Bible software. Very common in the NT. How then does John 17:3 attribute any more Jesus than the verses that call him “Son of God”? Son of God is Son of God is Son of God.
Anyway, you keep bringing up monotheistic like it has some kind of power. You yourself said that the Gospel of John was the oldest (in the viewpoint of the 1st century people). It looks to have been written about 90-100 AD according to most scholars. Christianity was sweeping the area by then so John, who many say is the Beloved Disciple, would feel less of a fear of making a stronger association of Jesus with God.
Also worth noting is the view that The Gospel of John advanced more of an anti-semitic theme when it covered the Crucifixion. So I don't think John was awfully concerned what the Jews thought at this point. After all, it was likely John who sat with Mary, the mother of Jesus, and watched Jesus die on the cross (John 19:26-27). Do you know that the Gospel of John is the only Gospel that speaks of the “disciple whom He loved”? And John appears to be the first Apostle to get to the empty tomb (John 20:4-5).
Hmmm, the strongest verses towards the Deity of God, all written by the Beloved Disciple. There are implications here I'd rather not touch at the moment.
And I've shown you where you err with 1 John 5:20. All you need to do is follow the usage of the masculine pronoun. All were used to describe God. The last phrase “He is the true God” fits right in with this pronoun usage. “Him” (God), “Him” (God), “His” (God), “He” (God).
Quote Show me anyplace in the NT scriptures where the word “Theos” was ascribed in a “True” or “Positive” sence to any being other than the Father and Yahshua! 1 Thessalonians 1:9 – For they themselves report about us what kind of a reception we had with you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve a living and true God
Quote You assume that because Jesus calls his Father God that Jesus is not God. John would differ with you in John 1:1. And over 600 Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic scholars would disagree with you. A good exegisis is found here…
This verse is the life blood of the Trinitarian viewpoint. Problem is…where does the Holy Spirit come in as God here? If I take your view, I only see Duality.Quote In fact the Father himself calls Jesus God. I think the Father considers Jesus to be “True God”, wouldn’t you? Does He? I would assume so, just as he called the judges appointed to be His representative “gods” (Psalm 82:6). If God called them “gods” then they must not be false either because He appointed them. Who better to represent God on earth than His only begotten Son?
In fact, it was Jesus who brought this very relationship up in John 10:34. Odd that he would equate himself with the judges of the OT, mere men appointed by God to represent Him. That's a point worth noting, and it was Jesus speaking on his own behalf, not John saying it of him. Yes, very noteworthy indeed.
Quote Heb 1:8
But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
Covered in a prior response to you. Move that horse out of the way, please.Quote Again, a real shocker here for a strict Monotheistic Jew. 1 John 5:20 KJV
And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.NLT
And we know that the Son of God has come, and he has given us understanding so that we can know the true God. And now we are in God because we are in his Son, Jesus Christ. He is the only true God, and he is eternal life.NIV
We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true–even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.ESV
And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.21Little children, keep yourselves from idols.NASB
And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding so that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.You say…
Quote Who is the true God? “He” is. Who is “He”
?Different versions, same God. What is your point?
Quote True, but who is the he? The one who gives us an understanding or the one that is “Eternal life”. 1 John 1:1,2 says Yahshua is the “Eternal life” that was with the Father, again perfectly aligning with John 1:1 And 17:3.
My contention is that John in 5:20 meant both the Father and the Son is the True God.
The contention of a die-hard Trinitarian is duly noted. Nevermind that he seems to ignore grammatical structure to make the conclusion.
KYou say…
Quote
I hate to say it, but you're hanging on to an odd interpretation of these scriptures merely because you absolutely refuse to see anything but the Trinitarian view. I can get that, I've been a closet Trinitarian for 20 years. That is, I was always taught it was true and I accepted it. I rarely though about it because most people outside of places such as this board RARELY bring it up. There is good reason for that.Were you saved through a board like this? I find that most who come here were already saved through a trinitarian church. I think there is a “good reason” for that.
If John 17:3 was all we had then what you say could be taken that way.
But John has already told us earlier that The Word, Yahshua, was God. And later confirms it in other passages like John 20:28 and 1 John 1:1,2 and 5:20.
To harmonize scripture John 17:3 does not say Jesus is not God.
You are SO right I am holding on to the Jesus I received 33 years ago. I have been a Trinitarian for 33 years and the more I have studied it the stronger my faith in it has become. Mainly because of Monotheistic Hebrew scriptures that say YHWH came in the flesh and that YHWH “Alone” created all things, yet we see all things were created by Jesus and nothing was made that was made without him.
A Trinitarian view is the only way to harmonize all of scripture. IMO.
You say…
Quote
Now let me ask you, is it not essential to salvation that we know who Jesus Christ is? Is the name Jesus Christ enough for those who have little knowledge? No, that is why verse like John 3:16 are among the most popular, it gives us the relationship of Jesus the Son and God the Father. If Jesus had come from any other then he would not have the authority to save. So salvation is knowing both God the Father and His Son Jesus. Of course there is more to salvation than merely knowing, but that connection is ultimately the most important piece. So how would this make John 17:3 anything more than it is?
When I accepted Jesus as my Saviour I called out to him. For there is no name under heaven whereby a man must be saved but Jesus.I had no knowledge of the Trinity, however I received the Spirit of Jesus the Spirit of God. So from the start Jesus was my God for I prayed to him and talked to him as my Lord and my God. I didn’t need a man to tell me to do this.
Should I stop praying to him and talking to him because someone tells me that Jesus is not my God any longer, I think not.
Then my understanding of the Father and Jesus and the Comforter and their relationship began to grow, but my first experience with God was Jesus.
Isnt that what its all about? God and his creation. Mans redemption back to him.
Isa 40:3
The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD,(YHWH) make straight in the desert a highway for our God.How is it men think that any other but he could be our Saviour? Jesus is not just an agent of God or his representitave. He is YHWH come in the flesh to bring salvation to all who call upon “God”.
Trinitarians do not deny Jesus as the Son of God, question is “What does the “Monogenes”, Unique, Son of God mean to the Jews? There is no other Monogenes, Unique, Son of God. They wanted to kill Jesus because he claimed he was the Son of God. To them he was making himself equal to God.
Again John 17:3 in light of all scripture does not mean Jesus is not “True God”. So when John said in John 1:1 “The Word was God”, then are we to assume that because John calls Jesus God that the Father is not God? Call it Trinitarian stuborness if you like, but I know in whom I have believed and I am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day.
You still havnt addressed John 1:1 nor Phil 2 and others.
You say…
Quote Do a search for the phrase “Son of God” in any Bible software. Very common in the NT. How then does John 17:3 attribute any more Jesus than the verses that call him “Son of God”? Son of God is Son of God is Son of God. No “Son of God” is not just “Son of God” as you imply. We are “sons of God”. Jesus is the “Monogenes”, Unique, Son of God. There is no other like him. He is God in the flesh. The Word/God, the LORD from heaven. The Only mediator between God (his Spirit) and man (his flesh)!
You say…
Quote
Anyway, you keep bringing up monotheistic like it has some kind of power. You yourself said that the Gospel of John was the oldest (in the viewpoint of the 1st century people). It looks to have been written about 90-100 AD according to most scholars. Christianity was sweeping the area by then so John, who many say is the Beloved Disciple, would feel less of a fear of making a stronger association of Jesus with God.I am not sure what you are implying here. But John being the newest of the Gospels , saw Jesus as YHWH in the flesh accoording to (Isa 6:1-5 and Jn 12:37-42) and (Zech 12:10 and Jn 19:37).
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….;t=1311
Not to mention he opens his Gospel with John 1:1 and ends it with John 20:28.
You say…
Quote
Also worth noting is the view that The Gospel of John advanced more of an anti-semitic theme when it covered the Crucifixion. So I don't think John was awfully concerned what the Jews thought at this point. After all, it was likely John who sat with Mary, the mother of Jesus, and watched Jesus die on the cross (John 19:26-27). Do you know that the Gospel of John is the only Gospel that speaks of the “disciple whom He loved”? And John appears to be the first Apostle to get to the empty tomb (John 20:4-5).I am not sure how you mean anti-semitic as to the crucifixtion. John did see Jesus die but also in the 19th chapter verse 37 he alludes to YHWH being pierced!
You say…
Quote
Hmmm, the strongest verses towards
the Deity of God, all written by the Beloved Disciple. There are implications here I'd rather not touch at the moment.And I've shown you where you err with 1 John 5:20. All you need to do is follow the usage of the masculine pronoun. All were used to describe God. The last phrase “He is the true God” fits right in with this pronoun usage. “Him” (God), “Him” (God), “His” (God), “He” (God).
Ok that is the way you see it. But the last phrase also says “the True God and Eternal life”, which John has explained in 1 Jn 1;1,2 that the “Eternal Life “ is Jesus.I said…
Quote Show me any place in the NT scriptures where the word “Theos” was ascribed in a “True” or “Positive” sence to any being other than the Father and Yahshua! And you quote…
Quote
1 Thessalonians 1:9 – For they themselves report about us what kind of a reception we had with you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve a living and true God.Huh? You can not find one example in NT scriptures where the title “God”, ’THEOS” is ascribed to a living King, Prophet, Angel or a man in a “True” or “positive sense” other than the Father or Jesus. All other uses are defined by scriptures as false gods. That’s huge.
There is only “One True God”. To believe in the very existence of other gods is Polytheism.. Yet John gives us Jn 1:1, 20:28 etc.
You say…
Quote
Does He? I would assume so, just as he called the judges appointed to be His representative “gods” (Psalm 82:6). If God called them “gods” then they must not be false either because He appointed them. Who better to represent God on earth than His only begotten Son?In fact, it was Jesus who brought this very relationship up in John 10:34. Odd that he would equate himself with the judges of the OT, mere men appointed by God to represent Him. That's a point worth noting, and it was Jesus speaking on his own behalf, not John saying it of him. Yes, very noteworthy indeed.
So you think Jesus because he quotes the Psalmist in Ps 82:6 was saying that judges and men are in the same class of being as he and the Father?
Was Jesus promoting Polytheism here or was he simply rebuking them for persecuting him for saying he was the “Son of God”?
I suppose Jesus is contradicting Paul or the Hebrew scriptures that says there is “No God” beside him? Wrong!!!
How do you reconcile Jesus statement in light of these scriptures…
Isa 43:10
Ye [are] my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.Isa 44:6
Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. (Hmmm, first and last, something to think about)Isa 44:8
Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.Isa 45:21
Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.You think Jesus didnt know these scriptures?
Paul knew this when he penned 1 Cor 8:4-6
Here is what Paul the Hebrew of the Hebrews a strict monotheistic Jew acknowledged…
1 Cor 8:
4 Therefore concerning the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that there is no such thing as an idol in the world, and *that there is no God but one*.
5 For even *if there are so-called gods* whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, (we know there is only “one Lord”, the Father and Yeshua).
6 yet *for us there is but one God*, the Father, from whom are all things and we {exist} for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.Paul is addressing paganism and polytheism which was a real problem in Corinth at that time.
Yet Paul puts Jesus right there with the Father ascribing an attribute of Deity to him. He says they are “So called gods” This same Paul wrote of Jesus in Phil 2 as being in the form of God in which if he was not God according to Jn 1:1 then his statement again would be in opposition to the Hebrew scriptures which cleary teach there is “no God beside YHWH”, neither is there any “Like Him”.
Talk about interpretation
Yes there is only “One God” the Father and Yahshua!
The Word was with God and the Word was God.
Redundant I know, but it screams in the face of the Henotheist and Arians and Unitarians of this day.
And as far as the Spirit. It is a given, for the Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son. How do you explain this?
It’s the Mormons that believe that we are gods or will become gods. But it is not scriptural.
The interpretation of Ps 82:6 and Jn 10 as meaning that men are gods like some believe, is a contradiction to the Monotheistic Jewish scriptures and Pauls writings.
You say…
Quote
The contention of a die-hard Trinitarian is duly noted. Nevermind that he seems to ignore grammatical structure to make the conclusion.True! I am a die hard Trinitarian and believe I if I had to die for my faith I would!
I know in whom I have believed! I have not ignored grammatical structure as yoiu claim, as I have preiviously shown.
You know for someone who says he hasnt made up his mind yet concerning the “Trinity”, you sure could have fooled me seeing how you have taken up the sword so strongly agianst it!
2 Cor 11:3
But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with [him].Blessings!
The apostle Paul mentions Jesus pre-existance at Colosians 1:15 + 16. Also read Revelation 3:14.
So Jesus was the first creation (creature) and then he help God create all
other things in heaven and on earth.
Also at John 3:16 Jesus is called Gods only “begotten” son. Begotten means “pro-created”
or “to cause to exists”. Jesus is the creators only “pro-created” son.
In light of this, some people think that Jesus is the one speaking at Proverbs 8:22-31.
Jesus has been with God from the beginning of creation. Over those billions of years
God taught Jesus many things and now Jesus is the second highest being in the universe.
Thats why our creator gives him so much responsibilty and authority. Acts 2:3, 5:31, Philipians 2:9WJ,
I'll answer the other part of the post later (gotta run!) but I did want to answer one question: I gave my heart and life to Jesus Christ while laying on my couch at home. I had just read several chapters of “Satan Is Alive and Well on Planet Earth” by Hal Lindsay. That same weekend I gave up drugs, stopped cursing, and my life has been moving forward since (with some dips in the road, yes). I did not hear about the Trinity for some time and it struck me as odd when I first heard it. But I was young in my faith and I felt that if I heard it from the pulpit, it must be true. I filed it in the back of my mind and not really thought about it until recently.
Therein lies an oddity of it. So many people say it is “foundational” but the majority of Christians would look at you funny if you asked them to actualll describe the Trinity. They would probably say “Three gods in one, Father, Son, Holy Ghost” if they even knew that much. Some would think it was just a name that many churches use in their title: “Trinity Baptist”, “Trinity Methodist”, etc.
Something so foundational but yet something rarely ever taught. What's up with that?
wj..> your right people just presume if it comming from an organized relgious institution it's right. they never really look into it for themselves, so they blindly believe their teachings without no real proof.
you can see how far this blindness can go, just look at worshiping Jesus' answers. he said it say's Jesus was truly God, but when i read what Jesus said it was “THOU ART THE ONLY TRUE GOD” and as far as i was taught the word THOU means someone else, not the person speaking, and the word (ONLY) meant no other.You would think that any openminded person could understand that and deal with it.
but then again this is what trinitarians do the avoid the straight forward answers and come up with all kind of other scriptures to skirt
around the obivious conclusions. blessings to you, ..GeneQuote (Nick Hassan @ July 06 2007,19:18) Hi not3,
You will not resolve it till you grasp he was son of God before he became man.
NHMy Bible says he was the Word/God before he became a man!
There is no scripture that states he was a son before he was born a son!
Inference again?
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 07 2007,09:48) wj..> your right people just presume if it comming from an organized relgious institution it's right. they never really look into it for themselves, so they blindly believe their teachings without no real proof. you can see how far this blindness can go, just look at worshiping Jesus' answers. he said it say's Jesus was truly God, but when i read what Jesus said it was “THOU ART THE ONLY TRUE GOD” and as far as i was taught the word THOU means someone else, not the person speaking, and the word (ONLY) meant no other.You would think that any openminded person could understand that and deal with it.
but then again this is what trinitarians do the avoid the straight forward answers and come up with all kind of other scriptures to skirt
around the obivious conclusions. blessings to you, ..Gene
GBWho are you to judge my relationship with Jesus?
Because I dont agree with you means I am blind?
I could say the same of you.
So your empty accusations do not change what scriptures say about Jesus being God!
Apparently you simply ignore the scriptures that do!
worshiping Jesus …> i gess when you went to school the word (ONLY) did not mean no one else, and the word (THOU) didn't mean someone other then the one speaking. It did in the school i went too.
and if scripture say's Jesus is God then i gess what Jesus said by saying
“THOU art the (ONLY) true God was a lie.and i have never said a word questioning your relationship with Jesus thats not my place to make that Judgement, Jesus will have to do that not me.
my disagreement with you is how you skirt the simple straight forward textes and jump all around to avoid dealing with then, using debatable scriptures and not answer the straight forward questions put to you.
if we can't get this simple little thing right how can we get anything right.
go figure; Gene
Hi W,
Prov 304Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst tell?
Psalm 68:18
18You have ascended on high, You have led captive Your captives;
You have received gifts among men,
Even among the rebellious also, that the LORD God may dwell there
John 3:1313″No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.
Ephesians 4:8
8Therefore it says,
“WHEN HE ASCENDED ON HIGH,
HE LED CAPTIVE A HOST OF CAPTIVES,
AND HE GAVE GIFTS TO MEN.”
Job 38:99When I made a cloud its garment
And thick darkness its swaddling band,——
So Christ identified himself as the one who has descended. All the rest describe the work that God does in union with His son. It is prophetic in part as the Son had yet to ascend. But it is also historical describing the work of creation done by God through His son.
Ps 68 is interesting showing Christ ruling in the Millenium in union with his Father as in Ps 2
'Psalm 68
1Let God arise, let his enemies be scattered: let them also that hate him flee before him.2As smoke is driven away, so drive them away: as wax melteth before the fire, so let the wicked perish at the presence of God.
3But let the righteous be glad; let them rejoice before God: yea, let them exceedingly rejoice.
4Sing unto God, sing praises to his name: extol him that rideth upon the heavens by his name JAH, and rejoice before him.
5A father of the fatherless, and a judge of the widows, is God in his holy habitation.
6God setteth the solitary in families: he bringeth out those which are bound with chains: but the rebellious dwell in a dry land.
7O God, when thou wentest forth before thy people, when thou didst march through the wilderness; Selah:
8The earth shook, the heavens also dropped at the presence of God: even Sinai itself was moved at the presence of God, the God of Israel.
9Thou, O God, didst send a plentiful rain, whereby thou didst confirm thine inheritance, when it was weary.
10Thy congregation hath dwelt therein: thou, O God, hast prepared of thy goodness for the poor.
11The Lord gave the word: great was the company of those that published it.
12Kings of armies did flee apace: and she that tarried at home divided the spoil.
13Though ye have lien among the pots, yet shall ye be as the wings of a dove covered with silver, and her feathers with yellow gold.
14When the Almighty scattered kings in it, it was white as snow in Salmon.
15The hill of God is as the hill of Bashan; an high hill as the hill of Bashan.
16Why leap ye, ye high hills? this is the hill which God desireth to dwell in; yea, the LORD will dwell in it for ever.
17The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands of angels: the Lord is among them, as in Sinai, in the holy place.
18Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them.
19Blessed be the Lord, who daily loadeth us with benefits, even the God of our salvation. Selah.
20He that is our God is the God of salvation; and unto GOD the Lord belong the issues from death.
21But God shall wound the head of his enemies, and the hairy scalp of such an one as goeth on still in his trespasses.
22The Lord said, I will bring again from Bashan, I will bring my people again from the depths of the sea:
23That thy foot may be dipped in the blood of thine enemies, and the tongue of thy dogs in the same.
24They have seen thy goings, O God; even the goings of my God, my King, in the sanctuary.
25The singers went before, the players on instruments followed after; among them were the damsels playing with timbrels.
26Bless ye God in the congregations, even the Lord, from the fountain of Israel.
27There is little Benjamin with their ruler, the princes of Judah and their council, the princes of Zebulun, and the princes of Naphtali.
28Thy God hath commanded thy strength: strengthen, O God, that which thou hast wrought for us.
29Because of thy temple at Jerusalem shall kings bring presents unto thee.
30Rebuke the company of spearmen, the multitude of the bulls, with the calves of the people, till every one submit himself with pieces of silver: scatter thou the people that delight in war.
31Princes shall come out of Egypt; Ethiopia shall soon stretch out her hands unto God.
32Sing unto God, ye kingdoms of the earth; O sing praises unto the Lord; Selah:
33To him that rideth upon the heavens of heavens, which were of old; lo, he doth send out his voice, and that a mighty voice.
34Ascribe ye strength unto God: his excellency is over Israel, and his strength is in the clouds.
35O God, thou art terrible out of thy holy places: the God of Israel is he that giveth strength and power unto his people. Blessed be God.
Quote But I will not continue to discuss my beliefs with someone who only wants to condemn me. I do not condemn you, and yet you feel that there is only one of us who holds to the truth – I'm assuming that that one person is you? Not 3 in 1,
Its is a matter of simple logic that at the very least, one of us has to be wrong. I don't remember condemning you, but I do remember pointing out that we can't both be right. And this is true. Either Jesus did exist as a pre-human being, or he didn't.He didn't exist as a pre-human being and at the same time didn't.
you feel that there is only one of us who holds to the truth you say.Yes. Yes, I do believe this. Because it is the truth, based on logic. We don't even have to consider the scriptures to know that he couldn't have pre-existed and at the same time not pre-exsisted.
Quote I understand that you believe you have the truth and I do not.
Right. And obviously, you believe the same. You do not believe that I have the truth in this matter. You believe you have the truth and I don't.
Yet, I would love for some scriptural backing on your part.Quote I do not condemn you, and yet you feel that there is only one of us who holds to the truth – I'm assuming that that one person is you?
And I assume that you believe you think you understand correctly on this matter. (If you didn't believe this, why would you hold to it.) We all think we have true understandings of everything we believe. Otherwise, we wouldn't believe it.
You try to make it seem as though I'm close minded for pointing out that one of us must logically be wrong.
I only point this out so that we can both see the importance of figuring this out. Before, you seemed to indicate it didn't matter. I then showed you two scriptures that indicate it does matter, and that our lives are involved.I sort of get the feeling you would rather just sidestep this whole conversation, and bring up other things and not actually discuss the scriptures on this matter. That does sadden me a little. Since you hold so strongly to this belief, I can't understand how you wouldn't be able to explain simply why you believe what you do.
david.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
