- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 10 2009,17:29) Quote (bodhitharta @ June 10 2009,00:12) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 10 2009,15:24) Quote (bodhitharta @ June 09 2009,21:44) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 10 2009,09:36) Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 09 2009,17:32) Hi WJ,
Of course he is not the one true God.
For us there is one God the Father ….and one Lord Jesus Christ[1cor8]
Hi HNAs you say there is only “One True God” now you have to decide if Jesus is “True” or not. Or is he just some little god that the Father called “God”.
Believe all the scriptures NH! Or believe some and reject the others, the choice is yours!
WJ
WJ,Nick didn't just make up that there was Only One True God.
Jesus Christ said it, Was Jesus wrong when he said that the Father was THE ONLY TRUE GOD?Either Jesus is wrong or you are, which is it?
Hi BDJesus also made claims to be God, though you and others deny his claims. He claimed to be equal to the Father and that is why the Jews crucified him.
So then like Nick you can alos white out the scriptures that claim his deity if you want, and not accept the scriptures calling Jesus God? Or do you believe that he a false god?
Paul is not contradicting himself. Paul is clearly saying that there are no other Gods, yet Paul calls Jesus God.
Is it unscriptural for me to call Jesus my Lord and my God or not?
If you think so then show me why.
WJ
Jesus never ever claimed to be God, in fact he taught us all to pray to his God and our God and told us true worshippers worship the Father in spirit and in truth. In other words God is never worshipped in the flesh because God is not a man, nor a son of man.I do believe that you love God and seek to do what is right:
Romans 1
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Hi BDThis is one of Jesus claims to deity if you have ears to hear…
If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him. John 14:7
So Thomas asked Jesus to show him God.
Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. John 14:8
Jesus answer was…
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 14:9
How long have I been with you Philip and you do not know that I am the one you are seeking for. Why do you ask me to show you God? If you have seen me you have seen God! Jesus was not talking about his flesh and blood. He was talking about their spiritual eyes to see who he really was!
Jesus is the “Image of the Invisible God”, and if your image of him is less than God than you have created a false image of God, for you cannot know or see the Father God apart from the Son. He who has the Son has the Father also, why?,
because the Son is God also!Blessings WJ
Hi WJ:Jesus stated that those who have seen him had seen the Father because the works that he was doing were in obedience to God.
Quote Jhn 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Jhn 14:11 Believe me that I [am] in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.
Jhn 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
Love in Christ,
MartyMarty said:
Quote Hi WJ: Jesus stated that those who have seen him had seen the Father because the works that he was doing were in obedience to God.
Marty,
You reveal that you do not have ears to hear Just as WJ said. Titus 2:13-14 is one of the most clear statements concerning the Divinity of Jesus in all of Scripture. It says that the God and Savior Jesus Christ gave Himself FOR US….Come to terms with it bro!
thinker
Quote (thethinker @ June 12 2009,02:10) Marty said: Quote Hi WJ: Jesus stated that those who have seen him had seen the Father because the works that he was doing were in obedience to God.
Marty,
You reveal that you do not have ears to hear Just as WJ said. Titus 2:13-14 is one of the most clear statements concerning the Divinity of Jesus in all of Scripture. It says that the God and Savior Jesus Christ gave Himself FOR US….Come to terms with it bro!
thinker
tt,Can God be taught? Does God learn from someone?
John 8:27-29 (King James Version)
27They understood not that he spake to them of the Father.
28Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
Jesus was taught so tell me can God be taught, yes or no?
Quote (thethinker @ June 11 2009,04:07) WorshippingJesus said: Quote As you can see in verse 14 Paul continues his sentence by telling us who it is that is going to appear… Jesus Christ, “WHO GAVE HIMSELF FOR US TO REDEEM US”!!!
Is this terminology used of the Father anywhere in scriptures?
WJ,
Excellent bro! Even I overlooked verse 14. I hope Unitarian hermeneutics aren't rubbing off on me. You're absolutely correct. The only God and Savior who “gave Himself for us to redeem us” was Jesus Christ. Therefore, “God” and “Savior” in verse 13 cannot refer to the Father.thanks,
thinker
Titus 210Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.
11For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
12Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
13Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
14Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
verse 14 actually proves that 13 is talking about The Father and Jesus because verse 11 explains that Jesus appeared as a grace from God to bring salvation.
Now I have explained here before that the way you get to the root of the problem is understanding how the author is using his words, not just in a sentence but throughout a book and look what we find in the beginning of this book:
Titus 1
1Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God's elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness;2In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;
3But hath in due times manifested his word through preaching, which is committed unto me according to the commandment of God our Saviour;
4To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.
You will see that in this book Paul is calling Jesus and The Father Saviour but notice Paul is never calling Jesus “God”
In-fact he even says he is a servant of God and an apostle of Christ.
and once again in titus 3 look:
4But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
5Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
6Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
This is total proof that Paul is calling God “God” and Jesus Christ “Jesus Christ” he is simply calling them both saviours
but there is nothing divine about that because Moses was the deliverer of the Israelites from Egypt but God was likewise and above all the deliverer of the Israelites.
For those who God has given the ability to heal isn't it right to say that God is really doing the healing yet you would still be called a healer.
So we can see from the usage through out the document that there is no attempt to call Jesus “God”
I have now shown you through the scriptures.
Hi BD
Quote (bodhitharta @ June 11 2009,12:39) You will see that in this book Paul is calling Jesus and The Father Saviour but notice Paul is never calling Jesus “God”
But you are forgetting that Paul did call Jesus his Great God and Saviour…Remmember, the Greek word for “appearing” is ‘epiphaneia’ which means;
1) an appearing, appearance
It is translated AV — appearing 5 times, brightness 1 time.
As you can see in verse 14 Paul continues his sentence by telling us who it is that is going to appear…
Jesus Christ, “WHO GAVE HIMSELF FOR US TO REDEEM US”!!!
Is this terminology used of the Father anywhere in scriptures?
First he says he will appear, and we know there are “no” scriptures that say the Father is going to appear, or that the Father is who we are looking for to return.
Paul uses the word “epiphaneia” exclusively for the Lord Jesus Christ return in all the 6 times he used it in the NT.
to keep this command without spot or blame until “THE APPEARING (EPIPHANEIA) OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST”, 1 Tim 6:14
but it has now been revealed through “THE APPEARING (EPIPHANEIA) OF OUR SAVIOR, CHRIST JESUS”, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. 2 Tim 1:10
In the presence of God and of “CHRIST JESUS, WHO WILL JUDGE THE LIVING AND THE DEAD, AND IN VIEW OF HIS APPEARING (EPIPHANEIA) AND HIS KINGDOM”, I give you this charge: 2 Tim 4:1
Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which “THE LORD, THE RIGHTEOUS JUDGE, WILL AWARD TO ME ON THAT DAY–AND NOT ONLY TO ME, BUT ALSO TO ALL WHO HAVE LONGED FOR HIS APPEARING (EPIPHANEIA)”. 2 Tim 4:8
And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom “THE LORD JESUS WILL OVERTHROW WITH THE BREATH OF HIS MOUTH AND DESTROY BY THE SPLENDOR (EPIPHANEIA) OF HIS COMING”. 2 Thess 2:8
This scriptural fact together with the Grandville Sharp rule leaves Titus 2:13 unambiguous as to Paul’s confession that Jesus is his Great God and Savior.
Couple that with what Paul wrote In Phil 2 that Jesus was “in very nature God” and that he thought it not robbery to be equal to God the Father, along with this scripture which also fits Grandville Sharps rule…
For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our “ONLY MASTER AND LORD, JESUS CHRIST”. Jude 1:4
And another scripture that follows the rule is…
Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of “OUR GOD AND SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST have received a faith as precious as ours: 2 Peter 1:1 Peter who was also a witness of Jesus and Thomas confession claims Jesus as his God and Savior.
Other places in scriptures calls Jesus God also, why is this so hard for you to accept?
Blessings WJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 12 2009,04:50) Hi BD Quote (bodhitharta @ June 11 2009,12:39) You will see that in this book Paul is calling Jesus and The Father Saviour but notice Paul is never calling Jesus “God”
But you are forgetting that Paul did call Jesus his Great God and Saviour…Remmember, the Greek word for “appearing” is ‘epiphaneia’ which means;
1) an appearing, appearance
It is translated AV — appearing 5 times, brightness 1 time.
As you can see in verse 14 Paul continues his sentence by telling us who it is that is going to appear…
Jesus Christ, “WHO GAVE HIMSELF FOR US TO REDEEM US”!!!
Is this terminology used of the Father anywhere in scriptures?
First he says he will appear, and we know there are “no” scriptures that say the Father is going to appear, or that the Father is who we are looking for to return.
Paul uses the word “epiphaneia” exclusively for the Lord Jesus Christ return in all the 6 times he used it in the NT.
to keep this command without spot or blame until “THE APPEARING (EPIPHANEIA) OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST”, 1 Tim 6:14
but it has now been revealed through “THE APPEARING (EPIPHANEIA) OF OUR SAVIOR, CHRIST JESUS”, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. 2 Tim 1:10
In the presence of God and of “CHRIST JESUS, WHO WILL JUDGE THE LIVING AND THE DEAD, AND IN VIEW OF HIS APPEARING (EPIPHANEIA) AND HIS KINGDOM”, I give you this charge: 2 Tim 4:1
Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which “THE LORD, THE RIGHTEOUS JUDGE, WILL AWARD TO ME ON THAT DAY–AND NOT ONLY TO ME, BUT ALSO TO ALL WHO HAVE LONGED FOR HIS APPEARING (EPIPHANEIA)”. 2 Tim 4:8
And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom “THE LORD JESUS WILL OVERTHROW WITH THE BREATH OF HIS MOUTH AND DESTROY BY THE SPLENDOR (EPIPHANEIA) OF HIS COMING”. 2 Thess 2:8
This scriptural fact together with the Grandville Sharp rule leaves Titus 2:13 unambiguous as to Paul’s confession that Jesus is his Great God and Savior.
Couple that with what Paul wrote In Phil 2 that Jesus was “in very nature God” and that he thought it not robbery to be equal to God the Father, along with this scripture which also fits Grandville Sharps rule…
For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our “ONLY MASTER AND LORD, JESUS CHRIST”. Jude 1:4
And another scripture that follows the rule is…
Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of “OUR GOD AND SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST have received a faith as precious as ours: 2 Peter 1:1 Peter who was also a witness of Jesus and Thomas confession claims Jesus as his God and Savior.
Other places in scriptures calls Jesus God also, why is this so hard for you to accept?
Blessings WJ
Let me explain in a different manner.Even if you were correct and we all called Jesus “God”
The scripture still says to whom the word of God is given were called gods “Ye are gods” Said God, “You are all the children of The Most High”
Now what is most important about what I just wrote is this:
Jesus was accused of blasphemy because in his words:
John 10:36 (King James Version)
36Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?Now, Jesus says they are not being correct because:
John 10:35-37 (King James Version)
35If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
Jesus tells them he has a right according to the scriptures to call himself the Son of God, but wait!
Psalm 82:5-7 (King James Version)
5They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.
6I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
Now God says “all of you are children of the Most High so when Jesus is saying he is the Son of God he is correctly saying He is not The Most High
so who is the Most High? Ask Jesus:
John 17:2-4 (King James Version)
3And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
4I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
Jesus makes it clear that while there may be many children of the Most High there is ONLY ONE TRUE GOD who is the Most High.
So let me make it clear that I have no problem if Jesus is called God because he is the child of God but Jesus makes it clear that the Only True God is the Most High God.
Jesus has a God which by very nature makes him not The Only True God but the Father has no God to Worship, That is the Only True God.
Bless you always!
bodhitharta wrote:
Quote Now, Jesus says they are not being correct because: John 10:35-37 (King James Version)
35If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
Jesus tells them he has a right according to the scriptures to call himself the Son of God, but wait!
Psalm 82:5-7 (King James Version)
5They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.
6I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
Now God says “all of you are children of the Most High so when Jesus is saying he is the Son of God he is correctly saying He is not The Most High
so who is the Most High? Ask Jesus:
John 17:2-4 (King James Version)
3And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
4I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
Jesus makes it clear that while there may be many children of the Most High there is ONLY ONE TRUE GOD who is the Most High.
So let me make it clear that I have no problem if Jesus is called God because he is the child of God but Jesus makes it clear that the Only True God is the Most High God.
Jesus has a God which by very nature makes him not The Only True God but the Father has no God to Worship, That is the Only True God.
bd,
Read the narrative again carefully. Jesus did NOT deny that the term “God” truly and properly applied to Himself. He affirmed only that it was inconsistent of the Jews to charge Him with blasphemy. If the term could apply to their magistrates who held an office with more limited power, then it could apply to Himself in a GREATER sense seeing that He was sanctified and sent into the world. He told them that His works were the proof that the term “God” applied to Him in a much greater sense. His works were the evidence that He was “God” with greater power.In John 10 the title “son” has absolutely nothing to do with being a “child of God” as you put it. Their magistrates were called “sons” of the Most High because of the power and authority they had. It had to do with their official capacity. And to the extent they had power and authority was to the extent they were “gods” or “sons of the Most High.” The works that Jesus did testified to the degree of the power and authority He possessed. Therefore, by His works we know He was a “son” that was EQUAL to the Father.
This is why He said, “If you don't believe Me then believe the works.”
thinker
Quote (thethinker @ June 12 2009,11:27) bodhitharta wrote: Quote Now, Jesus says they are not being correct because: John 10:35-37 (King James Version)
35If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
Jesus tells them he has a right according to the scriptures to call himself the Son of God, but wait!
Psalm 82:5-7 (King James Version)
5They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.
6I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
Now God says “all of you are children of the Most High so when Jesus is saying he is the Son of God he is correctly saying He is not The Most High
so who is the Most High? Ask Jesus:
John 17:2-4 (King James Version)
3And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
4I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
Jesus makes it clear that while there may be many children of the Most High there is ONLY ONE TRUE GOD who is the Most High.
So let me make it clear that I have no problem if Jesus is called God because he is the child of God but Jesus makes it clear that the Only True God is the Most High God.
Jesus has a God which by very nature makes him not The Only True God but the Father has no God to Worship, That is the Only True God.
bd,
Read the narrative again carefully. Jesus did NOT deny that the term “God” truly and properly applied to Himself. He affirmed only that it was inconsistent of the Jews to charge Him with blasphemy. If the term could apply to their magistrates who held an office with more limited power, then it could apply to Himself in a GREATER sense seeing that He was sanctified and sent into the world. He told them that His works were the proof that the term “God” applied to Him in a much greater sense. His works were the evidence that He was “God” with greater power.In John 10 the title “son” has absolutely nothing to do with being a “child of God” as you put it. Their magistrates were called “sons” of the Most High because of the power and authority they had. It had to do with their official capacity. And to the extent they had power and authority was to the extent they were “gods” or “sons of the Most High.” The works that Jesus did testified to the degree of the power and authority He possessed. Therefore, by His works we know He was a “son” that was EQUAL to the Father.
This is why He said, “If you don't believe Me then believe the works.”
thinker
I didn't say that he denied the term, I said he explained why him saying he was the “son of God” was not blasphemy according to the scriptures. Of course a male child of God is called Son.Jesus never said he was a son in a “greater” sense. He said My Father and your Father, My God and your God.
as far as the works:
John 9:3-5 (King James Version)
4I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.
John 10:24-26 (King James Version)
24Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.
25Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
John 10:36-37 (King James Version)
36Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
37If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
Now why is it that you don't understand that the Father sanctified Jesus this means that he was not always sanctified.
Who can sanctify God Almighty He is Holy Forever but Jesus was sanctified.
Acts 13:32-34 (King James Version)
32And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers,
33God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.
Notice he is not eternally begotten like some trinitarians claim.
If he was equal to his Father Jesus would not say that the Father is greater than I, Is equal the same as greater?
Why are you talking about the works Jesus did made him a “son” that was equal to the Father. Elijah did Miracles similar to Jesus and so did many other prophets so according to you that would make them all sons equal to the Father.
Even the Birth of Jesus it is a Miracle that is amazing but God also made barren women pregnent which is equally amazing because at least a virgin has healthy fresh eggs but the barren women doesn't even have eggs.
Peace and blessings be forever upon Jesus the Christ who puts no partners with God.
Quote (bodhitharta @ June 12 2009,04:39) Quote (thethinker @ June 11 2009,04:07) WorshippingJesus said: Quote As you can see in verse 14 Paul continues his sentence by telling us who it is that is going to appear… Jesus Christ, “WHO GAVE HIMSELF FOR US TO REDEEM US”!!!
Is this terminology used of the Father anywhere in scriptures?
WJ,
Excellent bro! Even I overlooked verse 14. I hope Unitarian hermeneutics aren't rubbing off on me. You're absolutely correct. The only God and Savior who “gave Himself for us to redeem us” was Jesus Christ. Therefore, “God” and “Savior” in verse 13 cannot refer to the Father.thanks,
thinker
Titus 210Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.
11For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
12Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
13Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
14Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
verse 14 actually proves that 13 is talking about The Father and Jesus because verse 11 explains that Jesus appeared as a grace from God to bring salvation.
Now I have explained here before that the way you get to the root of the problem is understanding how the author is using his words, not just in a sentence but throughout a book and look what we find in the beginning of this book:
Titus 1
1Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God's elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness;2In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;
3But hath in due times manifested his word through preaching, which is committed unto me according to the commandment of God our Saviour;
4To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.
You will see that in this book Paul is calling Jesus and The Father Saviour but notice Paul is never calling Jesus “God”
In-fact he even says he is a servant of God and an apostle of Christ.
and once again in titus 3 look:
4But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
5Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
6Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
This is total proof that Paul is calling God “God” and Jesus Christ “Jesus Christ” he is simply calling them both saviours
but there is nothing divine about that because Moses was the deliverer of the Israelites from Egypt but God was likewise and above all the deliverer of the Israelites.
For those who God has given the ability to heal isn't it right to say that God is really doing the healing yet you would still be called a healer.
So we can see from the usage through out the document that there is no attempt to call Jesus “God”
I have now shown you through the scriptures.
Amen to your post here BD. Also, God, my Father, and the Father of my Lord Jesus, has revealed to the church that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God (Matthew 16:16-17), and so that should settle the issue.
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (942767 @ June 12 2009,15:02) Quote (bodhitharta @ June 12 2009,04:39) Quote (thethinker @ June 11 2009,04:07) WorshippingJesus said: Quote As you can see in verse 14 Paul continues his sentence by telling us who it is that is going to appear… Jesus Christ, “WHO GAVE HIMSELF FOR US TO REDEEM US”!!!
Is this terminology used of the Father anywhere in scriptures?
WJ,
Excellent bro! Even I overlooked verse 14. I hope Unitarian hermeneutics aren't rubbing off on me. You're absolutely correct. The only God and Savior who “gave Himself for us to redeem us” was Jesus Christ. Therefore, “God” and “Savior” in verse 13 cannot refer to the Father.thanks,
thinker
Titus 210Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.
11For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
12Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
13Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
14Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
verse 14 actually proves that 13 is talking about The Father and Jesus because verse 11 explains that Jesus appeared as a grace from God to bring salvation.
Now I have explained here before that the way you get to the root of the problem is understanding how the author is using his words, not just in a sentence but throughout a book and look what we find in the beginning of this book:
Titus 1
1Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God's elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness;2In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;
3But hath in due times manifested his word through preaching, which is committed unto me according to the commandment of God our Saviour;
4To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.
You will see that in this book Paul is calling Jesus and The Father Saviour but notice Paul is never calling Jesus “God”
In-fact he even says he is a servant of God and an apostle of Christ.
and once again in titus 3 look:
4But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
5Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
6Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
This is total proof that Paul is calling God “God” and Jesus Christ “Jesus Christ” he is simply calling them both saviours
but there is nothing divine about that because Moses was the deliverer of the Israelites from Egypt but God was likewise and above all the deliverer of the Israelites.
For those who God has given the ability to heal isn't it right to say that God is really doing the healing yet you would still be called a healer.
So we can see from the usage through out the document that there is no attempt to call Jesus “God”
I have now shown you through the scriptures.
Amen to your post here BD. Also, God, my Father, and the Father of my Lord Jesus, has revealed to the church that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God (Matthew 16:16-17), and so that should settle the issue.
Love in Christ,
Marty
God willing it will settle it.bodhitharta said:
Quote tt, Can God be taught? Does God learn from someone?
John 8:27-29 (King James Version)
27They understood not that he spake to them of the Father.
28Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
Jesus was taught so tell me can God be taught, yes or no?
bd,
Look at the context bro. Jesus said that He cannot do anything on His own authority but what the Father has taught Him. It means that He could not speak anything other than what the Father instructed Him to say. You missed that He claimed to be the I AM in that very statement,Quote Then Jesus said to them, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I AM, and that I do nothing of Myself but what My Father has instructed Me. It is clear that He meant that He can speak nothing but what the Father instructed Him to speak. If you say “Aha! He was under God's authority” I will reply that saying that He has been exalted now. But if you want to waste time go ahead.
You're going to have to do better if you want to out think the thethinker
thinker
Quote (thethinker @ June 13 2009,07:03) bodhitharta said: Quote tt, Can God be taught? Does God learn from someone?
John 8:27-29 (King James Version)
27They understood not that he spake to them of the Father.
28Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
Jesus was taught so tell me can God be taught, yes or no?
bd,
Look at the context bro. Jesus said that He cannot do anything on His own authority but what the Father has taught Him. It means that He could not speak anything other than what the Father instructed Him to say. You missed that He claimed to be the I AM in that very statement,Quote Then Jesus said to them, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I AM, and that I do nothing of Myself but what My Father has instructed Me. It is clear that He meant that He can speak nothing but what the Father instructed Him to speak. If you say “Aha! He was under God's authority” I will reply that saying that He has been exalted now. But if you want to waste time go ahead.
You're going to have to do better if you want to out think the thethinker
thinker
1 Corinthians 1528and when the all things may be subjected to him, then the Son also himself shall be subject to Him, who did subject to him the all things, that God may be the all in all.
This clearly sates that Jesus will be subject to God in his exalted state. But just to be clear lets back up a little and realize that God was still the authority of Jesus when he gave authority to Jesus.
27for all things He did put under his feet, and, when one may say that all things have been subjected, [it is] evident that He is excepted who did subject the all things to him,
There you have it, I have out thinked the thinker…lol
bodhitharts said:
Quote 1 Corinthians 15 28and when the all things may be subjected to him, then the Son also himself shall be subject to Him, who did subject to him the all things, that God may be the all in all.
This clearly sates that Jesus will be subject to God in his exalted state. But just to be clear lets back up a little and realize that God was still the authority of Jesus when he gave authority to Jesus….There you have it, I have out thinked the thinker…lol
pd,
First, how do you figure you have out thought thethinker? You didn't even reply to my points from John 8. Here are those points again,Jesus said that He cannot do anything on His own authority but what the Father has taught Him. It means that He could not speak anything other than what the Father instructed Him to say. You missed that He claimed to be the I AM in that very statement,
Quote Then Jesus said to them, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I AM, and that I do nothing of Myself but what My Father has instructed Me. It is clear that He meant that He can speak nothing but what the Father instructed Him to speak.
ANSWER THESE POINTS PLEASE!
Second, the passage in 1 Corinthians 15 means that the Father and Son distinction will be done away and God will become “all in all” as He was before. Colossians 3:11 says that Christ is “ALL IN ALL” in His exalted state. After Christ yields the kingdom the Father and Son distinction will be gone. It will be simply God, no Father or Son or anything like that.
thinker
Thinker,
When it says that Christ will be subject to the Father so that God can be all in all – it is different from you saying that it really means the the distinction between Father and Son is lost. It does not say that. It says that Christ will be G5293
ὑποτάσσω
hupotassō
hoop-ot-as'-so
From G5259 and G5021; to subordinate; reflexively to obey: – be under obedience (obedient), put under, subdue unto, (be, make) subject (to, unto), be (put) in subjection (to, under), submit self unto.Also when I AM is used the phrase I don't believe that it means “I AM GOD”
If that is the case then when the beggar uses the same phrase by your reasoning he must be saying that he also is God. John 9:9
I think that when Jesus says when the “Son of man” is lifted up then they will know that I AM it means that they will KNOW that he is the “son of man” it refers/relates to what is being talked about before the I AM he then goes on to say AND I only do what the FATHER tells me
If he was saying that he was God and one with God he would not then say that he only does what his Father tells him to do and is teaching him he would say that I am God and am doing what my Father and I have planned as we are both God.
Hi TT,
Your theology already says there is no distinction as you think all are the one God.
But The Son never was his Father so that we believe in both.
That distinction is forever.Quote (meerkat @ June 14 2009,08:59) Thinker, When it says that Christ will be subject to the Father so that God can be all in all – it is different from you saying that it really means the the distinction between Father and Son is lost. It does not say that. It says that Christ will be G5293
ὑποτάσσω
hupotassō
hoop-ot-as'-so
From G5259 and G5021; to subordinate; reflexively to obey: – be under obedience (obedient), put under, subdue unto, (be, make) subject (to, unto), be (put) in subjection (to, under), submit self unto.Also when I AM is used the phrase I don't believe that it means “I AM GOD”
If that is the case then when the beggar uses the same phrase by your reasoning he must be saying that he also is God. John 9:9
I think that when Jesus says when the “Son of man” is lifted up then they will know that I AM it means that they will KNOW that he is the “son of man” it refers/relates to what is being talked about before the I AM he then goes on to say AND I only do what the FATHER tells me
If he was saying that he was God and one with God he would not then say that he only does what his Father tells him to do and is teaching him he would say that I am God and am doing what my Father and I have planned as we are both God.
Meerkat,
What you are overlooking is that Christ's subjection to the Father was always VOLUNTARY (Philippians 2). In other words, He didn't have to subject Himself to the Father. But He did subject Himself for the sake of our salvation. The proof for this is in the fact that if He had asked the Father to deliver Him from death the Father would have done it. Therefore, His subjection to the Father was necessary for our salvation and not because He was bound to subject Himself.Jesus told the Jews that they must believe that “I AM” or they would die in their sins. Then He said, “Before Abraham was I AM.” The beggar did not say that men would die in their sins if they deny that “I AM.” The beggar did not say “Before Abraham was I AM.”
Jesus was under the Father in the days of His flesh. He has been exalted to the Father's right hand and is no longer under the Father. Jesus has ALL authority now and the Father Himself calls Jesus “God” (Heb. 1:8). Paul said that when Christ delivered up rthe kingdom that God would be ALL IN ALL. This means that the Father and Son distinction is done away and that God goes back to what He was before. Until then Christ is ALL IN ALL,
Quote …but Christ is ALL IN ALL (Colossians 3:11) So no matter how you slice it Christ is ALL IN ALL.
thinker
Quote (thethinker @ June 17 2009,05:12) Quote (meerkat @ June 14 2009,08:59) Thinker, When it says that Christ will be subject to the Father so that God can be all in all – it is different from you saying that it really means the the distinction between Father and Son is lost. It does not say that. It says that Christ will be G5293
ὑποτάσσω
hupotassō
hoop-ot-as'-so
From G5259 and G5021; to subordinate; reflexively to obey: – be under obedience (obedient), put under, subdue unto, (be, make) subject (to, unto), be (put) in subjection (to, under), submit self unto.Also when I AM is used the phrase I don't believe that it means “I AM GOD”
If that is the case then when the beggar uses the same phrase by your reasoning he must be saying that he also is God. John 9:9
I think that when Jesus says when the “Son of man” is lifted up then they will know that I AM it means that they will KNOW that he is the “son of man” it refers/relates to what is being talked about before the I AM he then goes on to say AND I only do what the FATHER tells me
If he was saying that he was God and one with God he would not then say that he only does what his Father tells him to do and is teaching him he would say that I am God and am doing what my Father and I have planned as we are both God.
Meerkat,
What you are overlooking is that Christ's subjection to the Father was always VOLUNTARY (Philippians 2). In other words, He didn't have to subject Himself to the Father. But He did subject Himself for the sake of our salvation. The proof for this is in the fact that if He had asked the Father to deliver Him from death the Father would have done it. Therefore, His subjection to the Father was necessary for our salvation and not because He was bound to subject Himself.Jesus told the Jews that they must believe that “I AM” or they would die in their sins. Then He said, “Before Abraham was I AM.” The beggar did not say that men would die in their sins if they deny that “I AM.” The beggar did not say “Before Abraham was I AM.”
Jesus was under the Father in the days of His flesh. He has been exalted to the Father's right hand and is no longer under the Father. Jesus has ALL authority now and the Father Himself calls Jesus “God” (Heb. 1:8). Paul said that when Christ delivered up rthe kingdom that God would be ALL IN ALL. This means that the Father and Son distinction is done away and that God goes back to what He was before. Until then Christ is ALL IN ALL,
Quote …but Christ is ALL IN ALL (Colossians 3:11) So no matter how you slice it Christ is ALL IN ALL.
thinker
He did ask the Father to save him from death and the Father did listen.bodhitharta said:
Quote He did ask the Father to save him from death and the Father did listen. bd,
Jesus did NOT asked to be saved from death. He said that if He had asked for twelve legions of angels the Father would give it to Him. If the Father would have given it to Him then He did not have to subject Himself to death if He didn't want. Therefore, His subjection to the Father was VOLUNTARY just as Paul teaches in Philippians 2.thinker
Quote (thethinker @ June 17 2009,05:56) bodhitharta said: Quote He did ask the Father to save him from death and the Father did listen. bd,
Jesus did NOT asked to be saved from death. He said that if He had asked for twelve legions of angels the Father would give it to Him. If the Father would have given it to Him then He did not have to subject Himself to death if He didn't want. Therefore, His subjection to the Father was VOLUNTARY just as Paul teaches in Philippians 2.thinker
Mark 14:35-37 (King James Version)35And he went forward a little, and fell on the ground, and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from him.
36And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt.
He did ask and God did deliver him
1) That they said (in boast), “We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah.;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
( سورة النساء , An-Nisa, Chapter #4, Verse #157)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
