The Truth

Participant

Hi CO,
So you agree with the eternal words of Jesus.
You say they are for you.
But you refuse them?

October 19, 2008 at 5:09 am#110701

Participant

Amen.

October 19, 2008 at 6:09 pm#110716

942767

Participant

It is time to pray.

November 7, 2008 at 8:12 pm#111470

Participant

Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 25 2007,09:03)

Hi,
Jesus is the truth

John 14:6
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Truth was in him
John 1:14
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Ephesians 4:21
If so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus:Ephesians 4:21

and that truth was the grace of God's Spirit.

John 14:17
Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

John 16:13
Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

and he said this in Jn17

17Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth

and the teachings of the gospel are truth
Ephesians 1:13
In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

We should abide in the bible teachings which are truth and abhor the empty teachings of men.

amen

November 7, 2008 at 8:14 pm#111471

Participant

Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 14 2007,14:03)

Hi,
How odd it is that men will not believe the truth.
They would seem to prefer those who accused him of making himself equal with God.

Its probably very odd to you that things that you think you see so clearly as being “true”, that others do not agree with you. Just so you do not think you are alone in this, just know that I feel EXACTLY the same way about you sometimes.

blessings,
Ken

November 7, 2008 at 8:41 pm#111472

Participant

“Some modern theologians argue that Jesus never claimed deity and was greatly misunderstood, but that is hardly John's point of view (in Jn 5:18). Veteran theologian Robert Lightner puts it this way: “Christ has existed eternally as the Son of God… Whenever the title is used of Him, it speaks of His divine essence. His fierce critics, the Jewish religious leaders, did not fail to make the connection between His repeated claims that God is His Father and His claim for deity, that He is equal with God the Father (John 5:18; 10:30-38; 20:28-31)” (Lightner, p. 61).—Holman New Testament Commentary

“Jesus called God his Father (5:17). The Jews recognized the argument immediately and from that point pursued him not merely for Sabbath breaking but also for blasphemy (5:18). They understood that he was not merely claiming to be a child of God in the general sense but in a very special way. Accordingly, they charged him with “making himself equal with God” (5:18). Jesus’ claim would violate their understanding of monotheism …. Such a claim, therefore, would undoubtedly be categorized by the rabbis as sinning with the high hand (a direct challenge to God), unless the claim was true. And that was precisely the claim of Jesus and the early church.—New American Commentary

“The theological skeptics and liberals of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries were intent on denying Jesus' deity. They viewed Him as the quintessential strictly human moral teacher, in whom the spark of divinity inherent in all people burned most brightly. In their minds, Jesus' sacrificial life provided mankind with a model that all should follow, but not with a means by which men might be saved. Thus, He was “an example for faith, not the object of faith” (J. Gresham Machen, Christianity and Liberalism [Reprint; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974], 85).
To twentieth-century existentialists, such as the highly influential Rudolf Bultmann, the Jesus of history was all but unknowable. That did not bother Bultmann, however, since he believed that the “Christ of faith” invented by the church could still provide the basis for a genuine religious experience. Neoorthodox theologians, such as Karl Barth, were not willing to so completely ignore the factual significance of Jesus' life or His deity. Yet they were not willing to accept and believe the biblical record of Christ in a truly historical sense.
Other conceptions of Jesus range from the crusading sociopolitical revolutionary of liberation theology, to the cynical Jewish sage of the Jesus Seminar, to the countercultural hero of the rock musicals Godspell and Jesus Christ Superstar. But all such fanciful and blasphemous viewpoints are far removed from the God-man revealed in holy Scripture. They say more about the obstinate unbelief and perverted imaginations of the people who created them than about Jesus' true identity.
Ironically, in all the debate over Him, Jesus' own self-testimony is seldom considered reasonably. Did He, as historic Christianity has always maintained, claim to be God incarnate in human flesh? Or, as skeptics argue, did His followers later invent those claims and attribute them to Him? All this unbelieving pseudo scholarship ignores the biblical account of His life and ministry, which leaves no legitimate doubt about who Jesus declared Himself to be, and who He was.
Jesus frequently spoke of His unique, otherworldly origin, of having preexisted in heaven before coming into this world. To the hostile Jews He declared, “You are from below, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world” (8:23). “What then,” He asked, “if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before?” (6:62). In His High Priestly Prayer Jesus spoke of the glory which He had with the Father before the world existed (17:5). In John 16:28 He told His disciples, “I came forth from the Father and have come into the world; I am leaving the world again and going to the Father.”
Jesus assumed the prerogatives of deity. He claimed to have control over people's eternal destinies (8:24; cf. Luke 12:8-9; John 5:22, 27-29), to have authority over the divinely ordained institution of the Sabbath (Matt. 12:8; Mark 2:28; Luke 6:5), to have the power to answer prayer (John 14:13-14; cf. Acts 7:59; 9:10-17), and to have the right to receive worship, faith, and obedience due to God alone (Matt. 21:16; John 14:1; cf. John 5:23). He also assumed the right to forgive sins (Mark 2:5-11)—something that, as His shocked opponents correctly understood, only God can do (v. 7).
Jesus also called God's angels (Gen. 28:12; Luke 12:8-9; 15:10; John 1:51) His angels (Matt. 13:41; 24:30-31); God's elect (Luke 18:7; Rom. 8:33) His elect (Matt. 24:30-31); and God's kingdom (Matt. 12:28; 19:24; 21:31; Mark 1:15; Luke 4:43; John 3:3) His kingdom (Matt. 13:41; 16:28; cf. Luke 1:33; 2 Tim. 4:1).
When a Samaritan woman said to Him, “I know that Messiah is coming (He who is called Christ); when that One comes, He will declare all things to us” (4:25) Jesus replied, “I who speak to you am He” (v. 26). In His High Priestly Prayer to the Father, He referred to Himself as “Jesus Christ whom You have sent” (17:3); “Christ” is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word translated “Messiah.” When asked at His trial by the high priest, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?” (Mark 14:61) Jesus replied simply, “I am” (v. 62). He also accepted, without correction or amendment, the testimonies of Peter (Matt. 16:16-17), Martha (John 11:27), and others (e.g., Matt. 9:27; 20:30-31) that He was the Messiah.
The Lord's favorite description of Himself was “Son of Man” (cf. Matt. 8:20; Mark 2:28; Luke 6:22; John 9:35-37, etc.). Although that title seems to stress His humanity, it also speaks of His deity. Jesus' use of the term derives from Daniel 7:13-14, where the Son of Man is on equal terms with God the Father, the Ancient of Days.
The Jews viewed themselves collectively as sons of God by creation. Jesus, however, claimed to be God's Son by nature. “All things have been handed over to Me by My Father,” Jesus affirmed, “and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him” (Matt. 11:27). In John 5:25-26 He said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself.” After receiving word that Lazarus was ill Jesus said to the disciples, “This sickness is not to end in death, but for the glory of God, so that the Son of God may be glorified by it” (11:4). When asked at His trial, “Are You the Son of God, then?” Jesus replied, “Yes, I am” (Luke 22:70; cf. Mark 14:61-62). Instead of rejecting the title, the Lord embraced it without apology or embarrassment (Matt. 4:3, 6; 8:29; Mark 3:11-12; Luke 4:41; John 1:49-50; 11:27).
The hostile Jewish authorities clearly understood that Jesus' use of the title Son of God was a claim to deity. Otherwise, they would not have accused Him of blasphemy (cf. 10:36). In fact, it was Jesus' claim to be the Son of God that led the Jews to demand His death: “The Jews answered [Pilate], 'We have a law, and by that law He ought to die because He made Himself out to be the Son of God'” (19:7). Even while He was on the cross, some mocked Him, sneering, “He trusts in God; let God rescue Him now, if He delights in Him; for He said, 'I am the Son of God'” (Matt. 27:43).
Jesus further outraged the unbelieving Jews by taking for Himself the covenant name of God, “I am” (Yahweh). That name was so sacred to the Jews that they refused to even pronounce it, lest they take it in vain and suffer judgment (cf. Ex. 20:7). In John 8:24 Jesus warned that those who refuse to believe He is Yahweh will perish eternally: “Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that
I am He, you will die in your sins.” (The word “He” is not in the original Greek.) Later in that chapter “Jesus said to [His hearers], 'Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am'” (v. 58). Unlike many modern deniers of His deity, the Jews knew exactly what He was claiming, as their subsequent attempt to stone Him for blasphemy makes clear (v. 59). In John 13:19 Jesus told His disciples that when what He predicted came to pass, they would believe that He is Yahweh. Even His enemies, coming to arrest Him in Gethsemane, were overwhelmed by His divine power and fell to the ground when Jesus said “I am” (18:5-8).
All of the above lines of evidence converge on one inescapable point: Jesus Christ claimed absolute equality with God. Thus He could say, “I and the Father are one” (10:30); “He who sees Me sees the One who sent Me” (12:45); and “He who has seen Me has seen the Father” (14:9). Those who would deny that Jesus claimed to be God must deny the historical accuracy and truthfulness of the gospel records and thereby establish themselves as superior sources of truth. They are saying they know more about what was true two thousand years ago than the inspired eyewitnesses. Such skepticism is unwarranted, however, since the New Testament is by far the most well-attested document of the ancient world (cf. F. F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1973). Skeptics are also hard-pressed to explain why Jesus' monotheistic Jewish followers would have embraced His deity so early in church history apart from His own claims. William Lane Craig notes,
Within twenty years of the crucifixion a full-blown Christology proclaiming Jesus as God incarnate existed. How does one explain this worship by monotheistic Jews of one of their countrymen as God incarnate, apart from the claims of Jesus Himself?… If Jesus never made any such claims, then the belief of the earliest Christians in this regard becomes inexplicable. (Apologetics: An Introduction [Chicago: Moody, 1984], 160)
This section affirming our Lord's deity flows directly from the confrontation that arose when Jesus healed a crippled man on the Sabbath (vv. 1-16). The Lord did not violate the Old Testament Sabbath regulations, but rather the rabbinic additions to those regulations. Yet He did not defend Himself by pointing out the distinction between God's Law and man's extraneous tradition. Instead, He responded in a far more radical way—He maintained that He was equal with God and thus had the right to do whatever He wanted on the Sabbath. The result is one of the most profound Christological discourses in all of Scripture. In verses 17-24 Jesus makes five unmistakable claims to full equality with God: He is equal with the Father in His person, in His works, in His sovereign power, in His judgment, and in the honor due Him.
—MacArthur New Testament Commentary, The

Lastly, I want to just thank you Nick. Every time you deny the Scripture, it points me to go to the Scriptures, to study, to show myself approved, and every time I come away from such experiences all the more convinced in Jesus' deity. So thank you.

blessings,
Ken

November 9, 2008 at 5:49 am#111537

Participant

Hi E,
Was Jesus his own God?
Is there a greater?

November 10, 2008 at 12:30 am#111592

Participant

I never thought I'd see the day …I agree with Nick, God is one, not a “trinity”.

1Cor.8:4-7
…and that there is no other God except One.
5 For even if so be that there are those being termed gods, whether in heaven or on earth, even as there are many gods and many lords,
6 nevertheless for us there is one God, the Father, out of Whom all is, and we for Him, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through Whom all is, and we through Him.
7 But not in all is there this knowledge.

Blessings.

November 10, 2008 at 12:57 am#111594

GeneBalthrop

Participant

EP…….Tell us where it says that Jesus was praying Himself, seeing you believe His is the true GOD as Trinitarians say. Tell us how He was praying to himself, and If he wasn't , then who was He praying to. Tell Us also if He was lying when He said “For THOU ART THE (ONLY) TRUE GOD”, seems you don't believe Jesus' words, Or was Jesus secretly talking about himself. When He said “i am going to my Father and YOUR Father, My GOD and YOUR GOD. How do you and WJ and his 600 Scholars get around those words. EP you explained “free will” very well, how is it you don't understand the Trinity is a false teaching?

peace ………………gene

November 10, 2008 at 4:04 am#111604

Participant

Quote (chosenone @ Nov. 10 2008,11:30)

I never thought I'd see the day …I agree with Nick, God is one, not a “trinity”.

Blessings.

thats too bad… well… you can't always be right I guess ehhh? 😉

blessings,
Ken

November 10, 2008 at 4:39 am#111606

Participant

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Nov. 10 2008,11:57)

peace ………………gene

Gene… come now….. the “was Jesus praying to Himself?” question is about as substantial an objection as “if Jesus was God who ran heaven for the 3 days Jesus was dead?”or the question an atheist asks “can God make a rock so big he can't lift it?”

….. here is a religious presupposition that one should examine, and if one has this presupposition, they should examine it and reject it if it is not biblical…. if you think that God can and MUST have ONLY one center of consciousness, then you think that God MUST be like humans. God is one in essence, 3 in person… in other words, to state the obvious, God is not human…. now maybe that's strange…. maybe that's a little weird…. but the fact that God possesses a different type of being than humans have, does not, IN AND OF ITSELF, make it wrong or impossible.

As far as Jesus praying to God goes, God the Son was, is, and always will be in perfect communication with the Father. And prayers are simply that, communication. So when the Son prayed to the Father, remember this important point: the Son was praying to the Father… LOL… The Son was simply speaking to and fellowshipping with the Father, after all, Trintarians do not believe that Father and the Son are the same person…. that is, do not make the simple, fundamental error that many uninformed anti-Trinitarians make, that of confounding the Father with the Son Trintarians do not believe that the Father and the Son are the same person… they are both God (along with the Holy Spirit), but they are not the same person…. if you remember the following, many many errors will be avoided….

——> The Father is not the Son or the Holy Spirit; the Son is not the Father or the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is not the Father or the Son…. by keeping this in mind, you can easily dispel questions of the sort you asked.

When Jesus told the Father that He was the only true God, I believe Him. The reason this does not conflict wioth trintarian beliefs is this, we believe that there is only one true God, Jesus is not “another God” like the JW's and others might think… there is only 1 God…1…. The Son came and lived as a human being, and thus in so far as to touching His human nature, He spoke to God in that way. But despite this, we know that the Son was unique, and did things, and said things, that are reserved for God alone. For instance we know that God alone can forgive sins, yet the Son forgave sins, ergo, Jesus is either lying and blaspheming by claiming to do what He did not have the authority or right to do, or He was God. You see when people sin against us, we have the right to forgive them. But if someone sinned against my friend, I do not have the right to go to that person and forgive them, my friend needs to do this. But Jesus claims to forgive sins committed against God. Either He was extremely deluded as to who He was, or He really did have a right to forgive sins committed against God, because He was God.

The same goes for when Jesus called the Father His Father… He is… no need to belabor that point….

and when He said “my God and your God” He was simply speaking the truth, and it is a truth that does not in any way conflict with Trintiarianism, for the reasons I mentioned above. And for these reasons:

JOHN 20:17—Does this verse prove that Jesus is not God Almighty?
MISINTERPRETATION: John 20:17 quotes Jesus as saying to Mary, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren, and say to them, ‘I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God’ ” (niv). The Jehovah’s Witnesses say that since Jesus had a God, his Father, he could not at the same time be that God (Reasoning from the Scriptures, 1989, 212, 411).
CORRECTING THE MISINTERPRETATION: Prior to the incarnation, Christ had only a divine nature (John 1:1). But in the incarnation (John 1:14) Christ took on a human nature. In his humanity (Phil. 2:6–8) it was proper that Christ acknowledge the Father as “my God.” After all, Jesus was “made like His brethren in all things” (Heb. 2:17). As a human Jesus acknowledges God as do all other humans. However, Jesus in his divine nature could never refer to the Father as “my God,” for Jesus was fully equal to the Father in every way regarding his divine nature (John 10:30).
Geisler, N. L., & Rhodes, R. (1997). When cultists ask : A popular handbook on cultic misinterpretations (190). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

Thanks again re my understanding of “freewill”, the reason that I do not understand that the doctrine of the Trinity is a false teaching is… well…. because it's not.

hope this helps…. not so much that it helps you so as to change your mind…. for that is a notoriously difficult thing to do… people rarely change their minds on forums like this… and changing your mind on this issue would be a paradigmatic shift to be sure…. but…. thank God… I do not have to change your mind… I do not have to convince you ….. I just have to give reasons that seem sufficient to me for my beliefs, and that I have done, and by God's grace, will continue to do….

blessings,
Ken

November 10, 2008 at 4:47 am#111607

Participant

Hi E,
You would not have to paint such a broad and complex picture if you were sola scriptura.
The flim flam of man's rationalisations and justifications for their speculations adds nothing to truth.

Why not believe in and follow Jesus instead of the clever so called divines?

November 10, 2008 at 5:28 am#111613

Participant

Hi EP.
Jesus was the first thing created by God, …Rev.3:14 “And to the messenger of the ecclesia in Laodicea write: 'Now this is saying the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, and God's Creative Original:
Notice “and God's creative original”.
Ro.8:29 …for Him (Jesus) to be Firstborn among many brethren.
Col.1:15 …Who is the Image of the invisible God, Firstborn of every creature.

God is eternal, having no begining and no ending, He always was.

The word “trinity” is nowhere found in scripture correctly translated. 'Tri' means three, God is one.

Blessings.

November 11, 2008 at 7:45 pm#111684

Participant

Quote (chosenone @ Nov. 10 2008,16:28)

The word “trinity” is nowhere found in scripture correctly translated. 'Tri' means three, God is one.

Blessings.

that's blasphemy…. not that such a thing would bother you or anything… but Jesus is not a created being…. He is co-eternal with the Father…

the phrase “first born” is a title of preeminence and does not mean, when applied to Christ, that He came into existence at a particular time…. here is why….

Genesis 41:51-52 (ESV) 51 Joseph called the name of the firstborn Manasseh. “For,” he said, “God has made me forget all my hardship and all my father’s house.” 52 The name of the second he called Ephraim, “For God has made me fruitful in the land of my affliction.”

Now we know that the Scripture does not contradict itself… yet it also says….

Jeremiah 31:9 (ESV) With weeping they shall come, and with pleas for mercy I will lead them back, I will make them walk by brooks of water, in a straight path in which they shall not stumble, for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn.

How can this be if we INSIST that the term “firstborn” MUST mean a “coming into existence at a particular time and space? Persons who believe that this is what the term must mean are hopelessly stuck and are left with an irreconcilable contradiction int he Scriptures. The fact is, as the Scripture says, the title “firstborn” can come to be applied to the one that has preeminence…

Genesis 48:17-20 (ESV) Ge 17 When Joseph saw that his father laid his right hand on the head of Ephraim, it displeased him, and he took his father’s hand to move it from Ephraim’s head to Manasseh’s head. 18 And Joseph said to his father, “Not this way, my father; since this one is the firstborn, put your right hand on his head.” 19 But his father refused and said, “I know, my son, I know. He also shall become a people, and he also shall be great. Nevertheless, his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his offspring shall become a multitude of nations.” 20 So he blessed them that day, saying, “By you Israel will pronounce blessings, saying, ‘God make you as Ephraim and as Manasseh.’ ” Thus he put Ephraim before Manasseh.”

And since Jesus is ruler of all, the before whom every knee will bow and confess that He is Lord, is preeminent over all.

Secondly, I would encourage you to start using a reliable translation of the Scriptures. Koch's version, though at first glance it may seem to be a good method (the so-called “concordant” method) it leads to inaccuracies int he text.

“We must take a closer look at the concordant method. At first sight it sounds good and right that all Greek (or Hebrew) words should be translated consistently into English, but in fact this concept is deeply flawed. The idea that any given Greek word should always where possible be translated by the same English word sounds good, but it runs totally contrary to the way languages actually work.

Individual words in any language represent areas of meaning rather than pin-points. The areas of meaning covered by English words hardly ever correspond exactly to areas covered by words in other languages. You only have to look in any foreign language dictionary to get this point. Any French dictionary will give several French words for one English word and conversely several English words for one French word. The most accurate translation of any given word will vary according to its context. The same thing of course is true with English and Greek (or Hebrew).” (http://www.growthingod.org.uk/concord.htm)

Lastly, I know very well that the word “Trinity” does not appear in the Scriptures, but the teaching and principle does. Show me anywhere in the Bible that it says we will have only 66 books and the only books we will have are those listed in today's Protestant bibles, in the table of contents. Since you can't do that, since no such scripture exists, I'll not worry too deeply about accepting principles that may be found in the Scriptures (cessation of new revelation) such as those who prove that God is triune, which means 3 in person, but one in being, you can see an example of this in this complicated mathematical problem:

1x1x1=1

BTW, did you know that the word “concordant” and the phrase “The Concordant Literal New Testament” does not appear anywhere in the Scriptures! That MUST mean that the version of the Scriptures you are using is unbiblical!! And therefore you must abandon that translation of the Scriptures immediately or face the wrath of God!!

😉

blessings,
Ken

November 11, 2008 at 7:56 pm#111685

Participant

Hi E,
Luke 12:10
And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.

November 11, 2008 at 7:57 pm#111686

Participant

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 10 2008,15:47)

Hi E,
You would not have to paint such a broad and complex picture if you were sola scriptura.
The flim flam of man's rationalisations and justifications for their speculations adds nothing to truth.

Why not believe in and follow Jesus instead of the clever so called divines?

That is just your opinion, I see you using no scriptures to back up your man-made tradition and subjective personal views.

So you even know what “sola scriptura” means N? I doubt it. You may think you know what it means, but here is the correct definition:

“VI. The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.” (On scripture, Westminster Confession of Faith)

Now N, you may disagree with this definition, but these are the very people who came up with the phrase “sola scriptura”, therefore THEY are ones who should be able to dictate what it is that THEY meant by the phrase, and thus, they are the ones who can define the phrase. And these same people all believed in the Trinity because they felt that by good and necessary consequence the Trinity may be deduced from the Scriptures.

So what I won't do is follow “clever” people like you, nothing you can say, no matter how strongly and how often you insist that I follow you, instead I will follow Jesus, and those who best exemplify the definition of “teacher” in the Scriptures.

blessings,
Ken

November 11, 2008 at 8:04 pm#111687

Participant

Hi E,
You say
“Lastly, I know very well that the word “Trinity” does not appear in the Scriptures, but the teaching and principle does.”

Where is this teaching about God being a trinity?
Where is the trinity principle in scripture you support?

Do we need to read between the lines or is it clear?

November 11, 2008 at 8:06 pm#111689

Participant

Hi E,
“..or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture”

Did Jesus teach we could accept as truth what can be DEDUCED from scripture?
If not why follow those who do so?

November 11, 2008 at 8:07 pm#111690

Participant

Hi E,
You say you follow Jesus but you espouse what he did not teach.
Why?

November 11, 2008 at 10:08 pm#111700