- This topic is empty.
- Posts
The following is Is 1:18's post June 2 2007.
Let me preface this rebuttal by saying congratulations t8, this is without doubt your best effort to date, and finally we’ve moved away from the verses that (in your mind) disprove the trinity, but in reality merely show The Father and Son are two different persons. Although, I do note that you edited your post after submission without bothering to acknowledge or annotate what it was that was changed. This sentence of your’s…..
Quote This scripture is a slap in the face for those who promote the Trinity Doctrine.
….once read “This scripture is a slap in the face with a wet bus ticket for those who promote the Trinity Doctrine” when I first read the post, which makes me wonder how much more of the post’s content was surreptitiously altered after it was posted, without any reference by you of the actual changes. BTW, the phrase “slap on the face with a wet bus ticket” is a humorously-inappropriate cliché to use in the context in which you used it (isn't it called mixing your metaphors?), but I guess you picked that up – that’s why you changed it. In future, if you alter your posts in this debate after you submit them it would be nice if you let me and others know.Let me see if I can accurately encapsulate the key point of you post with this syllogism:
Major premise: YHWH is invisible, and has not ever been seen by men.
Minor premise: Christ was and is visible. He has been seen by men.
Conclusion: Therefore Christ cannot be God.On the surface this looks like a logical dilemma for a trinitarian. If it’s true that God has never been seen then, ostensibly, it puts trinitarians in a tight spot. In logic, the law of noncontradiction (also called the law of contradiction) states that “one cannot say of something that it is and that it is not in the same respect and at the same time”. And it would indeed be a contravention of this law of logic if both the minor and major premises above hold true.
But is it true that YHWH has never been seen? T8 maintains that it is, and qualified the assertion by writing that men have occasionally seen a “messenger/angel” of YHWH. But is this born out by OT texts? I don’t think it is and I’ll cite five passages where it is indisputable that YHWH has been seen:
1. Genesis 18:1,8,13-14,17-19,20-21,26,33
1Now the LORD (YHWH) appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, while he was sitting at the tent door in the heat of the day. 8He took curds and milk and the calf which he had prepared, and placed it before them; and he was standing by them under the tree as they ate. 13And the LORD (YHWH) said to Abraham, “Why did Sarah laugh, saying, 'Shall I indeed bear a child, when I am so old?' 14”Is anything too difficult for the LORD (YHWH)? At the appointed time I will return to you, at this time next year, and Sarah will have a son.”17The LORD (YHWH) said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do, 18since Abraham will surely become a great and mighty nation, and in him all the nations of the earth will be blessed? 19”For I have chosen him, so that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the LORD by doing righteousness and justice, so that the LORD may bring upon Abraham what He has spoken about him.” 20And the LORD (YHWH) said, “The outcry of Sodom and Gomorrah is indeed great, and their sin is exceedingly grave. 21″I will go down now, and see if they have done entirely according to its outcry, which has come to Me; and if not, I will know.” 26So the LORD said, “If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare the whole place on their account.”33As soon as He had finished speaking to Abraham the LORD (YHWH departed, and Abraham returned to his place.T8 would argue that this is not YHWH in view here but a “representative of God”, but that is NOT what the text says. It reads : “The LORD appeared unto him”. There are no grammatical ambiguities here, the language is plain.
In the above text we have the following clearly recorded:
- YHWH appeared to Abraham (v1)
- YHWH ate with Abraham (v8)
- YHWH spoke to Abraham (v13)
- YHWH and Abraham negotiated over the Sodom’s fate (v26ff)
- YHWH departed from Abraham’s presence (v33)
What’s striking about this narrative is that the person designated YHWH, frequently employed first person singular pronoun “I” when speaking. He also implicitly claimed for Himself sovereign rights that are exclusive to YHWH. For instance, in verse 19 the personage identified in the text as YHWH declared that He has chosen Abraham to be the conduit for Israel’s blessings. Can a non-divine delegate rightly state this? The answer is no. Furthermore, in verse 26 this person negotiated with Abraham over the Sodom’s fate and YHWH conceded that He would spare the whole place on account of 50 righteous men? Does a non-divine appointee of YHWH have the mandate to make a decision on the annihilation of an entire city? Again, it's no. A non-divine messenger would not speak this way at all. He would say something akin to “If the LORD finds in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then He will spare all the place for their sakes”. No messenger can rightly speak as this One spoke, unless it was YHWH that was speaking. What we see in Genesis 18 is multiple instances where Abraham’s visitor speaks as YHWH, not for YHWH. And that’s a key distinction to highlight. So, not only is the visitor explicitly called YHWH in the passage, he is also ascribed the authority/prerogatives that exclusively belong to YHWH. The details in this chapter overwhelmingly affirm that YHWH visited Abraham by the oaks of Mamre.
Despite the overt clarity of the text though, t8 would say it’s impossible for YHWH to do the things ascribed to Him in Genesis 18, to this I’ll counter with the rhetorical question YHWH posed to Abraham in the very same chapter I quoted:
“Is anything too difficult for the LORD?”
YHWH can take the form of a man and enter our time-space continuum. It’s not “too difficult” for YHWH to do anything that does not compromise His Holy nature, and we should not unduly seek to place limitations on the Almighty God that scripture does not place. The personage that visited Abraham really was YHWH, not a minion sent on YHWH’s behalf. But how do we know this for certain? YHWH tells us so in Exodus 6:3.
2. Exodus 6:2-3
2 God spoke further to Moses and said to him, “I am the LORD;3 and I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as God Almighty[/b], but by My name LORD I did not make myself known to them.”YHWH appeared to Abraham as God Almighty (el shadday). It cannot be said more plainly, YHWH “appeared” to Abraham not in the form of a non-divine messenger but as YHWH, God Almighty. Should we believe the statement YHWH has made here? I think we should take YHWH at His word.
YHWH also interacted with Moses, speaking to Him “face to face”:
3. Exodus 33:11
Thus the LORD used to speak to Moses face to face, just as a man speaks to his friend…”Is it possible to speak with someone “face to fa
ce” and not see them? YHWH reiterates this in Numbers 12:6-8, using even more descriptive language:4. Numbers 12:6-8
6 He [YHWH] said, “Hear now My words: If there is a prophet among you, I, the LORD, shall make Myself known to him in a vision. I shall speak with him in a dream. 7 Not so, with My servant Moses, He is faithful in all My household; 8 with him I speak mouth to mouth, even openly, and not in dark sayings, and he beholds the form of the LORD . . . “Here Moses is NOT spoken to in a dream or vision like some of the other prophets but rather “mouth to mouth”, YHWH goes on to say that He allows Moses to behold (look intently at) the form of the LORD. Again, it could not be more plainly stated that Moses saw YHWH.
Moreover, on at least one occasion YHWH was seen by a multitude of people:
5. Exodus 24:9-11
9Then Moses went up with Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, and they saw the God of Israel;10 and under His feet there appeared to be a pavement of sapphire, as clear as the sky itself. 11 Yet He did not stretch out His hand against the nobles of the sons of Israel; and they beheld God, and they ate and drank.”Again we have very clear and precise language being used. No one could honestly mistake the meanings of these two phrases:
“they saw the God of Israel”
“they beheld God”So has YHWH been seen? Evidently so! It’s difficult to discount even one of the above passages, let alone all five of them, and what I annotated is by no means the sum total of passages in the Bible that show YHWH has been seen by men. It’s just a selection of some of them.
So where does this place t8, and his assertion that the Father has not been seen? In a tight spot, as I would see it. He is faced with a glaring contradiction for which he has offered no tenable explanation. The trinitarians, as opposed to t8, have an explanation for this.
From a trinitarian’s perspective, I see two possible scenarios that could account for the contravention between 1 John 4:12 and the passages I cited:
1. It’s true that the Father has never been seen but another, also named YHWH, has.
2.The word theos in 1 John 4:12 does not refer to the Father, but the triune God.I think both are plausible, but on balance I would favour #1. This is because in consulting passages penned by John of the same basis theme (as 1 John 4:12) it’s explicit that “theos” does refer to the father. These three verses bear this out expressly:
John 1:18
No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.John 5:37
And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His form.John 6:46
No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.So on this point let me state that I concur with t8, no one has ever seen the Father, this appears to be the only logical conclusion to draw from John’s writings above. But it’s even more scripturally obvious that men have seen YHWH. Which begs the question – if not he Father, then Who was the person described as YHWH that has been seen? I surmise that the only reasonable candidate is the preincarnate Yeshua. We know from Paul and John’s writings that Yeshua existed in the “form” (nature) of God and “was God” (Phil 2:6, John 1:1). We know from Hebrews chapter 1 that He has the credentials to be YHWH, and from Zechariah chapter 14 that he is rightly called YHWH. We also know that Yeshua featured in the OT (John 5:39, 46). I think He featured prominently, more than most people imagine and I cite this passage as evidence of this proposition:
Luke 24:13-27
13And behold, two of them were going that very day to a village named Emmaus, which was about seven miles from Jerusalem. 14And they were talking with each other about all these things which had taken place. 15While they were talking and discussing, Jesus Himself approached and began traveling with them. 16But their eyes were prevented from recognizing Him. 17And He said to them, “What are these words that you are exchanging with one another as you are walking?” And they stood still, looking sad. 18One of them, named Cleopas, answered and said to Him, “Are You the only one visiting Jerusalem and unaware of the things which have happened here in these days?” 19And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, 20and how the chief priests and our rulers delivered Him to the sentence of death, and crucified Him. 21″But we were hoping that it was He who was going to redeem Israel. Indeed, besides all this, it is the third day since these things happened. 22″But also some women among us amazed us. When they were at the tomb early in the morning, 23and did not find His body, they came, saying that they had also seen a vision of angels who said that He was alive. 24″Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just exactly as the women also had said; but Him they did not see.”25And He said to them, “O foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! 26″Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to enter into His glory?” 27Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.There are some important points to take from this passage, the first being that this was an extensive Bible lesson that Yeshua gave these men. The walk was seven miles (approx. 12km) long and this would have taken hours to complete (about 3 ½ hours at the average human walking pace of 1 meter per second). The topic of the Yeshua’s study was Himself, as He was described in the OT scriptures. But the material He spoke about was not restricted to a few messianic passages from the Torah. Luke explained that the material that Yeshua used in His dissertation began at Moses, proceeded through all the prophets and in fact encompassed “all the scriptures”. In other words Yeshua had A LOT of material at His disposal to draw upon to explain to the men the things in the Bible that pertained to Himself! Details like this should not be overlooked.
Yeshua also made comments such as:
Matthew 23:37
“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling.I don’t think this was a reference to His earthly existence, the language doesn’t fit. He spoke the same way YHWH spoke of the Israelite in the OT. I think Yeshua, here in verse 37, implicitly claims to have foreknowledge of, and a vested interest in, the Israelites before His incarnation. It’s interesting that He invoking the idiom of “wings” in the context of a desire to protect, an idiom that was commonly ascribed to YHWH to describe the protection/refuge He offered (refer: Ruth 2:12, Psalm 17:8, 36:7, 57:1, 61:4, 63:7, 91:4).
Jude 5, is perhaps a more explicit example:
Jude 4-5
4For 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.5Now I desire to remind you, though you know all things once for al
l, that the Lord, after saving a people out of the land of Egypt, subsequently destroyed those who did not believe.Jude, in verse 4 of his letter, used the appellative “kurios” to denote Yeshua in an exclusive sense (“our only Lord”)and “theos” was used in reference to His Father. Then in the very next next verse kurios was used to describe an identity who saved “a people out of the land of Egypt”, with “the people” being an obvious reference to Israel. The Lord here is clearly Yeshua! Early and reliable manuscripts have “Jesus” in place of “the Lord” in verse 5. Here is what the NET Bible Commentary on Jude 5 records about this verse:
” The reading *Ihsou'” (Ihsous, “Jesus”) is deemed too hard by several scholars, since it involves the notion of Jesus acting in the early history of the nation Israel. However, not only does this reading enjoy strong support from a variety of early witnesses (e.g., A B 33 81 vg et alii), but the plethora of variants demonstrate that scribes were uncomfortable with it, for they typically exchanged kuvrio” (kurios, “Lord”) or qeov” (qeos, “God”) for *Ihsou'” (though Ì72 has the intriguing reading qeoV” Cristov” [qeos Cristos, “God Christ”] for *Ihsou'”). As difficult as the reading *Ihsou'” is, in light of v. 4 and in light of the progress of revelation (Jude being one of the last books in the NT to be composed), it is wholly appropriate. sn (1:5) The construction our Master and Lord, Jesus Christ in v. 4 follows Granville Sharp's rule (see tn (1:5) on Lord). The construction strongly implies the deity of Christ. This is followed by a statement that Jesus was involved in the salvation (and later judgment) of the Hebrews. He is thus to be identified with the Lord God, Yahweh. Verse 5, then, simply fleshes out what is implicit in v. 4.”
John, who penned the verse on which t8’s proof text is based also believed Yeshua existed as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the flesh. He, alluding to Isaiah 6, wrote:
John 12:37-41
37But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him: 38That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed? 39Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, 40He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.[/u] 41These things said Esaias, when he saw his [Christ’s] glory, and spake of him [Christ].This was the passage of Isaiah 6 that John quoted:
Isaiah 6:1-10
1In the year that king Uzziah died I [Isaiah] saw also the LORD [YHWH] sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple. 2Above it stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly. 3And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory. 4And the posts of the door moved at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke. 5Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD [YHWH] of hosts. 6Then flew one of the seraphims unto me, having a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar: 7And he laid it upon my mouth, and said, Lo, this hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin purged. 8Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Then said I, Here am I; send me. 9And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. 10Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.The “Him” in John 12:41 can only be the pre-incarnate Yeshua, He is unambiguously identified at the subject of the passage in verse John 12 v37, by virtue of being the nearest antecedent to verse 41. The “His” in this verse refers to Yeshua. The subject of the Isaiah passage is patently identified as YHWH. The subject of the John 12:37-41 passage is unmistakably Yeshua. It is obvious to me that John considered Jesus to be YHWH. I see no other plausible explanation.
“These things Isaiah said because he saw His (Yeshua's = YHWH’s) glory, and he spoke of Him (Yeshua = YHWH).”
Yeshua is also described as the Creator of Heaven and Earth in the NT, as my first debate submission outlined:
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….78;st=0And He fulfilled prophecies that could only be fulfilled by YHWH, as was the subject of my second submission:
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….11;st=0So, there is very good evidence to substantiate my assertion that it was the pre-incarnate Yehsua that appeared to men as YHWH in the OT. This would make sense of the verse t8 used for his proof text – 1 John 4:12 – and properly accounts for the contradiction t8 faces which is God not being able to be seen, yet at the same time being seen.
So at this point I pose this rhetorical question – after considering some of the passages cited thus far in my rebuttal, is 1 John 4:12 more problematic for trinitarians, or t8 himself??
I suggest that the explicit nature of passages like Genesis Ch 18, where Abraham's visitor is designated with the tetragammatron “YHWH” in the text and the divine prerogatives, such as deciding the fate of a city and appointing whom is to become the conduit for blessing on an entire nation, are predicated of Him, mean that scriptures like 1 John 4:12 are far more difficult for a henotheist like t8 than a trinitarian. When his argument to explain the OT texts that overtly contradict 1 John 4:12 are distilled down to it's basic essence, what we are left with is this – scripture is not saying what it manifestly appears to say. But, IMO, the sheer weight of evidence for YHWH being seen by men overwhelms his contention that He wasn't.
At this point I should address this point t8 made:
Quote But where do such scriptures exist. Well we know in the Old Testament there are a bunch of scriptures that talk about men who claim to have seen God. If I was ask anyone familiar with the bible to name one man that saw God, many would surely answer Moses.
But did Moses actually see God himself? Or did Moses see God's glory and a representative of God?
Well the answer is that latter. Moses spoke to YHWH, but through the messenger/angel of YHWH.
Exodus 3:1-14
Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian, and he led the flock to the far side of the desert and came to Horeb, the mountain of God.
2 There the angel of the LORD appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up.
3 So Moses thought, “I will go over and see this strange sight-why the bush does not burn up.”
4 When the LORD saw that he had gone over to look, God called to him from within the bush, “Moses! Moses!” And Moses said, “Here I am.”
5 “Do not come any closer,” God said. “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy ground.”
6 Then he said, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” At this, Moses hid his face, because he was afraid to look at God…Moses had an encounter with YHWH in this passage. How do we know? In verse 6 we read “”I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” At this, Moses hid his face, because he was afraid to look at God.”. It can’t be plainer than that really…..the identity in the bush explicitly introduces Himself as YHWH and furthermore commands Moses to take off his shoes because he was standing on Holy ground. Is the ground in which a delegate for YHWH appears Holy? No. So once again we have an instance where the “angel of the Lord” speaks AS YHWH, not FOR YHWH. The “angel of the Lord” often appears in OT scripture AS YHWH. Remember that the Hebrews word for angel (malak) simply mean ‘messenger’ and is used in reference to men, the hosts of Heaven (actual created angels) and YHWH. From a trinitarian perspective one member of the triune God can legitimately send another and He would be both “YHWH” and the messenger of YHWH. This makes sense of a lot of passages in which the titles “YHWH” and the angel of YHWH are used interchangeably in the text and the messenger, without hesitation naturally assumes the prerogative/authority of YHWH (which of course is patent blasphemy for anyone who is not YHWH). There are a great number of passages I could appeal to here, but Genesis 22:15-18 is perhaps one of the most best:
Genesis 22:11-18
11But the angel of the LORD called to him from heaven and said, “Abraham, Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.”12He said, “Do not stretch out your hand against the lad, and do nothing to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.” 13Then Abraham raised his eyes and looked, and behold, behind him a ram caught in the thicket by his horns; and Abraham went and took the ram and offered him up for a burnt offering in the place of his son. 14Abraham called the name of that place The LORD Will Provide, as it is said to this day, “In the mount of the LORD it will be provided.” 15Then the angel of the LORD called to Abraham a second time from heaven, 16and said, “By Myself I have sworn, declares the LORD, because you have done this thing and have not withheld your son, your only son, 17indeed I will greatly bless you, and I will greatly multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your seed shall possess the gate of their enemies. 18″In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.”Just a few quick observations about this text:
- LORD (YHWH) and “the angel of the LORD (YHWH)” are used interchangeably.
- The angel of the LORD declared that Abraham withheld the sacrifice of his Son from HIM. Abraham, of course, was sacrificing His Son for YHWH.
- The angel of the LORD swore “by Myself”, with the next verse making it plain that it was YHWH that swore.
- The angel prophesied that He would greatly bless Abraham, making a great nation out of his seed, and by this multiplication of his seed all the nations would be blessed. ONLY YHWH can rightly make these claims. It would be audacious and presumptuous for a messenger who is not YHWH utter such a prophecy.
- The angel of the LORD declared that the entire Earth would be blessed because Abraham obeyed his voice.
There is no question at all that the angel of the LORD was YHWH, representatives Who are not YHWH can not rightly speak the way the “angel of the Lord” did. They unequivocally would not use first person, singular pronouns (myself, I) when making proclamations that only YHWH can rightly make and bring about. They simply do not have this right.
So to quickly summarise, I dispute t8’s assertion that YHWH has never been seen. YHWH has indeed been seen – He appeared to Moses “as God Almighty” (Ex 6:3). I also gave an explanation for the ostensible contradiction that exists between the ‘God has been seen’ and ‘God has not ever been seen’ passages, and I think it’s far more plausible and faithful to the scriptures as a whole than t8’s postulation. Remember T8’s objective in this debate is to produce credible evidence disproving the trinity, but he has categorically failed to do this, in fact the verse he used (1 John 4:12) gives credence to the validity of the doctrine, as considered alongside the verses I cited it implies that YHWH has been seen by men, BUT it was NOT the person of the Father. Who else fits the bill if not the preincarnate Yeshua? If YHWH is triune then one member can use another as a representative, and the personage sent is both YHWH and the messenger (malak) of YHWH at the same time. Given the explicit nature of the texts that affirm YHWH has been seen, I content that the major premise of the syllogism (YHWH is invisible, and has not ever been seen by men) is patently false, therefore your argument is invalidated on this basis.
Blessings
Amen and Amen! Bro. Isaiha.
Scripture is a slap in the face with a wet bus ticket for those who promote arianism
Hi CB,
You quote Is 1.18
“Given the explicit nature of the texts that affirm YHWH has been seen, I content that the major premise of the syllogism (YHWH is invisible, and has not ever been seen by men) is patently false, therefore your argument is invalidated on this basis.”So two are prepared to nail their belief to the cross that Christ is a liar.
Any more?Quote So two are prepared to nail their belief to the cross that Christ is a liar.
Any more?
That's a SERIOUS accusation. You need to back it up. In what way have we represented Christ as a liar?Quote David. When you speak face to face with your friends do you use angels? Um, no, Cult Guy, but YOUR bible very clearly says God did:
Check it in these places:
ACTS 7:38
“This is he that came to be among the congregation in the wilderness with the angel that spoke to him on Mount Si′nai and with our forefathers, and he received living sacred pronouncements to give YOU.”ACTS 7:53
“YOU who received the Law as transmitted by angels but have not kept it.””HEBREWS 2:2
“For if the word spoken through angels proved to be firm, and every transgression and disobedient act received a retribution in harmony with justice;”GALATIANS 3:19
“….it [the law] was transmitted through angels by the hand of a mediator.”Quote Exo 33:11 And the LORD (Jehovah) spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. David. When you speak face to face with your friends do you use angels?
Clearly, Cult Guy, other scriptures in your Bible indicate you have the wrong idea about this. Please go check those scriptures. “face to face” indicates intimacy. Please don't continue to bury your head in the sand and ignore those other scriptures which explain this one.
Quote (Cult Buster @ June 09 2007,17:34) I dispute t8’s assertion that YHWH has never been seen. YHWH has indeed been seen
It's not my assertion.It is what Paul, John, and our Lord Jesus taught us.
Paul – 1 Timothy 1:17
Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever.
Amen.John – John 1:18
No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.Jesus – John 14:7
If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”Now notice that Jesus says that “we have seen the Father”. You see, it is in the context of seeing Christ that we see God and not the context of actually seeing God's form.
Certainly we cannot see or behold the invisible God from our perspective. He is way beyond us in our sight and thinking. But the way we see God is when we see Christ. Not because he is God, but because he is the image of God and the greatest glory of God which has been revealed to men.
When the disciples asked Jesus to show them the Father, look at what he said?
John 14:8-9
8 Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.”
9 Jesus answered: “Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?So yes it is true what the New Testament teaches, that no one can see God and has ever seen him. But we can see God THROUGH Christ and even creation for that matter. This is how we can see God and this is how any man has seen God. We see God through a mediator. It is presumptuous to think that we don't need a mediator or messenger.
Now to those who say that men actually saw God (his form), then I simply say to you, “if you have seen Jesus, you have seen his Father”. This is your answer if you can accept it. This is my answer to you Isaiah.
The confusion that you and others bring on this subject is nothing but the confusion of revelation in the Old Testament with revelation in the new which is greater.
Your argument is based in the old and contradicts the new. When you realise that we live in time when there is a greater revelation, you will realise that you can indeed see the invisible God through his visible son.
He is the wisdom and glory of God. But he is not God himself, he is his image.
Seeing is not just about seeing with your physical eyes is it. Proof in my statement is in the following:
Revelation 3:17
You say, 'I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.' But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked.Who would say that the above is talking about physical blindness? Likewise hearing is also used in a spiritual sense.
Revelation 2:7
He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will give the right to eat from the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.To hear and see God is not about seeing him as a physical or spiritual being and hearing audibly what he says. No. God is greater than such things. We see God and hear him in a greater way than our physical senses allow.
So to conclude Isaiah's argument.
The New Testament says:
# No one has ever seen God
# No one has seen God at anytime
# No one can ever see GodIsaiah says:
# No one has ever seen God, except for the ones who have
# No one has seen God at anytime, except for the times that they have seen him
# No one can ever see God except for the times that they canIn reality he completely disagrees with the New Testament on the subject of God being invisible and that no one can see his form. New Testament understanding is a slap in the face with a wet bus ticket to Isaiah's understanding.
His main argument lies in the Old Testament where men are said to have seen God, but he lacks the understanding that God is only seen through whom or what he decides to reveal himself.
Usually such revelations of God are through Christ, who often sends his angel to the men who are to receive it.
The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John,
Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 06 2007,14:35) T8,
Where in the Bible do we read about what Timothy believed here? He didn't actually write anything in the NT, remember??
I was referring to what Paul wrote to Timothy. But I guess it is possible that Timothy didn't believe what Paul wrote, but I doubt that.If Paul discipled Timothy I would think that he agreed with Paul's teachings. I see nothing in Paul's letters that refer to Timothy not believing his teachings like you. His letters to Timothy are not a debate like we see here. Paul was teaching Timothy in a language that shows that Timothy didn't resist what Paul was saying.
Isaiah.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 06 2007,15:33) Is YHWH so impotent that He can't appear in a form that men can see? “Is anything too difficult for the LORD?” (Gen 18:14)
Nothing is too difficult for him. The difficulty lies with men.
E.g., can God make man God? If not, then is God not all powerful?To say that nothing is too difficult for him is true, but you need to balance that with the limitations of others.
So yes God often sends angels by way of his son. In this way, men have seen God. But they cannot behold is form. They see the invisible God through a visible messenger. So yes nothing is too difficult for God.
When it says that Jesus is the visible image of the invisible God, it means 2 things. God is invisible and Jesus is not.
In Jesus own words: “If you have seen me, you have seen the Father. How can you say 'show us the Father?'”.
ALSO:
Regarding your thinking with the King of Kings and Lord of Lords in Revelation 17:14, 19:16. I would like to debate this too.
Perhaps it could be your next proof text and I suspect that if we talk of it here, then it may dominate this debate from henceforth and leave the other stuff said here, unanswered.
It deserves its own discussion and debate and I think it will be a good challenge.
I think for now you now need to show how your understanding in the Old Testament and New are not contradictory. So far all I can see is contradiction in your understanding.
You use the Old Testament to teach that the New Testament is wrong. The New Testament clearly teaches that no one can or has ever seen God, except Jesus Christ.
You use the Old Testament to say that the New Testament is incorrect in this matter.
Hi Is 1.18
You say
” Given the explicit nature of the texts that affirm YHWH has been seen, I content that the major premise of the syllogism (YHWH is invisible, and has not ever been seen by men) is patently false, therefore your argument is invalidated on this basis.”But Scripture says God is Spirit and invisible.
Jesus said
'John 1:18
No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.John 6:46
Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.and John said
1 John 4:12
No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.They have more credibility than you can muster.
'Quote (t8 @ June 10 2007,15:55) You use the Old Testament to say that the New Testament is incorrect in this matter.
No t8, as opposed to you I ascribe equal weighting to both the NT and OT proof texts, and I don't allow a presupposition to override overt biblical realities. Maybe you should try these things.Hi Nick.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 02 2007,17:28) So on this point let me state that I concur with t8, no one has ever seen the Father, this appears to be the only logical conclusion to draw from John’s writings above. But it’s even more scripturally obvious that men have seen YHWH.
Unfortunately for him, he said that the invisible God was the Father. What he didn't realise was Paul taught the following:1 Timothy 1:17
Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever.
Amen.So he concurred that the only God was the Father without realising it.
I wonder if he realises that truth now. If not, then he must of changed his mind regarding the invisible God being the Father.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 11 2007,13:39) No t8, as opposed to you I ascribe equal weighting to both the NT and OT proof texts, and I don't allow a presupposition to override overt biblical realities. Maybe you should try these things.
OK.Where do I start?
Shall I start with accepting a creed/doctrine that was formalized hundreds of years after the last book in the bible was written and is not mentioned or taught in the bible?
Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 11 2007,13:39) Quote (t8 @ June 10 2007,15:55) You use the Old Testament to say that the New Testament is incorrect in this matter.
No t8, as opposed to you I ascribe equal weighting to both the NT and OT proof texts, and I don't allow a presupposition to override overt biblical realities. Maybe you should try these things.
Is.Saying one thing and doing the other is what you are and have been doing. But this behaviour is not peculiar to you, I have seen the same behaviour in many who teach the Trinity doctrine because it is how they reason their false doctrine.
You say you give the New Testament equal weight, but in reality you have used the Old Testament to say that the New Testament teaching regarding God being invisible and that no one can see him, is wrong. How is that equal weight? It is really one sided and only half the picture. Without the greater revelation in the New Testament, you can still operate as even the best prophets did, but even they would love to have seen what we see today. So why should we disregard what the New Testament teaches? We shouldn't. It explains a lot of the Old Testament and it fulfills a lot of it too. It is a great light.
Anyway, is this how Trinitarians reason? They say one thing and do another. They say God is 3 persons and yet call him a HIM. They say I give both testaments equal weight and then just go ahead and use the old to show that God is visible while stamping all over the new when it says that the only true God is invisible and no one has or can see him.
Often when you corner Trinitarians on their double standards regarding their reasoning, they sometimes resort to ignoring you. If you continue to press them, you may eventually hear the famous excuse, “God is beyond our understanding”. In other words, they are really saying, “I have no idea about that which I teach”.
Given their denial, I could teach that God is a crocodile as some aboriginal groups do, and then reason my way out of this by saying that God can do anything and that he is beyond our understanding. Of course others couldn't prove that I was wrong if I was no willing to reason, and I could spend years arguing about it.
But I think it is time to face up to the fact Isaiah, that we CAN know about God. This is what scripture is for. We also have the Spirit of God to lead us into all truth.
When your reasoning contradicts scripture as you clearly are contradicting the New Testament teaching in this matter, then you should change to being able to accept that which is written, instead of continuing to not believe and providing opposition. What good is opposing the truth ever going to do for you anyway?
But if pride has its way, you will hold onto your failing theories to the bitter end and then you will wake up one day and say to yourself, “what have I done?”.
Isaiah, we have one life to live here and it is a short one at that. What will the books say when they are read out?
Will you hear “Well done my good and faithful servant”? Will you hear “Why did you persecute me?”.
It's up to you. You have the power to change what will be said to you on that great day.
David
Quote So, one could go no further and ignore the rest of the Bible and wrongly conclude that it was Jehovah himself who was speaking. Yet…..
ACTS 7:38
“This is he that came to be among the congregation in the wilderness with the angel that spoke to him on Mount Si′nai and with our forefathers, and he received living sacred pronouncements to give YOU.”ACTS 7:53
“YOU who received the Law as transmitted by angels but have not kept it.””HEBREWS 2:2
“For if the word spoken through angels proved to be firm, and every transgression and disobedient act received a retribution in harmony with justice;”GALATIANS 3:19
“….it [the law] was transmitted through angels by the hand of a mediator.”Is this a contradiction?
We have one part of the Bible saying that it was God who was speaking. It says this clearly many times.
And we have many other scriptures saying he used angels.David. You have just done another typical Jehovah's Witnesses trick with the scriptures. You have misrepresented the Word of God once again.
Look above at how you quoted Galations 3:19. You have cut off the first part of the verse which contradicts your argument, and as a result have promoted a falsehood.
See here the full verse in its context.
Gal 3:19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
There is no mention anywhere in your verses of the Ten Commandment law spoken by Jehovah (Christ) Himself.
Galations 3:19 and the others, describes a law that was added later on until ” the seed should come”. The “seed” refers to Jesus and this temporary law relates to the ceremonial sacrificial law which was nailed to the cross. It has nothing to do with the Ten Commandment moral law spoken by God Himself. Once Christ was sacrificed at the cross, there was no longer any need for the sacrificial system of laws and ordinances which pointed to His death.
David. Before you tamper with the Word of God, consider seriously the following.
Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Rev 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.God (Jesus) is serious about people tampering with His Word. (I pity the translators of the NWT.)
David. All your quoted verses are pertaining to the ceremonial sacrificial laws. The Bible does not contradict itself. The contradiction comes from the false teachings of the Jehovah's Witnesses Watchtower sect.
God personally spoke His Ten Commandment Law and wrote it with His own finger.
Exo 31:18 And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.
And God spoke face to face with Moses.
Exo 33:11 And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.
Joh 1:5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
Quote 1 Timothy 1:17
Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever.
Amen.t8. Your “only true God” argument has been previously explained in the light of scripture. But in case you've forgotten, here it is in a nutshell.
Since the one true God exists as a Godhead this means that the three Persons can be addressed as the only true God both individually and collectively. Putting it another way:
. The Godhead is the only true God.
· Each specific member of the Godhead is the only true God.
· Therefore, the members of the Godhead are the only true God, whether individually or collectively.This is why Jesus can speak of one member of the Godhead as the only true God without this implying that the other members are not God. To make this point more clear, notice what the inspired book of Hebrews says
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.
The Father praises his Son by calling him God.
Joh 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
Hi CB,
This is not scripture
“Since the one true God exists as a Godhead this means that the three Persons can be addressed as the only true God both individually and collectively. Putting it another way:. The Godhead is the only true God.
· Each specific member of the Godhead is the only true God.
· Therefore, the members of the Godhead are the only true God, whether individually or collectively.This is why Jesus can speak of one member of the Godhead as the only true God without this implying that the other members are not God. “
This is mindnumbingly foolish theology.
Please feed the children of God with the heavenly food.Quote (Cult Buster @ June 12 2007,02:23) Since the one true God exists as a Godhead this means that the three Persons can be addressed as the only true God both individually and collectively. Putting it another way: . The Godhead is the only true God.
· Each specific member of the Godhead is the only true God.
· Therefore, the members of the Godhead are the only true God, whether individually or collectively.
To CultB.Chapter and verse please.
I provide scriptures to back up what I say.
There should be no room for human reasoning.
That which is revealed by the Spirit of God is of God. That which comes from man's spirit is of man.
Now read the following:
John 17:3
Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.This is quite different to what you preach isn't it CultB?
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.
Joh 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
So tell us t8. Is Jesus Christ a true God or a false God?
Joh 1:5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
