- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Thanksgiving and Prayer
15For this reason, ever since I heard about your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all the saints, 16I have not stopped giving thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers. 17I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit[f] of wisdom and revelation, so that you may know him better. 18I pray also that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, 19and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is like the working of his mighty strength, 20which he exerted in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, 21far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every title that can be given, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. 22And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.Jesus Appears to Thomas
24Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!”
But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it.”
26A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” 27Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”28Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”
29Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
30Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
In my understanding, when Thomas falls down before Jesus and says: “My Lord and my God”, he is speaking to both Jesus and God the Father. I know that many will interpret this as meaning Thomas was calling Jesus both Lord and God. Just my thoughts though.
There is a Song that Goes like this
NOT MANY WISE MEN NOW ARE CALLED, NOT MANY NOBLE BRETHREN,
NOT MANY MIGHTY CHOSEN ONES, FOR YOU SEE YOUR CALLING.
SONS OF GOD YOU ARE CALLED, NOT BECAUSE OF GREATNESS,
EVEN THE WISDOM OF MANKIND IS TO GOD BUT FOOLISH.GOD CHOSE THE FOOLISH OF THIS WORLD, HE CHOSE THE WEAK AND BASE THINGS,
HE CHOSE THE THINGS WHICH ARE DESPISED, THAT NO FLESH SHOULD GLORY
SON'S OF GOD YOU ARE CALLED, NOT BECAUSE OF GREATNESS
YOU WHO ARE CALLED AND NOW IN CHRIST SHALL CONFOUND THE MIGHTY.EVEN THE FOOLISHNESS OF GOD, WISER BY FAR THEN MEN IS
EVEN THE WEAKNESS OF OUR GOD, STRONGER FAE\R THEN MAN IS.
SON'S OF GOD, YOU ARE CALLED, NOT BECAUSE OF GREATNESS,
LET THEM WHO GLORY BOAST IN CHRIST, NOT IN THEIR OWN GREATNESS.I believe that the Wisdom of some here are getting in the way of understanding about what Jesus is, and who our Heavenly Father God and His Holy Spirit is.
Peace and Love Mrs.
Quote (IM4Truth @ Nov. 07 2007,11:27) I believe that the Wisdom of some here are getting in the way of understanding about what Jesus is, and who our Heavenly Father God and His Holy Spirit is. Peace and Love Mrs.
Do you think that is getting in the way of my understanding IM4Truth?
Chap No I was not talking about you. I was responding to what Mandy had said. How you need a Law degree to understand. Sometimes those that take scripture apart believe according to their own Wisdom and do not listen what the Holy Sirit is saying to them. Some do not use common sense either.
That is what I meant.Love Grandma
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 04 2007,16:45) t8 How about God and God!
John out of the same breath uses the same word “Theos” for the Father and the Son. He didnt have to do that did he?
So do we accept that there is God and Jesus in the bible?OK. Now theos and theos.
Don't tell me you are turning into polytheist?
I thought you denied theos and theos?
OK, so now you admit that the word theos can be used of others, such as the son, men, angels.
Is this progression, or did you not mean to admit that theos is not exclusively used to refer to God.
Then we also have to contend with identifying the theos and theos in quality. This explains the wide usage of the word theos.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 04 2007,16:45) Can you admit that Jesus is the God of the bible? After all he said the scriptures were written about him, did he not? Are you to proud to admit that?
OK, so I take it that you are too proud to admit that God and Jesus are 2 beings/identities in the bible and in Revelation 1:1 in particular.Now to your question asking can I admit that Jesus is the God of the bible. The simple answer is that the God of the bible is the God of Jesus Christ. The God of Jesus Christ is the one true God and the Father of all.
John 17:3
Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.John 20:17
Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.' “John 14:1
“Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God; trust also in me.If these 3 witness scriptures cannot convince you, then I guess that scripture just isn't good enough for your supposed higher understanding.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 04 2007,11:33) There is your answer. So you cant say that Revelation 1:1 is prrof that Yeshua is not God!Because as you say it could be either one right?But then if you take your view you have to deny the other scriptures that cant be taken in a qualitative sense. WJ.God is identified with the article.Without the article an identity is not being referred.Although it may not be as simple as that, that is a general guide.Think of it like this.The man (is identifying a particular man)man (qualifies or speaks of nature).E.g.,
- The man made tools from the bones of animals.
- Man made tools from the bones of animals.The first option identifies a particular manThe second option is talking about mankind in general. Man/mankind is a term that describes beings with human nature.Given that, it is not hard to comprehend the difference between:
- The Theos
- theos
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 04 2007,16:55) Yes but we are not talking about God and his wife are we? You say that Eve is not the man in identity, of course Eve is not Adam! Eve is not man either she is woman. But she is human.
But lets talk about Adam and his Son. Abel is not Adam but Abel is man.
Is he not? Therefore all that Adam is in Nature, Abel is also!
Yeshua is the Mongenes “Unique” Son of God who also is all the Father is in nature.
Quote Yes but we are not talking about God and his wife are we? Correct. We are talking of God and his image and man and his image.
Quote You say that Eve is not the man in identity, of course Eve is not Adam! Eve is not man either she is woman. But she is human. Not true. Eve is true man and is adam. “adam” is actually the Hebrew word for man. Again to understand this, you need to see that Adam can be used to identify the first human or to talk of humanity/human nature in general.
Genesis 1:27
So God created man (adam) in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.Quote But lets talk about Adam and his Son. Abel is not Adam but Abel is man. Is he not? Therefore all that Adam is in Nature, Abel is also!
Yes that is true. But Abel is not identified as Adam, rather he is adam, (mankind). And it can also be argued that Yeshua has divine nature and yet he is not God himself.
If man can partake of divine nature, then how much more the son of God? Or is he somehow less than us?
So yes Adam and Abel are both men in nature.
I will explain further for the readers, (I am almost sure that WJ will reject or ignore this). The difference is that Adam is the Hebrew term for human/man. So Adam is named and idenified as Adam which means “Man” and all who come from him share his nature that is man/(adam). Even Eve came from him and she is also called adam that is to say she is part of mankind. But Adam not only had human nature, but he was idenitified as the originator of that nature and hence his name is Man/Adam.
The reason why humanity fell was because through one man sin entered to all men. So Adam was the man, and his offspring is man (male and female). When God created man, male and female, it actually says that God created “adam”, male and female. So “adam” can be used to identify the first man, or to speak of human nature in general.
Now the Father is identified as the “Theos” and all that come from him can share in his nature and attributes. Hence one reason we can use the word “theos” qualitatively. So the Father is God and beings that are born of him can partake in his nature. Men and angels are also called theos, but they are not identified as the Theos.
In short we can use both the word Adam and Theos to identify and we can use them to qualify.
When we identify the true God/Theos, we are talking about the Father. When we identify the Man/Adam, we are talking of Adam.
When we qualify god/theos, we can be talking about the Father, Jesus, men, angels, and even false gods.
When we qualify man/adam, we can be talking of anyone from the human race, which includes Adam the original human.
It stands to reason that all who are theos and all who are man, have originators.
Jesus said this of himself.
John 16:27
No, the Father himself loves you because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God.In other words he didn't claim to be God or the originator. Rather he said he CAME from God.
So if we honour the Father and the son, then surely we should believe what the son said of himself? To teach otherwise and knowingly against what he taught can only be wrong, and no good can come of it.
Quote (acertainchap @ Nov. 07 2007,11:23) Jesus Appears to Thomas John 20: 24-30
24 Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!”
But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it.”
26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”28 Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”
29 Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
30 Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31 But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
In my understanding, when Thomas falls down before Jesus and says: “My Lord and my God”, he is speaking to both Jesus and God the Father. I know that many will interpret this as meaning Thomas was calling Jesus both Lord and God. Just my thoughts though.
Just curious if anybody is of the understanding that Thomas was speaking to both Jesus and God the Father at the same time and not referring to Jesus as both Lord and God, when he says, “My Lord and my God!”Yes, Chap I also agree with your findings.
In this passage, it is my personal opinion that body language came into affect (and how will we know for sure? none of us were there).
Imagine for instance, that upon seeing Jesus, Thomas fell to his feet and with arms stretched towards Jesus he says, “My Lord!” and then reaches his hands towards heaven (in thanks to God for returning his Lord), he says, “….and my God!” Makes sense to me. And futhermore, it is in step with the tenor of the NT regarding the fact that Jesus has a God!
Hi …
I just want to point out that John 20:28ff says nothing about body language … it says nothing about Thomas falling to his feet, etc
Quote (Adam Pastor @ Nov. 08 2007,10:07) Hi … I just want to point out that John 20:28ff says nothing about body language … it says nothing about Thomas falling to his feet, etc
Hi Adam! Good to see you here!Of course the text does not mention anything of body language, this is just a guess on my part – a personal opinion. But as Chap pointed out, the text doesn't give us any reason to not believe it happened that way either.
Besides, all this was offered because so many believe this passage is saying that Jesus is God (something I know you do not believe).
Quote (acertainchap @ Nov. 08 2007,01:33) Quote (acertainchap @ Nov. 07 2007,11:23) Jesus Appears to Thomas John 20: 24-30
24 Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!”
But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it.”
26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”28 Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”
29 Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
30 Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31 But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
In my understanding, when Thomas falls down before Jesus and says: “My Lord and my God”, he is speaking to both Jesus and God the Father. I know that many will interpret this as meaning Thomas was calling Jesus both Lord and God. Just my thoughts though.
Just curious if anybody is of the understanding that Thomas was speaking to both Jesus and God the Father at the same time and not referring to Jesus as both Lord and God, when he says, “My Lord and my God!”
chapAs AP has pointed out, John 20:28 dosnt show any body lamguage to indicate what he meant. But his own words should be enough.
Thomas clearly is speaking to Yeshua.
This is unambiguous. Many wish that John 1:1 and 20:28 were just not there, in fact many wish that Johns writtings were not in the Cannon period.
Look closely at the text with out any bias as a Unitarian or a Henotheist or Arian and you will see there is no other way to interpret the verses.
The problem is Thomas didnt say…
“MY LORD AND MY FATHER”, did he?
Listen again…
Jn 20:
28 And Thomas answered and *said unto him*, My Lord and my God.Thomas *said unto him*. Not said unto them.
This would have been a blasphemous statement for Thomas to be calling Yeshua God.
Yet Yeshua does not rebuke nor correct him for his words but says…
Jn 20:29
Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because *thou hast seen me*, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.John the witness of this event neither corrects him in his writtings or explains why he said this.
What John does is write regarding this event the following…
Jn 20:30
And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his
disciples, which are not written in this book:
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.John says this was a sign.
John here is revealing who this Monogenes “Unique” Son of God is. This same John that penned John 1:1, the Word that was with God and was God has now as the Word/God come in the flesh and is born a Son.
Its been pointed out that Jesus appeared to Mary and said in verse 17 of the same chapter…
Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God (theos), and your God (theos), so they say Thomas could not have meant Yeshua is God.
However, to me this is even more proof that Yeshua is very God , not the Father as a Modalist would say, but God because John could have used another word for “Theos” in 20:28 and Jn 1:1, but he didnt. And he gives no explanation as to any difference. So then we conclude John meant what he says in John 1:1. “The Word was God”.
John clarifys this by writing 1 Jn 1:1-3 and this…
1 Jn 5:20 NET
And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us insight to know him who is true, and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. This one is the true God and eternal life.The pronoun This one (οὗτος, Joutos) refers to a person, but it is far from clear whether it should be understood as a reference (1) to God the Father or (2) to Jesus Christ. R. E. Brown (Epistles of John [AB], 625) comments, “I John, which began with an example of stunning grammatical obscurity in the prologue, continues to the end to offer us examples of unclear grammar.” The nearest previous antecedent is Jesus Christ, immediately preceding, but on some occasions when this has been true the pronoun still refers to God (see 1 John 2:3). The first predicate which follows This one in 5:20, the true God, is a description of God the Father used by Jesus in John 17:3, and was used in the preceding clause of the present verse to refer to God the Father (him who is true). Yet the second predicate of This one in 5:20, eternal life, appears to refer to Jesus, because although the Father possesses “life” (John 5:26, 6:57) just as Jesus does (John 1:4, 6:57, 1 John 5:11), “life” is never predicated of the Father elsewhere, while it is predicated of Jesus in John 11:25 and 14:6 (a self-predication by Jesus). If This one in 5:20 is understood as referring to Jesus, it forms an inclusion with the prologue, which introduced the reader to “the eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us.” Thus it appears best to understand the pronoun This one in 5:20 as a reference to Jesus Christ. The christological affirmation which results is striking, but certainly not beyond the capabilities of the author (see John 1:1 and 20:28): This One [Jesus Christ] is the true God and eternal life.
http://www.bible.org/netbible/index.htmBlessings
Quote (Not3in1 @ Nov. 07 2007,05:24) Quote (Is 1:18 @ Nov. 04 2007,11:28) Quote Yes you believe correctly that Yeshua and the Father are different. But what about God and Jesus.
This is the whole point here. You seem to not be able to grasp (or you are just avoiding the issue) that God and Jesus are different.
The bible is full of verses that say God and Jesus. I am not talking about the verses that say the Father and Jesus.
GOD AND JESUS.
What about God and Jesus. Are they different?
In the NT, theos” is usually used in reference to the Father (but sometimes the Son) and “kurios” is usually used in reference to Yehsua (but also the Father). Other authors, like Luke for instance, also showed a remarkable ambiguity in the use of the term “kurios” relative to Jesus and the Father. Both theos and kurios are appropriate designations to identify the Most High God, YHWH, in scripture so it’s seems a perfectly legitimate literary mechanism to assign different terms (which both denote deity) to each person when both are in view. This would serve to distinguish the two individual persons of the Father and Son without invoking modalistic thought (as would occur if either theos or kurios was used for each) but without delineating them ontologically. So an authors ascription of theos to the Father and Jesus/Christ/Son/Jesus to Yeshua is not telling us that Yeshua is not “God” (which would be in direct contradiction to many other NT statements about Yeshua), it’s simply a method of distinguishing the persons of the Father and Son in the text. Nothing more.
Wow. You need a law degree to understand this answer, Isaiah. Truly, I was looking forward to your response on this one. However, most folks will not be able to grasp what you are saying. And if you cannot talk about God and Jesus in a way that is simply understood…..how do you think common fishermen and villiage people understood them?Chuck Swindoll once said, “If it isn't complicated then it isn't God.” I believe somewhat the opposite is true. The Star was shown to shepards, the Son was shown to fishermen. The gospel was given to those who didn't have the law, and God used the model of a Father and Son to show us a common relationship.
Boy have we messed things up!
not3Quiet frankly I am surprised at your comments here.
I always thought that you respected Isaiahs scriptural knowledge.
I cant speak for Isa 1:18, but would like to comment on your statements.
Jesus said many things that the hearers did not understand, in fact many quit following him because of some of his sayings being hard to be understood. Jn Chapter 6.
While it is true that the Salvation message is so simple that men stumble over it , however this does not negate that God is infinitly higher than us and his ways past our finding out.
Some would desire to stay on milk and are not able to understand the deep things of God. But God would have us move on to perfection and be able to eat bread as well as strong meat, which is for the spiritually mature.
Heb 5:11
Concerning him we have much to say, and {it is} hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing.
12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food.
13 But solid food (strong meat) is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil.Revelation is progressive and is revealed to us as we grow in his grace and knowledge
There are many things that the Apostles wrote that are very deep and require some in depth study. The book of Revelation is the best example of this as well as the minor prophets and the major prophets of the Hebrew scriptures.
Why would you critisize a man who has spent years of study to find the truest interpretation of scriptures?
Do you think everything is in the scriptures for the simple?
Jesus said…
Matt 13:14
“In their case the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled, which says, 'YOU WILL KEEP ON HEARING, BUT WILL NOT UNDERSTAND; YOU WILL KEEP ON SEEING, BUT WILL NOT PERCEIVE;The Spirit of truth would reveal much to us that our “carnal, natural minds” could not grasp.
What about the complexity of the Greek and Hebrew languages?
Is it possible that Isaiahs study of the Greek and Hebrew can not be easily understood without some study of our own?
How about the complexity that went into the interpretation of just one verse like Jn 1:1?
What case, gender, and number is “theos” in John 1:1? Why is it anarthrous?
How about parsing “en”, its found three times in the verse. Must be important.
Whats its lexical form? Why is the imperfect tense important in the verse?
How does the imperfect tense relate to prepositional phrase at the start of verse?
Why “arche” in dative case? Why does “pros” have grave accent?
Who put period after “logos?”
I encourage you Sis to study these things.
You could start here and you might pick up some good stuff!
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….75;st=0Blessings.
Quote (acertainchap @ Nov. 09 2007,05:03) Thank you for that WJ. I appreciate your responses as always.
Thanks
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
