Who is this Jesus?

[terraricca]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 08 2013,02:55)

Quote (terraricca @ Aug. 07 2013,03:13) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2013,11:08) Quote (terraricca @ Aug. 06 2013,17:36) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2013,03:13) Pierre, 1 John 5 goes on to say that having the Son equates to having eternal life: 11And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life. kATHI yes ,Christ is the one that give us life but he is not that live ,God is the life giver ,he showed that by resurrecting his own son, but Christ is for us the way to eternal life,if we obey him Pierre, Christ IS that one, the eternal life that is the Word of Life in 1 John 1. Do the commentators agree with me or you on this. Read the commentaries found here after the parallel verses: http://biblehub.com/1_john/1-1.htm Kathi What is the meaning of 1John 12 What does the word “having ” means Would it mean that we have to own Christ What version of the Bible has 1 John 12 in it??

kathy

I use yours look in the quotes you did to me   ho I see it is 1 John 5;12

[terraricca]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 08 2013,02:59)

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2013,00:08) Quote (terraricca @ Aug. 06 2013,17:36) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2013,03:13) Pierre, 1 John 5 goes on to say that having the Son equates to having eternal life: 11And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life. kATHI yes ,Christ is the one that give us life but he is not that live ,God is the life giver ,he showed that by resurrecting his own son, but Christ is for us the way to eternal life,if we obey him Pierre, Christ IS that one, the eternal life that is the Word of Life in 1 John 1. Do the commentators agree with me or you on this. Read the commentaries found here after the parallel verses: http://biblehub.com/1_john/1-1.htm Pierre, Please answer this question. Do the commentators agree with me or you on this? Read the commentaries found here after the parallel verses: http://biblehub.com/1_john/1-1.htm Thanks!

kathi

the trinity is also preached ,by twisting the scriptures ;

the one that is with ,is different than the one he is with ,right

and so Christ “is not what he gives ” even if we call him life it would true ,but he his not that life ,because the one that gives the live is different of the one through whom we receive it ,right yes

[Proclaimer]

What we have here folks is Babylon religion trying to convince those who have come out of her to join with the harlot once more.

[Proclaimer]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 07 2013,04:59)

Meaning you are a Polytheist or at best a Henotheist.

You accuse Jesus of being a Polytheist. That is the conclusion.

Jesus said, “ye are gods”.

He quoted the OT, “ye are gods, ye are all sons of the Most High God”.

I am thinking that you do not realise that you are challenging Jesus Christ. But you are.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 06 2013,22:27)

This is one way for me to show you that your heart is blind since you cannot see the connection when others much more knowledgeable than you (the Bible commentators) can see the connection.

And what about the 25 Trinitarian scholars who produced the NET Bible?  Are their hearts equally blind on this one?

Kathi, this is what I was trying to say to Keith a couple of days ago.  In the past, we non-Trinitarians were bombarded with commentator after commentator – all of whom were more knowledgeable than us in scriptural matters.  Yet they were all Trinitarians, and put the Trinitarian slant on everything they wrote.  And that made it easy for people like you to say, “Others much more knowledgeable than you can see the connection.  If you cannot, then it's because your heart is blind.”

But then came the internet, which made it easy for us to search the actual Hebrew and Greek texts, and decide for ourselves whether the Trinitarian-sponsored English translations of those words were indeed accurate or not.  What we've found is a LOT of bias bleeding through – both in those translations and in the commentaries.

NET Bible is a product of this new age, Kathi.  They KNOW we can easily check the web to find out if what they're feeding us is truth or not.  I believe this is the main reason they are “more careful” with the usual absurd Trinitarian claims that earlier versions and commentators could just hammer down our throats with reckless abandon.  And the 25 Trinitarian scholars of NET Bible are calling it like they see it in this case.

According to the scripture itself, after any bias is removed, Peter merely quotes a portion of Isaiah 8.  Nothing more.  There is nothing in Peter's words that would lead an unbiased person to see a claim that Jesus was the “Jehovah of Hosts” from Isaiah 8.  And no amount of writings from Trinitarian-biased commentators is going to change that fact, Kathi.

Now, do you have a scripture in which Peter makes a CLEAR revelation that Jesus is “Jehovah the Son, Almighty God of heaven and earth”?

If not, would you like to move on to Paul?  Or would you like a large list of Peter's words where he makes it clear that Jesus is someone OTHER THAN “God”?

[Lightenup]

Mike,
The NET notes are notes about how the words are chosen to translate and the structure in which they translate. It is not a Bible commentary so that is probably why they didn't include a commentary of the passage. They did say that it was a quote of Isaiah 8. Open your eyes.

Also, I already know that Jehovah our Righteousness, our God and Savior Jesus Christ is someone other than God the Father. You don't need to spend that time on me.

[Lightenup]

Quote (t8 @ Aug. 05 2013,02:43)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 04 2013,03:35) t8 You should tell the whole story. You believe in one god the Father and one god the son. Why play the caps game? You say Jesus is “a god” like the JWs. You worship god the Father and “a god” the Son. That is Mystery Babylon!   WJ A very low score WJ. Try and aim for Counterargument up. And bearing false witness is not good.

Bump for t8. Seems like you can use this.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 06 2013,22:30)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 06 2013,19:20) So, IN THE CONTEXT OF MATTHEW 16:16, is Jesus “THE living God”?  Or the other one? Mike, The 'Living God' in Matt 16:16 is the Father……… Matt 16 mentions the two but applies the term 'Living God' to the Father in that context.

Thank you for your direct and honest answer, Kathi.

So in Matthew 16:16, Peter clearly identifies Jesus, not AS “the living God”, but as someone OTHER THAN “the living God”.

And this truth of scriptures isn't hidden in any riddles.  There is no special way we have to translate Peter's words to make him identify Jesus as someone OTHER THAN “the living God”.  We don't need any non-Trinitarian scholars or commentators to tell us what we should think in this matter, do we?  Nope.  Because it is plain as day that Peter knows Jesus is the Son and Messiah OF “the living God”.

And who exactly told this scriptural truth to Peter?  Wasn't it “the living God” Himself?  And how did Jesus respond when hearing that scriptural truth out of Peter's mouth?  Did Jesus correct his error?  Or did he say that this scriptural truth is the rock upon which he would build his church?

This is the church I belong to, Kathi.  The one that recognizes Jesus as the Son, Messiah, Servant, Lamb, Prophet and Priest OF “the living God”.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 06 2013,22:39)

Since you realize that Jehovah of hosts is the stumbling block that Jehovah has laid in Zion…………

Are all “stumbling blocks” in scripture Jehovah? Or is there more than one “stumbling block” mentioned in scripture?

Which one, Kathi?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 06 2013,23:00)

To show you that the Bible commentator scholars can see this…………..

Kathi,

There is not one shred of scriptural evidence that even hints at the possibility of Jesus existing from eternity. On the contrary, there are loads of scriptures that speak of him having a beginning.

And no amount of Trinitarian-biased commentators are going to change that scriptural fact.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2013,16:28)

Mike, The NET notes are notes about how the words are chosen to translate and the structure in which they translate. It is not a Bible commentary so that is probably why they didn't include a commentary of the passage. They did say that it was a quote of Isaiah 8. Open your eyes.

The NET Bible is full of commentaries, Kathi.  I should know, I've read a ton of them.

And what they said was that the words, “But do not be terrified of them or be shaken” was a quote from Isaiah 8:14.

Look and see for yourself, Kathi. They bold the words that are OT quotes. Look and see what words they bolded. (None of them from verse 15, right?)

[Lightenup]

Mike, v. 15 isn't bolded because the words are not quoted but replaced for revealing that the Jehovah of hosts is Christ the Lord. It would be wrong to bold the words 'Christ the Lord' because Jesus is not called that till the New Testament and thus is not the name of Him that was used in the OT in that passage. The NT clarifies the OT here. Jehovah of hosts = Christ our Lord in this passage.

Please notice that the rock of stumbling and offense is the same person who is Jehovah of hosts in Isaiah 8 but NOT Jehovah who is speaking. Jehovah of hosts is someone OTHER THAN the Jehovah who is speaking. Face it. The NT identifies the rock and Jehovah of hosts as Christ our Lord.

Also, the NET Bible notes have comments but it is not the scope of the translator notes to be a commentary. The notes clarify the translation. If there are no extra notes, there is no need for clarification…the Greek is clear here that 'Christ our Lord' is intended in the manuscripts they are translating from. The NET Bible has useful information in it at times but it is not meant to be an exhaustive commentary. It is not called the NET Bible Commentary. There is a difference between the NET Bible and a Bible commentary.

[Lightenup]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 07 2013,17:42)

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 06 2013,23:00) To show you that the Bible commentator scholars can see this………….. Kathi, There is not one shred of scriptural evidence that even hints at the possibility of Jesus existing from eternity.  On the contrary, there are loads of scriptures that speak of him having a beginning. And no amount of Trinitarian-biased commentators are going to change that scriptural fact.

Mike,
His beginning was in regards to a begettal, not a creation. He is Jehovah our Righteousness and Jehovah of hosts. He wouldn't have the name Jehovah of hosts and not be eternally self-existent.

[Lightenup]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 07 2013,17:37)

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 06 2013,22:30) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 06 2013,19:20) So, IN THE CONTEXT OF MATTHEW 16:16, is Jesus “THE living God”?  Or the other one? Mike, The 'Living God' in Matt 16:16 is the Father……… Matt 16 mentions the two but applies the term 'Living God' to the Father in that context. Thank you for your direct and honest answer, Kathi. So in Matthew 16:16, Peter clearly identifies Jesus, not AS “the living God”, but as someone OTHER THAN “the living God”. And this truth of scriptures isn't hidden in any riddles.  There is no special way we have to translate Peter's words to make him identify Jesus as someone OTHER THAN “the living God”.  We don't need any non-Trinitarian scholars or commentators to tell us what we should think in this matter, do we?  Nope.  Because it is plain as day that Peter knows Jesus is the Son and Messiah OF “the living God”. And who exactly told this scriptural truth to Peter?  Wasn't it “the living God” Himself?  And how did Jesus respond when hearing that scriptural truth out of Peter's mouth?  Did Jesus correct his error?  Or did he say that this scriptural truth is the rock upon which he would build his church? This is the church I belong to, Kathi.  The one that recognizes Jesus as the Son, Messiah, Servant, Lamb, Prophet and Priest OF “the living God”.

Mike,
You are welcome.

Does Isaiah 8 identify the Jehovah of hosts as Jehovah the speaker or someone other than Jehovah the speaker?

11For the Lord spoke thus to me with his strong hand upon me, and warned me not to walk in the way of this people, saying:
12“Do not call conspiracy all that this people calls conspiracy, and do not fear what they fear, nor be in dread.
13But the Lord of hosts, him you shall honor as holy. Let him be your fear, and let him be your dread.
14And he will become a sanctuary and a stone of offense and a rock of stumbling to both houses of Israel, a trap and a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
15And many shall stumble on it. They shall fall and be broken; they shall be snared and taken.”

[Lightenup]

Quote (terraricca @ Aug. 07 2013,16:34)

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 08 2013,02:55) Quote (terraricca @ Aug. 07 2013,03:13) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2013,11:08) Quote (terraricca @ Aug. 06 2013,17:36) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2013,03:13) Pierre, 1 John 5 goes on to say that having the Son equates to having eternal life: 11And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life. kATHI yes ,Christ is the one that give us life but he is not that live ,God is the life giver ,he showed that by resurrecting his own son, but Christ is for us the way to eternal life,if we obey him Pierre, Christ IS that one, the eternal life that is the Word of Life in 1 John 1. Do the commentators agree with me or you on this. Read the commentaries found here after the parallel verses: http://biblehub.com/1_john/1-1.htm Kathi What is the meaning of 1John 12 What does the word “having ” means Would it mean that we have to own Christ What version of the Bible has 1 John 12 in it?? kathy I use yours look in the quotes you did to me    ho I see it is 1 John 5;12

Pierre,
We have to have His Spirit within us.

[terraricca]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 08 2013,09:43)

Quote (terraricca @ Aug. 07 2013,16:34) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 08 2013,02:55) Quote (terraricca @ Aug. 07 2013,03:13) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2013,11:08) Quote (terraricca @ Aug. 06 2013,17:36) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2013,03:13) Pierre, 1 John 5 goes on to say that having the Son equates to having eternal life: 11And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life. kATHI yes ,Christ is the one that give us life but he is not that live ,God is the life giver ,he showed that by resurrecting his own son, but Christ is for us the way to eternal life,if we obey him Pierre, Christ IS that one, the eternal life that is the Word of Life in 1 John 1. Do the commentators agree with me or you on this. Read the commentaries found here after the parallel verses: http://biblehub.com/1_john/1-1.htm Kathi What is the meaning of 1John 12 What does the word “having ” means Would it mean that we have to own Christ What version of the Bible has 1 John 12 in it?? kathy I use yours look in the quotes you did to me    ho I see it is 1 John 5;12 Pierre, We have to have His Spirit within us.

KATHY

Quote

We have to have His Spirit within us.

YOU GOT THAT RIGHT ;

the spirit is of God ,and our spirit is of us but not God and not us ,
see it this way ;when I was not a servant of God then God's spirit was not in me right yes, how then, did he came part of me

was it not by learning his will in the scriptures and changing my ways TO BECOME A SERVANT OF IS YES

SO WHAT PART DID CHANGE IN ME AFTER MY STUDIES OF GOD'S WILL IT WAS THE KNOWLEDGE OF HIS WORDS AND WILL ,THAT I PUT IN MY MIND AND HEART AND NOW FULFILL NOT MY WILL BUT HIS WILL AND SO GOD IS USING ME TO FULFILL HIS WILL THROUGH ME ;NOW I CAN SAY THAT I HAVE GOD'S SPIRIT IN ME

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2013,19:45)

Jehovah of hosts is someone OTHER THAN the Jehovah who is speaking.

So only ONE of your two Jehovahs is “Jehovah of hosts”? Is that what you are claiming? (Be careful, because it WILL come back to bite you.)

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2013,19:45)

Also, the NET Bible notes have comments but it is not the scope of the translator notes to be a commentary.

So it DOES have comments, but it is NOT a commentary?

Okay……… my mistake.  

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2013,19:49)

His beginning was in regards to a begettal, not a creation.

At least two scriptures say differently. And look at this page.  The first thing they list after the big word “beget” is “create“.

Anyone who has ever been begotten has also been created, Kathi.  You think Jesus is the exception to this universal rule, but it is nothing but an unsupported thought.  

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2013,19:49)

He is Jehovah our Righteousness and Jehovah of hosts. He wouldn't have the name Jehovah of hosts and not be eternally self-existent.

Did you purposely leave “Jehovah our Righteousness” out of your claim because you know Israel is also called by that name?  

1.  There is no scriptural evidence that Jesus is ever called “Jehovah of hosts”.  This is just in your imagination.

2.  Many people have “Jehovah” as part of their names.  None of those people are “eternally self-existent”, are they?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2013,20:13)

Does Isaiah 8 identify the Jehovah of hosts as Jehovah the speaker or someone other than Jehovah the speaker?

Jehovah of hosts is the one speaking.

[Author]

Posts