- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 02 2009,20:50) This is a really interesting debate, my view can be found here. 4th post down.
PaulTrue and you make some good points here…
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)
here. 4th post down
WJ
I think these Genesis passages are problematic for the Arians. as they quite patently state that YHWH was seen. Yet the NT is just as emphatic in stating that The Father hasn't been seen….
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 02 2009,21:03) I think these Genesis passages are problematic for the Arians. as they quite patently state that YHWH was seen. Yet the NT is just as emphatic in stating that The Father hasn't been seen….
True!Is 1:18……> Haven't heard from you in quite a while , Hope your OK, Being we Know Scripture does not contradict itself, then we Should Believe what Jesus Said, NO Man has ever seen the Father, and John also said no man has ever seen GOD. God is Spirit and you can't see Spirit. It's like the wind you can see the effects of it (FRUITS) but you can't tell when it comes and where it goes.
gene
Quote (thethinker @ Sep. 25 2009,08:02) Job 16:19-21 says: 19 Even NOW my witness is in heaven;
my Advocate is on high.20 My Intercessor IS my friend
as my eyes pour out tears to God;21 on behalf of a man He pleads with God
as a man pleads for his friend. NIVHeaven Net friends,
Jesus Christ pre-existed His birth. Note that Job said that his Advocate is in heaven “even NOW.” Job knew his Advocate for he said, “He IS my friend.” He said that his Advocate “pleads with God as a man pleads for his friend.”The apostle John said that our Advocate is Jesus Christ (1 John 2:1). And Paul said that there is ony ONE mediator between God and man, “Jesus Christ the righteous.”
Okay Jodi Lee and Gene, if Christ was not pre-existent then who was Job's advocate? There is only ONE advocate or would you say two? If you say two then show it.
thinker
No offense but I have some issues with “NIV” alot of times.“Job 16:19-21 says:
19 Even NOW my witness is in heaven; my Advocate is on high.
20 My Intercessor IS my friend as my eyes pour out tears to God;
21 on behalf of a man He pleads with God as a man pleads for his friend. NIV”
Compared to:
Job 16:19-21 says:
19 Also now, behold, my witness [is] in heaven, and my record [is] on high.
20 My friends scorn me: [but] mine eye poureth out [tears] unto God.
21 O that one might plead for a man with God, as a man [pleadeth] for his neighbour! KJV
Pretty big difference just between the two versions, dont you think?
Also notice the word “witness” in verse 19. In the Hebrew the word “witness” is `ed contracted from `uwd meaning testimony or evidence. So in the Hebrew he is literally stating:
19 Also now, behold, my testimony [is] in heaven, and my record [is] on high. Or 19 Also now, behold, my evidence [is] in heaven, and my record [is] on high.
So this does not mean “witness” is not a good word to apply here because ones testimony or evidence is in fact witness for or against them. But the word in this verse should be viewed in its proper perspective.
Also the NIV left out the word “Behold”, it is amazing how a word added or removed can change the context.
Why would the “NIV” add “My Intercessor IS my friend” since it isn't even suggested in the KJV?
The “NIV” makes it look like something is being done on Job's behalf, where as the “KJV” shows that it is something JOB yearns for, pretty big difference.
Now, I pray I offended no one, but this is what I gleaned from these verses.
Blessings to all.
TO JODI LEE:
Jodi,
The verse below is Colossians 1:16 in the Greek and notice that the two words are “di” and “eis” meaning “through” and “for.”τὰ πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται
thinker
Constitutionalist said:
Quote The “NIV” makes it look like something is being done on Job's behalf, where as the “KJV” shows that it is something JOB yearns for, pretty big difference. Now, I pray I offended no one, but this is what I gleaned from these verses.
Const,
The problem with what you say here is that YHWH was actually advocating for Job in the story.Chapter 1:8
Quote Then the LORD said to Satan, “Have you considered My servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, one who fears God and shuns evil?”
.Chapter 2:3
Quote Then the LORD said to Satan, “Have you considered My servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, one who fears God and shuns evil? And still he holds fast to his integrity, although you incited Me against him, to destroy him without cause.” Chapter 42:7:
Quote And so it was, after the LORD had spoken these words to Job, that the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite, “My wrath is aroused against you and your two friends, for you have not spoken of Me what is right, as My servant Job has. Job was not “yearning” for an Advocate in heaven. He had an Advocate who was pleading his case all along and that was YHWH (Jesus) Himself.
thinker
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 03 2009,12:52) by g1722 ἐν en
him g846 αὐτός autos
were g2936 κτίζω ktizō
all things g3956 πᾶς pas
created, g2936 κτίζω ktizō
that are in g1722 ἐν en
heaven, g3772 οὐρανός ouranos
and g2532 καί kai
that are in g1909 ἐπί epi
earth, g1093 γῆ gē
visible g3707 ὁρατός horatos
and g2532 καί kai
invisible, g517 ἀόρατος aoratos
whether g1535 εἴτε eite
[they be] thrones, g2362 θρόνος thronos
or g1535 εἴτε eite
dominions, g2963 κυριότης kyriotēs
or g1535 εἴτε eite
principalities, g746 ἀρχή archē
or g1535 εἴτε eite
powers: g1849 ἐξουσία exousia
all things g3956 πᾶς pas
were created g2936 κτίζω ktizō
by g1223 διά dia ————————————–>dia “by or through”
him, g846 αὐτός autos
and g2532 καί kai
for g1519 εἰς eis————————————–>eis “for”
him: g846 αὐτός autosIn context the words do not mean the same thing or the passage makes no sense!
WJ
Keith,
You are correct and Jodi goes against ALL the translations including the NWT which is anti-trinitarian. She goes against ALL scholarship.thinker
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 03 2009,13:03) I think these Genesis passages are problematic for the Arians. as they quite patently state that YHWH was seen. Yet the NT is just as emphatic in stating that The Father hasn't been seen….
Hey Is. 1:18,
It is good to see you back. In my estimation John 1:18 is grossly misunderstood. It says,“No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.”
The word “declared” here is the Greek “exegesis” from which we get our word “to explain.” John meant that no man has seen God with the understanding except the only begotten Son; “He has explained Him.”
John was referring to seeing with the understanding. “No man has understood God at any time.” We know that there were many times that old testament saints saw God with their eyes. Jacob called the place he wrestled with God “Peniel” because he had seen God “face to face.” Hagar identified the Messenger as “the God who see me” because “I have seen Him.”
Gnosticism and its wife Arianism start out with the presupposition that God cannot change or Himself become immanent. Job had to deal with a Gnostic in the person of Bildad the Shuhite and we still must deal with Gnostics today.
thinker
DUPLICATE FOR JODI LEE'S ATTENTION
TO JODI LEE:
Jodi,
The verse below is Colossians 1:16 in the Greek and notice that the two words are “di” and “eis” meaning “through” and “for.”τὰ πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται
thinker
Quote (Gene @ Oct. 03 2009,15:35) Is 1:18……> Haven't heard from you in quite a while , Hope your OK, Being we Know Scripture does not contradict itself, then we Should Believe what Jesus Said, NO Man has ever seen the Father, and John also said no man has ever seen GOD. God is Spirit and you can't see Spirit. It's like the wind you can see the effects of it (FRUITS) but you can't tell when it comes and where it goes. gene
Hello Gene,
Kinda good to be back. Unfortunately I can't be on here as much as I would like do to various committments. Regretfully this might be the only nicety we exchange for a while. Sad, but history will bear that out. I've looked hard at this and have come to the conclusion that the only way to reconcile the two precepts (i.e. no one has seen the Father, God was seen) is trinitarianism or binatarianism. I'm open for suggestions….What have you got?
Quote (thethinker @ Oct. 03 2009,20:24) Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 03 2009,13:03) I think these Genesis passages are problematic for the Arians. as they quite patently state that YHWH was seen. Yet the NT is just as emphatic in stating that The Father hasn't been seen….
Hey Is. 1:18,
It is good to see you back. In my estimation John 1:18 is grossly misunderstood. It says,“No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.”
The word “declared” here is the Greek “exegesis” from which we get our word “to explain.” John meant that no man has seen God with the understanding except the only begotten Son; “He has explained Him.”
John was referring to seeing with the understanding. “No man has understood God at any time.” We know that there were many times that old testament saints saw God with their eyes. Jacob called the place he wrestled with God “Peniel” because he had seen God “face to face.” Hagar identified the Messenger as “the God who see me” because “I have seen Him.”
Gnosticism and its wife Arianism start out with the presupposition that God cannot change or Himself become immanent. Job had to deal with a Gnostic in the person of Bildad the Shuhite and we still must deal with Gnostics today.
thinker
I agree, good point about John 1:18. To be honest I can't get past the use of first person pronouns that YHWH used when dialoguing with people in the OT (e.g. Genesis 18). When YHWH sends a messenger (e.g. the prophets) they speak for Him, not as Him.Quote (thethinker @ Oct. 03 2009,00:57) Constitutionalist said: Quote The “NIV” makes it look like something is being done on Job's behalf, where as the “KJV” shows that it is something JOB yearns for, pretty big difference. Now, I pray I offended no one, but this is what I gleaned from these verses.
Const,
The problem with what you say here is that YHWH was actually advocating for Job in the story.Chapter 1:8
Quote Then the LORD said to Satan, “Have you considered My servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, one who fears God and shuns evil?”
.Chapter 2:3
Quote Then the LORD said to Satan, “Have you considered My servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, one who fears God and shuns evil? And still he holds fast to his integrity, although you incited Me against him, to destroy him without cause.” Chapter 42:7:
Quote And so it was, after the LORD had spoken these words to Job, that the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite, “My wrath is aroused against you and your two friends, for you have not spoken of Me what is right, as My servant Job has. Job was not “yearning” for an Advocate in heaven. He had an Advocate who was pleading his case all along and that was YHWH (Jesus) Himself.
thinker
Yes you are correct that in most parts of God does stick up for Job.But we are speaking about the original verses at the beginning of this topic.
But also their are other characters in this story;
Satan: He speaks for himself and speaks against Job.
Job: He speaks for himself
Jobs Friends: They speak for themslevesIn the verse in question, Job is speaking for himself and yes he is yearning.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 03 2009,12:03) Quote (thethinker @ Oct. 02 2009,19:44) Quote (t8 @ Oct. 03 2009,11:17) Quote (thethinker @ Oct. 03 2009,09:06) The narrative clearly says that it was God Himself who spoke from the midst of the bush, “So when the LORD saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, “Moses, Moses!” And he said, “Here I am.”
Moses thought that it was YHWH Himself who spoke, “Then Moses answered and said, “But suppose they will not believe me or listen to my voice; suppose they say, ‘YHWH has not appeared to you’”, Exodus 4:1). Therefore, the Messenger was God and shared the name YHWH with YHWH.
God can also speak through us. You know that.God is an invisible spirit, and he speaks through people and primarily through his only begotten.
Besides, here is what the writer of the Book of Acts says about this event. It is obviously different to the way you see it.
Acts 7:30
“After forty years had passed, an angel appeared to Moses in the flames of a burning bush in the desert near Mount Sinai.Notice the word 'angel'. That word means messenger. This also agrees with the fact that God is invisible and no one has seen him and that Christ is the visible representation of the invisible God and that angels are spirits that reflect God's glory.
It wasn't the Most High God that appeared VISIBLY in the burning bush, but a visible messenger of God.
t8,
When did I say that God cannot speak through us? The Messenger of Jehovah said “I am the God of your fathers” (Exodus 3). To Hagar He said, “I will multiply your seed.”But the messenger Gabriel did not speak like this. He said to Mary, “The power of the Most High will come upon you.” Why didn't the Messenger which came to Hagar and Moses do the same as Gabriel?
thinker
JackTrue! And the messanger that spoke to Moses out of the Bush identified “Himself” as YHWH. No Angel has ever identified themselves as YHWH.
Therefore the Messenger must be Jesus who is YHWH.
This blindness is happened to them accrording to the scriptures!
WJ
So your conclusion must be that the writer of the Book of Acts got it wrong, or the translation is wrong.Acts 7:30
“After forty years had passed, an angel appeared to Moses in the flames of a burning bush in the desert near Mount Sinai.It is obvious to all that you disagree with the above scripture.
What's up with that?Can you not see that God sends messengers to do his bidding. He even uses Michael to imprison the Devil for 1000 years and he sent Christ to die for us.
In fact God who gave the Revelation to Jesus, communicated it to his angel.
The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John,
There is an order when God does things. If you think that God takes on a body and does thing himself, then you are sadly mistaken. God is an eternal spirit who exists even outside his own creation. You obviously haven't a clue about how much greater God is to us. You can't expect that God was going to die and eat bread, and appear in a finite body in a burning bush. God dwells in us. Not as one of us. Your thinking is carnal WJ and you heart must be hard in order for you not to be able to grasp something as simple as this.
You also obviously disagree with Paul when he says “which God will bring about in his own time, God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen”
I mean Paul is very clear that no one has seen God and can see him. But you disagree with this too.
Of course to those who have ears, what we actually see is God's glory and the greatest revelation of his glory is in the face of Christ.
Wake up WJ. Repent. Believe that which is written.
Are you for God or not? If you are, then respect his scripture which was inspired by him. If not, then what exactly is the point of rebelling against that which he reveals to his faithful? What do you hope to gain by denying his truths?
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 03 2009,20:43) Quote (thethinker @ Oct. 03 2009,20:24) Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 03 2009,13:03) I think these Genesis passages are problematic for the Arians. as they quite patently state that YHWH was seen. Yet the NT is just as emphatic in stating that The Father hasn't been seen….
Hey Is. 1:18,
It is good to see you back. In my estimation John 1:18 is grossly misunderstood. It says,“No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.”
The word “declared” here is the Greek “exegesis” from which we get our word “to explain.” John meant that no man has seen God with the understanding except the only begotten Son; “He has explained Him.”
John was referring to seeing with the understanding. “No man has understood God at any time.” We know that there were many times that old testament saints saw God with their eyes. Jacob called the place he wrestled with God “Peniel” because he had seen God “face to face.” Hagar identified the Messenger as “the God who see me” because “I have seen Him.”
Gnosticism and its wife Arianism start out with the presupposition that God cannot change or Himself become immanent. Job had to deal with a Gnostic in the person of Bildad the Shuhite and we still must deal with Gnostics today.
thinker
I agree, good point about John 1:18. To be honest I can't get past the use of first person pronouns that YHWH used when dialoguing with people in the OT (e.g. Genesis 18). When YHWH sends a messenger (e.g. the prophets) they speak for Him, not as Him.
Yet today, due to the redemptive work in Christ, God can speak and dwell in us. I don't think this was possible in the past, with the exception of Jesus who had never sinned.Although John the Baptist might be a special case, as he was the prophesied Elijah to come.
Jesus said that he was the greatest of those born of a woman, yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he because we can be born of the Spirit. That means we have a greater privileged than even the greatest of the prophets of old.So comparing Jesus and other prophets requires such an understanding.
Quote (t8 @ Oct. 03 2009,02:41) Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 03 2009,20:43) Quote (thethinker @ Oct. 03 2009,20:24) Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 03 2009,13:03) I think these Genesis passages are problematic for the Arians. as they quite patently state that YHWH was seen. Yet the NT is just as emphatic in stating that The Father hasn't been seen….
Hey Is. 1:18,
It is good to see you back. In my estimation John 1:18 is grossly misunderstood. It says,“No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.”
The word “declared” here is the Greek “exegesis” from which we get our word “to explain.” John meant that no man has seen God with the understanding except the only begotten Son; “He has explained Him.”
John was referring to seeing with the understanding. “No man has understood God at any time.” We know that there were many times that old testament saints saw God with their eyes. Jacob called the place he wrestled with God “Peniel” because he had seen God “face to face.” Hagar identified the Messenger as “the God who see me” because “I have seen Him.”
Gnosticism and its wife Arianism start out with the presupposition that God cannot change or Himself become immanent. Job had to deal with a Gnostic in the person of Bildad the Shuhite and we still must deal with Gnostics today.
thinker
I agree, good point about John 1:18. To be honest I can't get past the use of first person pronouns that YHWH used when dialoguing with people in the OT (e.g. Genesis 18). When YHWH sends a messenger (e.g. the prophets) they speak for Him, not as Him.
Yet today, due to the redemptive work in Christ, God can speak and dwell in us. I don't think this was possible in the past, with the exception of Jesus who had never sinned.Although John the Baptist might be a special case, as he was the prophesied Elijah to come.
Jesus said that he was the greatest of those born of a woman, yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he because we can be born of the Spirit. That means we have a greater privileged than even the greatest of the prophets of old.So comparing Jesus and other prophets requires such an understanding.
I like that avatar, it's cool.Is 1:18………> In my opinion, God is Spirit and Spirit is expressed in words, Words can not be physically seen they are perceptions of the mind and expressions of thought. GOD is Pure LIGHT or TRUTH. WE can only see GOD through the MINDS EYE, Jesus said no one has seen GOD , but He has disclosed HIM. The way GOD was (IN) Jesus was through the MIND, and if this mind be in US it will also quicken or bring Us back to life also, as it did Jesus. The Spirit is the mind of a person, we can see the persons flesh but we can see the thoughts of that person, but he can express them through his mouth. And by that we are able to try His spirit. Spirit is what enlightens and animates Gods Creation, it gives it life. God lives vicariously through His creation He is the (ONLY) one who is Pure Spirit, Without a Body that is visible to us or anyone else.
We are told in John that a time will come when Jesus would show us plainly about the Father, he said He talked about Him through proverbs. He also said we would no longer ask him anything. There seem to be a more in depth understand about the FATHER yet to come. I believe that will be that It is impossible to really see GOD HIMSELF, His presents is through SPIRIT ONLY>He co-habits and indwells his creation, therefore GOD the FATHER was truly in Jesus and can exist in (ALL) and through (ALL)> IMO
gene
Gene: Very nicely put. If we take that and expand it a little more you could say that (Jesus) the word of God was with God in the beginning. The word of God (Jesus) was with God when he created the worlds. The word even pre-existed creation. Further, we are now becoming the word of God made flesh in a man, as we tear away thoughts and doctrines that deny this Truth. So, we were at the beginning in Christ with Jesus as the word in God at the forming of all creation. Just like a man is a male, a husband, a grandfather, an uncle, a Mr. and so on yet one. He is ONE man with many aspects. Lets get over the word trinity and just know that God is his word, which is his spirit which is from God, which created billions sons and daughters which are all aspects of God. We are from God and ONE with God.There will be no division in the body of Christ when all come to the knowledge that we are all ONE! There also will be no division in the body because if all are one there is no judgment. The only thing that separates us from one another, is not knowing, believing and understanding this as the Truth of God. Bless all forever, TK
TK………..The problem with what you said is the fact Jesus did (NOT) preexist HIS Berth here on earth only in the plan and Will of GOD. The Word in John is GOD HIMSELF and Has nothing to do with Jesus in the beginning, This word who was GOD came and (INDWELL) the (MAN) Jesus, and Yes that WORD or GOD was in the Beginning, but NOT Jesus the MAN , he only existed in the Plan of GOD and at the right time GOD brought Him forth through a unique Berth through Mary, He was the reason GOD created this whole creation it was for this purpose (second) Adam , Jesus being the first fruit of this creation, that was intended from the start of creation, as Jodi clearly brought out for any who have ears to Hear and eyes to see. IMO
peace and love…………….gene
Quote (thethinker @ Oct. 03 2009,04:24) Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 03 2009,13:03) I think these Genesis passages are problematic for the Arians. as they quite patently state that YHWH was seen. Yet the NT is just as emphatic in stating that The Father hasn't been seen….
Hey Is. 1:18,
It is good to see you back. In my estimation John 1:18 is grossly misunderstood. It says,“No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.”
The word “declared” here is the Greek “exegesis” from which we get our word “to explain.” John meant that no man has seen God with the understanding except the only begotten Son; “He has explained Him.”
John was referring to seeing with the understanding. “No man has understood God at any time.” We know that there were many times that old testament saints saw God with their eyes. Jacob called the place he wrestled with God “Peniel” because he had seen God “face to face.” Hagar identified the Messenger as “the God who see me” because “I have seen Him.”
Gnosticism and its wife Arianism start out with the presupposition that God cannot change or Himself become immanent. Job had to deal with a Gnostic in the person of Bildad the Shuhite and we still must deal with Gnostics today.
thinker
Hi JackI have to disagree with you on this one.
I think Jesus did see the Father. The Greek word almost invariably is used in the NT for actually seeing with the eye.
It ties in beautifully with what Jesus who is the Image of the invisible God said in John 14 when he said they had seen the Father when they have seen him.
Jesus surely did make the Father known and they could see the visible image of God in the flesh when they seen him. IMO
WJ
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
