Worship God the Father only?

Participant

Quote (mikeangel @ Nov. 20 2010,07:24)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 19 2010,09:10)

Quote (mikeangel @ Nov. 18 2010,20:37)

1) They were worshiping the spirit of God, not Elisha. Also the spirit of God in David, who could do nothing in himself but only with Gods sprit.Moooooo

2) You can second guess the writers of the bible. I will accept it as Gods word to me. Mooooo

Hi Mark,

1) So why wouldn't you think the same thing about Jesus? You do understand he is the SON of God, not GOD, right?
You say that when they bowed before David, they were “worshipping the SPIRIT of God”, but when they did it before Jesus, for some reason now you have to change the meaning of the same exact word and action and say they were worshippping him AS God.

Paul said this,

1 Corinthians 8:6 (New International Version)
6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

Paul knew who God was, and he knew that Jesus was someone other than and lessor to God. And Paul also said this,

Acts 24:14 (Contemporary English Version)
14I admit that their leaders think that the Lord's Way which I follow is based on wrong beliefs. But I still worship the same God that my ancestors worshiped. And I believe everything written in the Law of Moses and in the Prophets.

This is the same Paul that many times said “I thank the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ for you….” So if Paul knew that our God was also Jesus' God, and he believed and followed everything written in the Law and the Prophets, and “worship ONLY Jehovah” is written there many times, who do you think Paul worshipped?

Listen Mark, you have to decide whether Jesus is God Himself or the Son of God. If you think Jesus IS God, then that's another topic altogether. But if you believe the scriptures that say our God is also Jesus' God, then you know Jesus is NOT God Himself. And if that's the case, then like Kathi, you choose to make a second “God” and worship him also.

2) Would you like me to re-post the NWT's version of each of the scriptures Kathi posted? I guarantee that not one of them say anything about anybody “worshipping” Jesus. So exactly which of these flawed human men's words will you accept as “God's word”? The ones who translated “proskuneo” as “worshipped”, or the ones who translated it as “did obeisance”? And what reasons would you give for your choice?

peace and love,
mike

You could post all you want. Thank you for presenting this. Like all the info I recieve on here, when I read something on here, I research it to find out for myself. Since I joined this I have done more bible study in my 47 years of life in the past several months. This is no differant.

I posted before many, many different translations that quoted scriptures giving examples of Jesus being worshiped, yet you do not agree, and in the above quote you state that you would show me the “correct” meaning of scripture in the NWT. I never knew what this was, so I looked into it.

The NWT is the translation done by the Jehova's witnesses. The history can be obtained by search, like I did. Due to this I will assume you are a JW. I am sorry if I am wrong, but since you base your understanding of the scriptures on this version, that is what I am assuming from my research, due to the fact that is was comissioned and published by them, and they have copyright.

Knowing that, I searched the JWs,, and read about them. Everyone is entitled to there own beliefs, as am I , but I do not agree with it. I can not comprehend that all other beliefs are wrong, and they are exclusively right, and are the only ones who are not under the influance of satan, as they believe. They translate the bible, under thier own pre-concieved notions, and quote it to support thier own beliefs. That explains to me why I can quote you many multiple translations, and you think they are incorrect because they do not come from the NWT.

I have come to the conclusion that this is a waste of time……….JWs have predicted and prophysied many dates that have come and gone with nothing happening, and like moses said, “If what they prophesy does not come to pass, have no fear of them”

Moo?

Peace and love-Mark

Hi Mark,
Mike consistently shows us how the NWT translates proskuneo as not 'worship' when given to Jesus. He knows that those that developed the NWT believed that Jesus was an angel and they translate accordingly since the Bible speaks directly to not worshiping angels. In another thread Mike claims that Jesus is not an angel. So it is confusing to me that he would put so much emphasis on the NWT's translation of proskuneo knowing what the viewpoint they are translating from. It is like there is a blind spot there. I would think that he would run from the NWT but instead embraces it.

Nevertheless, giving religious obeisance towards 'a god' would certainly be against the first commandment if the 'god' were not the true 'God' or a part of the true 'God.'

The NWT does call the word 'a god' in John 1:1 but the JW's don't see that they violate the first commandment with their religious obeisance towards God the Father and a god that is not the Father. That is totally against the commandment.

Exodus 20

1`And God speaketh all these words, saying,

2I [am] Jehovah thy God, who hath brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of a house of servants.

3`Thou hast no other Gods before Me.

4`Thou dost not make to thyself a graven image, or any likeness which [is] in the heavens above, or which [is] in the earth beneath, or which [is] in the waters under the earth.

5Thou dost not bow thyself to them, nor serve them: for I, Jehovah thy God, [am] a zealous God, charging iniquity of fathers on sons, on the third [generation], and on the fourth, of those hating Me,

November 20, 2010 at 7:19 pm#225802

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ Nov. 19 2010,11:29)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 18 2010,17:39)

Quote (Lightenup @ Nov. 19 2010,07:31)

true but He tells Peter to feed HIS sheep, He doesn't say to feed His Father's sheep but His sheep.

Does Jesus refer to the ones that his God has given him out of the world?

Scriptures say “Yes”. In fact, Jesus says, “they were yours, but you gave them to me.”

mike

Mike,
I think that was talking about the disciples.

Are you not a disciple of Jesus Kathi?

mike

November 20, 2010 at 7:27 pm#225803

Participant

Moo?

November 20, 2010 at 7:54 pm#225809

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 21 2010,05:19)

Quote (Lightenup @ Nov. 19 2010,11:29)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 18 2010,17:39)

Quote (Lightenup @ Nov. 19 2010,07:31)

true but He tells Peter to feed HIS sheep, He doesn't say to feed His Father's sheep but His sheep.

Does Jesus refer to the ones that his God has given him out of the world?

Scriptures say “Yes”. In fact, Jesus says, “they were yours, but you gave them to me.”

mike

Mike,
I think that was talking about the disciples.

Are you not a disciple of Jesus Kathi?

mike

I think he was talking about apostles.The 12 he chose and told them they would judge the 12 tribes of Isreal, which after Jesus, became all who believe in Christ. One of which, he said in this conversation, would go on to betray him, later on would be replaced in Acts. We are all Diciples who believe. Peace- Mark

November 20, 2010 at 8:06 pm#225810

Blocked

Quote (mikeangel @ Nov. 20 2010,23:24)

Due to this I will assume you are a JW.

Hi Mark,

And once again the old “assume” addage is proven true!

I am not a JW, nor do I believe everything that they do. In fact I strongly oppose some of their understandings of scripture, especially that Jesus actually IS the archangel Michael.

What I was pointing out is that the word “proskuneo” CAN mean either the worship due God OR simply a showing of reverence and honor to others. And I was asking if you wanted to believe the MEN who translated the trinity-biased Bibles like the NIV and KJV…….OR the MEN who translated the NWT.

While even some of the trinitarian slanted translations vary on when the use the word “worship”, I choose the “doing obeisance” rendering – not because the JW's say so, but because it fits better into scripture as a whole.

Jesus said that only the Father is worthy of our worship. It makes no sense to me that he would then let others “worship” him in contrast to what he taught. God never says we cannot bow down to show our reverence to another, as is show by the many times it happened throughout scripture. Jesus surely knew this, and knew that is the reason he was bowed down to. And since the word can mean either, which makes more sense?

Now, the only other option I see is that Jesus knew he WAS God, so it was okay to be “worshipped”. If you think that, then we have a long scriptural discussion ahead of us Mark.

Look Mark, one of the times Jesus was supposedly “worshipped”, the Pharisees were present. They were looking for a reason to have Jesus killed anyway – wouldn't this have sufficed?

Add all the info up knowing the word could mean either/or, and what fits better into scripture?

peace and love,
mike

November 20, 2010 at 8:27 pm#225812

Participant

Are you telling me you “know” what Jesus “knew”? Also why would you think the JWs rendering would be correct and most all other bibles are wrong when they state “worship”? Who would give a son a snake when he ask for a fish? If Jesus and his Father are one, and he told us he would be with us until the end, which would have to be by spirit he promised at pentacost, a cow would discern they all compose God and deserve worship, IMO. We can have as long a a scriptural discussion as you want but you cannot say what Jesus knew, but we will find out one day……………. Peace Mark

November 20, 2010 at 9:02 pm#225817

Participant

Mike said about the NWT's tranlation of proskuneo:

Quote

What I was pointing out is that the word “proskuneo” CAN mean either the worship due God OR simply a showing of reverence and honor to others.

What you need to realize is that proskuneo can mean either religious worship or civil worship. Religious reverence and honor to 'a god' would violate the first commandment so when done to 'a god,' you disobey God's commandments. You can see that no matter how the word is translated, if given to a god it is in direct violation of the command of God and Mike doesn't seem to realize this. Jesus is not 'a god' but God with God the Father as one wisdom, one power, one nature or essence, one kind, one purpose, deserving of religious devotion, honor and worship together. God is more than the Father, Jesus is more than a god.

November 20, 2010 at 9:03 pm#225818

Participant

Quote (mikeangel @ Nov. 20 2010,13:54)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 21 2010,05:19)

Quote (Lightenup @ Nov. 19 2010,11:29)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 18 2010,17:39)

Quote (Lightenup @ Nov. 19 2010,07:31)

true but He tells Peter to feed HIS sheep, He doesn't say to feed His Father's sheep but His sheep.

Does Jesus refer to the ones that his God has given him out of the world?

Scriptures say “Yes”. In fact, Jesus says, “they were yours, but you gave them to me.”

mike

Mike,
I think that was talking about the disciples.

Are you not a disciple of Jesus Kathi?

mike

True, Mark.

November 20, 2010 at 9:31 pm#225821

Participant

“What I was pointing out is that the word “proskuneo” CAN mean either the worship due God OR simply a showing of reverence and honor to others. And I was asking if you wanted to believe the MEN who translated the trinity-biased Bibles like the NIV and KJV…….OR the MEN who translated the NWT.”

As I stated before, I wouldn't trust the men who translated the NWT, I'm not a JW, why would I?

November 21, 2010 at 12:33 am#225840

Blocked

Quote (mikeangel @ Nov. 21 2010,07:31)

As I stated before, I wouldn't trust the men who translated the NWT, I'm not a JW, why would I?

Okay Mark,

That statement says alot about you Mark. I wouldn't dismiss any translation based on that reason. But then again, I actually check out the Hebrew and Greek words to find out what a scripture is REALLY saying before making my decision.

Did you catch the part of my last post where I mentioned that even the trinitarian Bibles disagree on “worship” on various scriptures? So forget the NWT, which one of the OTHERS will you believe when one says “bowed down before” and another says “worshipped” in the same scripture? And why?

By the way Mark, the NIV, which was translated by 100 scholars who had to sign off on being a trinitarian before being allowed on the project is my overall favorite translation – not the NWT.

Your comment about the NWT translation struck a bad chord with me. To me, it is no different than a bigot saying he wouldn't read the version translated by a black man – or a sexist saying he wouldn't read the version translated by a woman.

The NWT translates the same scriptures faithfully and honestly. It is a very good translation – based on the three I've read word for word so far.

And you answered NONE of the logic parts of my post. Why would Jesus teach us to worship ONLY Jehovah, but then allow others to worship him?

mike

November 21, 2010 at 1:00 am#225847

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ Nov. 21 2010,04:01)

Wow Kathi.

I guess if you can't beat them with scripture, do whatever else comes natural. When one of your “approved” translations use “worship” while another one of your “approved” translations use “bowed down before” for the same scripture, what is your “insult” against that translation that used “bowed down before” then?

I find it very sad that both you and Mark jumped right over the point in question in favor of implying something's wrong with the NWT. Did you both forget the actual point here?

The word “proskuneo” could mean worship to “a god”, or it could mean the showing of reverence to someone not even considered as “a god”. So instead of the point being, “Which way do most of the mainstream Bibles translate it?”, it should be, “Which rendering of proskuneo fits best with the rest of scripture?”

Here's what we KNOW from scripture:
Scripture says to worship ONLY Jehovah. Scripture cannot be broken. So either Jesus WAS Jehovah Himself on earth, or his disciples did not worship him.

Here's a very DIRECT question for both of you:
Why do you insist that it means “God-Worship” in each and every reference to Jesus? What scripture makes you think this? One scripture at a time please.

I'll start.

38 Then the man said, “Lord, I believe,” and he worshiped him.

39 Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind.”

40 Some Pharisees who were with him heard him say this and asked, “What? Are we blind too?”

Did the Pharisees who were already looking for a reason to have Jesus killed really witness him receiving the worship due only to Jehovah and say nothing about it?

Okay, your turn Mark and Kathi. One scripture or passage only. Show me one that “insists” it was “God-Worship” given to Jesus instead of extreme awe and reverence.

peace and love,
mike

November 21, 2010 at 4:38 am#225880

Participant

Mike,

you said:

Quote

Why do you insist that it means “God-Worship” in each and every reference to Jesus?

Let me refine your question to “Why do you insist that it means 'religious worship' in several references to Jesus?

It is like you gloss right over the term I use…'religious worship' vs. 'civil worship.' I believe that the people gave Jesus religious worship and not civil worship. Regarding the pharisees and the blind man…they knew he was giving Jesus religious worship, they knew he was declaring himself as a disciple of Jesus, all which they punished him for by casting him out of the temple. Soon after they attempted to stone Jesus for making Himself equal to God. Give it up Mike with the Pharisees and the blind man. It was clearly not civil worship or even civil homage but religious in nature. Nevertheless there were several passages that used the word proskuneo towards Jesus.

I am convinced that the proskuneo-ing given to Jesus was typically not civil worship…He did not have a kingdom on earth, so if anyone talked about His kingdom, they were referring to a heavenly kingdom, hence not civil worship but religious worship as faith showed them He was from God. You seem to think that every instance that Jesus was proskuneo-ed it was civil worship and that just isn't so. He was not an earthly king but a heavenly king. Earthly kings get civil worship, heavenly kings get religious worship. The OT taught of a heavenly kingdom and Jesus taught of a heavenly kingdom. Jesus was worshiped by His disciples and if they did that so will I. I have the faith that He is as much a part of the Father as a ray of the sun.

Look at this instance and you can clearly see that this is not civil worship:

50 And He led them out as far as Bethany, and He lifted up His hands and blessed them. 51 While He was blessing them, He parted from them and was carried up into heaven. 52 And they, after worshiping Him, returned to Jerusalem with great joy, 53 and were continually in the temple praising God.

Some commentary on this:
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
They worshipped him – The word “worship” does not “always” denote religious homage. See the notes at Matthew 2:11. Compare Luke 14:10. But here it is to be remarked,

1. That they offered this worship to an “absent” Saviour. It was “after” he left them and had vanished out of their sight. It was, therefore, an act of religion, and was the “first” religious homage that was paid to Jesus after he had left the world.

2. If “they” worshipped an absent Saviour – a Saviour unseen by the bodily eye, it is right for “us” to do it. It was an example which we “may and should” follow.

3. If worship may be rendered to Jesus, he is divine. See Exodus 20:4-5.

Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
They worshipped him – Let it be observed that this worship was not given by way of civil respect, for it was after he was parted from them, and carried back into heaven, that they offered it to him; but acts of civil respect are always performed in the presence of the person. They adored him as their God, and were certainly too much enlightened to be capable of any species of idolatry.

Returned to Jerusalem with great joy – Having the fullest proof that Jesus was the promised Messiah; and that they had a full commission to preach repentance and remission of sin to mankind, and that they should be Divinely qualified for this great work by receiving the promise of the Father, Luke 24:49.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
And they worshipped him,…. Not with a civil worship, as he was sometimes worshipped by men, in the days of his flesh, who, though they took him for some extraordinary person, knew him not to be the Son of God; but with religious worship as God: for by his resurrection from the dead, Christ was declared to be the Son of God, and both by that, and by his going to his Father, his ascension to heaven, the disciples were more confirmed in his proper deity, and divine sonship; and therefore worshipped him as God; by calling upon his name, ascribing blessings and honour, and glory, to him; by making him the object of their reverence and fear; and by trusting in him; and by doing every religious act in his name, and which they ever after continued to do:

and returned to Jerusalem: as they were ordered, where they were to tarry and wait for the pouring down of the Spirit: and this they did

with great joy; for though their Lord was parted from them, and was gone to heaven, this did not cause sorrow, as did his death, but, on the contrary, joy, even great joy; partly because of the glory he was entered into, and possessed of; and partly on account of what he was gone to do for them; to appear in the presence of God for them, to make intercession for them, to take possession of heaven in their name, and to prepare a place for them, as well as to receive gifts for them; and now they return to Jerusalem with great cheerfulness, in full hope and expectation, yea, assurance of faith, that they should shortly receive the promise of the Father.

from: http://bible.cc/luke/24-52.htm

November 21, 2010 at 12:10 pm#225897

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ Nov. 21 2010,14:38)

Mike,

you said:

Quote

Why do you insist that it means “God-Worship” in each and every reference to Jesus?

Let me refine your question to “Why do you insist that it means 'religious worship' in several references to Jesus?

Look at this instance and you can clearly see that this is not civil worship:

2. If “they” worshipped an absent Saviour – a Saviour unseen by the bodily eye, it is right for “us” to do it. It was an example which we “may and should” follow.

3. If worship may be rendered to Jesus, he is divine. See Exodus 20:4-5.

and returned to Jerusalem: as they were ordered, where they were to tarry and wait for the pouring down of the Spirit: and this they did

from: http://bible.cc/luke/24-52.htm

I couldn't have said it better. Great post Kathi!

Mike,

I was just saying that if you read my post on the origins of the NWT, and who wrote it, it would explain my skepticism. It's like why when I need to quote scripture, I use that bible concordance, because if I used the Catholic bible (big c) One could easily and correctly state that it would be biased according to pre-concieved notions. Like, if you were anti-trinitarian, it would most certainly have an impact on how you translate……….But, my fellow bible scholar Kathi makes a very good point, you cant call worshiping a absent savior and christ” proskuneo “, and if your NWT uses the same term for that instance, wouldn't that cast doubt on your whole argument?

There were many instances where the pharasees wanted to kill Jesus and couldn't and didn't. It wasn't because the correct hommage, proskuneo, or worship was observed, it was because it wasn't his time, as scripture states.

Believe it or not, I really am trying to look at your arguement with an open mind. But as of now here are my major roadblocks:

1. He plainly states he is one with the Father “I and the Father are one”, “when you see me, you have seen the Father”

2. What Kathi just posted, that is worship, no matter the translation.

3. Why would Jesus say that sins against him and the Father could be forgiven, but that sins against the holy spirit could not? “the word was a God”

4. Could the anti-Catholic (mostly well deserved) resentment among bible translators skew the intracate renderings of similar actions and feelings?

5. Knowing how false in structure and predictions the translators of the NWT were, why is it biggotry to you for me to doubt it?

6. The spirit- Explain how Jesus can be with me now and until the end of the world and be at the Fathers right hand at the same time? How do you reconcile that?

Now, to change the subject slightly. Lets look at worship/adoration/affection/proskuneo etc. right now. To expand the subject, worship also includes whatever you turn your attention and affection to. (4. 4extravagant respect or admiration for or devotion to an object of esteem – ) You can claim to worship God, but i
f God or Godly things are not practiced in your life you do not even worship Jehova. If you say you love God, yet do not help those in need, you are a liar. If you give god kudos on here, and even go to church, but show little emotion, and then watch football, racing etc. all weekend and talk about it all week,
Who do you worship? I am about to go to church. When I get there their will be many cars with NFL logos on them, Kids soccer, hunting, Rock and roll band names, but no christian fish. WHO DO THEY WORSHIP? Our country has evicted God out of Government, allowing many evils to become leagal, and honor all the founding fathers, Washington monument, Lincoln memorial, desacrating Mt. rushmore with Presidents, while at the same time removing anything that has to do with God,WHO DO THEY WORSHIP? I went to drop my wife off at her friends house last night, and driving down Evils Prestly Blvd. there were the usual band of tourist from all over the country and world, with Evils impersonators walking on the sidewalk. with people saying ” There's the King” WHO DO THEY WORSHIP?

It was written that I be Baptised in the name of the Father, and of the son, and of the holy spirit. True to my baptism, I also pray to them. I worship them. I long for them. Jesus is 'The King'. FULL authority has been granted to him.

Also, as I stated before, you give Jesus as much credit as the muslims do. They say Jesus was a prophet, and aknowledge he did miracles and was born to a virgin, but deny he was God's literal son, with the Kingship and authority of the Father, worthy to be worshiped. Moo?

Peace and Love -Mark

November 21, 2010 at 12:17 pm#225898

Participant

IMO the devil has really done a good job of screwing things up when I actually have people telling me it's wrong to worship Jesus.

November 21, 2010 at 7:09 pm#225936

Blocked

Quote (mikeangel @ Nov. 21 2010,22:17)

IMO the devil has really done a good job of screwing things up when I actually have people telling me it's wrong to worship Jesus.

Hi Mark,

And IMO, the Devil has done an excellent job in convincing people it's okay to worship someone other than Jehovah, when many scriptures, including one that Jesus himself quoted, say He is the ONLY One worthy of our worship.

It's like I've told Kathi before: Satan's goal is to separate people from God and get them to break His commandments. He is smart and knows that he can't cause someone with as much faith as you have to break away from God's commands through the delusions of big bangs and evolution. He knows he can't get you to worship Buddah or an idol. So what's his best game plan then? Convincing people that God would be “cool” with people worshipping someone other than Him – as long as that person is His Son.

He is winning, and that, IMO, is the main reason WHY the narrow road has so few finding it.

peace and love,
mike

November 21, 2010 at 7:38 pm#225938

Blocked

No Kathi,

Please DON'T refine my question. There is worship, and then there is doing obeisance. There is no such thing as “civil worship”. What you're calling “civil worship” is “doing obeisance” and is not “worship” at all.

When the man bowed to King David, he was not performing “civil worship” Kathi, for any kind of “worship” given to King David would have been against the commandments of God.

This is just another “word game” that someone has come up with as a diversion.

About your post, first let me point out that even your source says that the times that people bowed to him on earth were NOT the so-called “religious worship”. Can we agree on this? Is this enough to show you, Mark and Keith that proskuneo didn't ALWAYS mean “religious worship”?

If you and Mark, who apparently loved your post, agree that NOT ALL times of proskuneo meant “religious worship”, because as your own source says, “Not with a civil worship, as he was sometimes worshipped by men, in the days of his flesh, who, though they took him for some extraordinary person, knew him not to be the Son of God;”, then I will be happy to discuss the Luke passage with you.

So……..do you both agree that while on earth, Jesus was NOT “religious-worshipped”?

peace and love,
mike

November 21, 2010 at 7:42 pm#225939

SimplyForgiven

Participant

If God is not a God of confusion, than How is it that it has comes to defining an ancient language to determine whom to Worship,
Wouldnt it be better to ask him, not based on our biaseness?
The same God who inspired the writing of the commandments and scriptures is the Living God that currently exists today,
have we become dependant on proving what God thinks based on language, and inpterpretation of words and grammer?
The only reason one would refer back to ancient manuscript as some of the first fathers of christiantiy did to debate and argue over what is really written or not, is becuase they dont know Him.

Its like debating whether if Dennison believes in a Trinity or not, based of what i have written in this forum, even coming to a point to defning terms and depend on your own understanding to prove what you think that i believe, but wouldnt it be logical just to Ask me, and I will respond.

isnt it possible to simply ask the Living almighty God?

November 21, 2010 at 7:48 pm#225940

Blocked

Quote (mikeangel @ Nov. 21 2010,22:10)

Believe it or not, I really am trying to look at your arguement with an open mind. But as of now here are my major roadblocks:

1. He plainly states he is one with the Father “I and the Father are one”, “when you see me, you have seen the Father”

Okay Mark,

Let's tear down those road blocks one at a time.

You say “I and the Father are one” implies that Jesus is God. So when Jesus says his hope is for the disciples to be “one with him and the Father”, is he saying the disciples will also be God?

You mention, “when you see me, you have seen the Father”. Let's look at it in context.

7 If you really knew me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”

Can you see that Jesus is not saying he IS the Father? Can you understand this from the many, many scriptures in which Jesus distinguishes himself as someone other than and lessor to the Father?

Mark, do you think the Son is actually the Father?

mike

November 21, 2010 at 7:53 pm#225941