Worship God the Father only?

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ July 16 2011,21:35)

Deuteronomy 10:17 NAS
“For the LORD your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God who does not show partiality nor take a bribe.

Rev 7:14 “These will wage war against the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, because He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those who are with Him are the called and chosen and faithful.”

Rev 19:16 And on His robe and on His thigh He has a name written, “KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.”

Blessings,
Kathi

Kathi

you are right but God made it possible ,so it is God our savior and Christ the son of God was commission to sort out the controversy in creation because he was the first born also the eldest of Gods sons.

Jn 10:17 The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again

so Christ take us from point A to point B(the believers anyway)

and when he is done all will return to God and become all of God,

so there never was two gods only one

in the Hebrew time it was God the father that foretold trough the prophets about his son being the mediator of the new covenant that free all mankind of sin and of Satan,

when Christ came in the flesh this was the beginning of the end of Satan and his world,

so Deuteronomy 10:17 NAS
“For the LORD your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God who does not show partiality nor take a bribe.

is true to God the father

while Rev 7:14 “These will wage war against the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, because He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those who are with Him are the called and chosen and faithful.”

Rev; is true to Christ as was the commission given to him by his father

this parable is the story of Israel from its birth to the killing of Gods son,

MT 21:33 “Listen to another parable. There was a landowner who PLANTED A VINEYARD AND PUT A WALL AROUND IT AND DUG A WINE PRESS IN IT, AND BUILT A TOWER, and rented it out to vine-growers and went on a journey.
MT 21:34 “When the harvest time approached, he sent his slaves to the vine-growers to receive his produce.
MT 21:35 “The vine-growers took his slaves and beat one, and killed another, and stoned a third.
MT 21:36 “Again he sent another group of slaves larger than the first; and they did the same thing to them.
MT 21:37 “But afterward he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’
MT 21:38 “But when the vine-growers saw the son, they said among themselves, ‘This is the heir; come, let us kill him and seize his inheritance.’
MT 21:39 “They took him, and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.
MT 21:40 “Therefore when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vine-growers?”
MT 21:41 They *said to Him, “He will bring those wretches to a wretched end, and will rent out the vineyard to other vine-growers who will pay him the proceeds at the proper seasons.”
MT 21:42 Jesus *said to them, “Did you never read in the Scriptures,
‘THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED,
THIS BECAME THE CHIEF CORNER stone;
THIS CAME ABOUT FROM THE LORD,
AND IT IS MARVELOUS IN OUR EYES’?
MT 21:43 “Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people, producing the fruit of it.
MT 21:44 “And he who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust.”

Pierre

July 16, 2011 at 4:54 am#252590

Participant

Pierre,
you said:

Quote

so Deuteronomy 10:17 NAS
“For the LORD your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God who does not show partiality nor take a bribe.

is true to God the father

It is true to God the Father AND to the Lord, Jesus Christ…for us there is one God the Father and one Lord Jesus Christ. Here we have the God of gods and the Lord of lords, not just God of gods. Deut 10 talks about the God of creation who is the God of gods and the Lord of lords. John 1:3, Col 1:16, Heb 1 all identify the Son with creation.

Deut 10:12“Now, Israel, what does the LORD your God require from you, but to fear the LORD your God, to walk in all His ways and love Him, and to serve the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, 13and to keep the LORD’S commandments and His statutes which I am commanding you today for your good? 14“Behold, to the LORD your God belong heaven and the highest heavens, the earth and all that is in it. 15“Yet on your fathers did the LORD set His affection to love them, and He chose their descendants after them, even you above all peoples, as it is this day. 16“So circumcise your heart, and stiffen your neck no longer. 17“For the LORD your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God who does not show partiality nor take a bribe. 18“He executes justice for the orphan and the widow, and shows His love for the alien by giving him food and clothing. 19“So show your love for the alien, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt. 20“You shall fear the LORD your God; you shall serve Him and cling to Him, and you shall swear by His name. 21“He is your praise and He is your God, who has done these great and awesome things for you which your eyes have seen. 22“Your fathers went down to Egypt seventy persons in all, and now the LORD your God has made you as numerous as the stars of heaven.

Kathi

July 16, 2011 at 5:24 am#252593

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ July 16 2011,22:54)

Pierre,
you said:

Quote

so Deuteronomy 10:17 NAS
“For the LORD your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God who does not show partiality nor take a bribe.

is true to God the father

Kathi

Quote

I do not understand what you are saying there is one God and one lord the son Christ,it is not because someone participate in creation that now he become a god,

all the apostles are and have participate in the creation of the kingdom they did a good work because they have become a part of it in heaven. are them as well now gods?

but they all receive there authority from God to participate in that work.so?

Pierre

July 16, 2011 at 5:13 pm#252647

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ July 15 2011,21:35)

Hi Kathi,

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that the Being of “Jehovah Almighty” is made up of the Father, who is the “God of gods”, and Jesus, who is the “Lord of lords”. Is that correct?

1. You also believe that Jesus is the “outstretced arm OF the God of gods”, right? Yet Psalm 136 mentions a “HE” (not a “THEM”), who is both the God of gods AND the Lord of lords – who also “brought Israel out from among them with a mighty hand and outstretched arm”.

So if this “Jehovah” mentioned in Ps 136 is a combo OF the Father and Jesus, then who is the “outstretched arm” OF this “Combo God”?

2. The Father is called the King of kings. The Lamb is ALSO called the King of kings. Nebuchadnezzar is ALSO called the King of kings. So here we have BOTH “halfs” of “the Godhead” being referred to by the SAME title. Doesn't this contradict your implication that “Lord of lords” refers only to the Son, while God of gods refers only to the Father – since it shows them both having the same title applied to them?

And if being called “the King of kings” was an indication that one was God Almighty Himself, then isn't Nebuchanezzar also God Almighty? (Not to mention Artaxerxes, who was also called “the King of kings”?)

3. 1 Timothy 6:15-16 distinguishes Jesus as someone OTHER THAN the Father, who is called “the Lord of lords”.

This is just the tip of the iceberg, Kathi. What you have done is “invented” a doctrine, and tried to support that doctrine with nothing but your unsubstaniated claim that by calling Jehovah “the God of gods” AND “the Lord of lords”, the writer meant to imply that one of them is the Father and the other is the Son, who together form “Jehovah Almighty”. But it takes much time and study to “invent” a doctrine that is in opposition to the teaching of the scriptures.

Take a page from the Trinitarian's book: They've been at it for 2000 years, and STILL can't come up with any LOGICAL or SCRIPTURAL reason the Son OF God would also BE the same God he is the Son OF.

Kathi, try to remember that two or more persons are NEVER referred to with a SINGULAR, PERSONAL pronoun such as “HE”. And the passage you've pointed us to clearly says “Jehovah, your God” is a “HE”, not a “THEY”.

peace,
mike

July 16, 2011 at 8:49 pm#252669

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ July 16 2011,22:54)

Pierre,
you said:

Quote

so Deuteronomy 10:17 NAS
“For the LORD your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God who does not show partiality nor take a bribe.

is true to God the father

Kathi

nothing belongs to anyone but God the father ,Christ is on his mission to subdue all things under God when that is finish he turn himself under his father will,

Pierre

July 17, 2011 at 5:16 am#252703

Participant

Mike,
you said:

Quote

The UNITY of Jehovah our God is made up of two…the Father who is God of gods and Jesus, who is Lord of lords.

The UNITY of America our country is made up of 50 states…Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, etc.

Quote

I believe that Jesus, the Lord of lords is the outstretched arm of Jehovah our God.

The United States of America IS (not are) the land of the free and the home of the brave.
The unity is singular and made up of many or at least more than one.

Quote

Context is king.

Quote

3. 1 Timothy 6:15-16 distinguishes Jesus as someone OTHER THAN the Father, who is called “the Lord of lords”.

Maybe the Father in that passage isn't the Lord of lords but is referred to as the unapproachable Light and Jesus, the Lord of lords is the only one that dwells in Him, in His bosom who at that time was 'invisible' to the believers because He had risen out of sight.

Quote

Already answered.

Good night Mike,
Kathi

July 17, 2011 at 2:03 pm#252724

theodorej

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ July 15 2011,06:40)

Hi Ted,
We can't love like we are supposed to so we ask God to love through us and we act by faith on that. He loves through us according to what the person needs for their benefit in the long run. He promises to work everything out for good for those who love the Lord.

Blessings,
Kathi

Kathi …. When we truely understand the loving mercifull nature of God it is very difficult not to love him…. The carnal nature of man is the anthesis of love ….. With out the spirit of Gods presense in the man it is virtually impossible to love your neighbor as yourself…. Love is never selfish,Love is always kind,and so on went the lesson Paul taught to the corrintians…Empathy is the mindfull awareness and subequent feeling for a neighbor,freind or even an enemy …IMHO that is about as close as carnal man can ever get to AGAPE love…

July 17, 2011 at 2:34 pm#252728

shimmer

Participant

Sorry to interupt Theodore but Amen to that. Empathy is a gift of God. Empathy is seeing everyone you meet or walk past, differently. Empathy is what keeps us going, and also helps us in society to act the right way and so – others treat us different in return. Also humbleness. Easily forgotten sometimes. But, returning to humility brings kindness, and all that goes with it. Amen to your two posts here though. Leave you back to it.

July 17, 2011 at 2:48 pm#252729

theodorej

Participant

Quote (shimmer @ July 18 2011,01:34)

Shimmer …. Your input is always a welcome addition to a discussion and thank you for the encouragment…

July 17, 2011 at 4:47 pm#252739

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ July 16 2011,23:16)

The UNITY of Jehovah our God is made up of two…the Father who is God of gods and Jesus, who is Lord of lords.

The UNITY of America our country is made up of 50 states…Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, etc.

The United States of America IS (not are) the land of the free and the home of the brave.
The unity is singular and made up of many or at least more than one.

Is the unity of America ever called a “HE”? Kathi, you can't transfer the application of IMPERSONAL PRONOUNS such as “IT” to PERSONAL PRONOUNS such as “HE”. The unity of a government is an “IT”, never a “HE”. In fact, there is no time in the history of the world where the unity of more than one individual PERSONS were ever called a “HE”.

Quote (Lightenup @ July 16 2011,23:16)

I believe that Jesus, the Lord of lords is the outstretched arm of Jehovah our God.

Ah, but it was “Jehovah our God” who delivered Israel from the Egyptians WITH HIS outstretched arm. Jesus cannot be the outstretched arm that BELONGS TO Jehovah our God at the same time he is equally Jehovah our God whom the arm BELONGS TO.

Just another chink in the armor, Kathi. Many more will be revealed if you continue to move forward with this new doctrine you've just invented. I suggest that one chink should be enough for you to know you're barking up the wrong tree.

Quote (Lightenup @ July 16 2011,23:16)

to keep this command without spot or blame until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 which God will bring about in his own time—God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16 who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see.
It seems that one who is called “God” is the King of kings AND the Lord of lords, and will bring about the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ. It seems pretty straightforward to me from those words that Jesus is someone OTHER THAN the One called “God” in this verse.

Kathi, look at your response. “Maybe the Father in that passage isn't the Lord of lords……..”

Can't you see what you're doing? It is the same thing the non-preexisters do with John 17:5. Because they've already made their mind up beforehand that Jesus DIDN'T pre-exist, they must take a clear scripture where Jesus is asking to be returned to his former glory, and come up with all kinds of cockamamie reasonings, such as “Jesus had glory as a thought in God's head”, and “it was a foreordained glory that Jesus was now asking to be applied to him”.

This will happen anytime someone tries to form the scriptures around their understanding instead of forming their understanding around the scriptures.

You can't credibly and honestly just start changing the clear meaning of the written words of scripture so that they say something that fits around the doctrine you've invented, can you?

peace,
mike

July 17, 2011 at 7:57 pm#252748

Participant

Mike,

you said:

Quote

That was not my point, my point was that a unity is identified with singular pronouns.

Quote

In fact, there is no time in the history of the world where the unity of more than one individual PERSONS were ever called a “HE”.

Can you say “oops?”
Mark 5:9 has an example of one name for many:
And He was asking him, “What is your name?” And he said to Him, “My name is Legion; for we are many.”
One name for many…using the 'he' pronoun for many…using the 'my' pronoun for many.

Quote

The Lord of lords who is referred to as the outstretched arm is part of the unity referred to as Jehovah our God.

Quote

Just another chink in the armor, Kathi.

Not a chink, just a misunderstanding of the armor that you are trying to challenge.

Quote

Not as straightforward as you think, the God referred to is either the Son who is Lord of lord who is the only Potentate that dwells in the bosom of the Father who is the Light, or the God referred to is Jehovah who is both our God of gods and Lord of lords. That is why I use the word “maybe.” It could be either. I have seen commentators mention that either are possible. Also, look at the Greek for v. 15…the word 'God' is not in the Greek but assumed by the translators.

Here is what Chrisostom says about it:
Ver. 14. “That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
That is, till thy end, thy departure hence, though he does not so express it, but that he may the more arouse him, says, “till His appearing.” But what is “to keep the commandment without spot”? To contract no defilement, either of doctrine or of life.
Ver. 15. “Which in His times He shall show, Who is the blessed and only Potentate, King of kings, and Lord of lords, Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto.”
Of whom are these things said? Of the Father, or of the Son? Of the Son, undoubtedly: and it is said for the consolation of Timothy, that he may not fear nor stand in awe of the kings of the earth.
“In His times,” that is, the due and fitting times, that he may not be impatient, because it has not yet come. And whence is it manifest, that He will show it? Because He is the Potentate, the “only Potentate.” He then will show it, Who is “blessed,” nay blessedness itself; and this is said, to show that in that appearing there is nothing painful or uneasy.
But he says, “only,” either in contradistinction to men, or because He was unoriginated,13111311 ἀνέννητον. or as we sometimes speak of a man whom we wish to extol.
“Who only hath immortality.” What then? hath not the Son immortality? Is He not immortality itself? How should not He, who is of the same substance with the Father, have immortality?
“Dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto.” Is He then Himself one Light, and is there another in which He dwells? is He then circumscribed by place? Think not of it. By this expression is represented the Incomprehensibleness of the Divine Nature. Thus he speaks of God, in the best way he is able. Observe, how when the tongue would utter something great, it fails in power.
“Whom no man hath seen nor can see.” As, indeed, no one hath seen the Son, nor can see Him.13121312 That is, in His divine nature, considered apart from the human. See on Philip. ii. 5–11, Hom. vii. p. 78, and note g, and compare John i. 14–18; vi. 46; xiv. 7, 9; Luke xxiv. 39; John iv. 24; 2 Cor. iii. 17; 1 Tim. iii. 16; 1 John iii. 2.
472
“To whom be honor and power everlasting. Amen.” Thus properly, and much to the purpose, has he spoken of God. For as he had called Him to witness, he speaks much of that Witness, that his disciple may be in the greater awe. In these terms he ascribes glory to Him, and this is all we can do, or say. We must not enquire too curiously, who He is. If power everlasting is His, fear not. Yea though now it take not place,13131313 μὴ γένηται. He either means that though not yet fully come, His Kingdom, when come, shall be eternal, or puts γένεσθαι, “to take place,” in opposition to εἶναι, “to be.” The former word refers to events in time, the latter to the real constitution of things. Philip. ii. 10; Heb. ii. 8. to Him is honor, to Him is power evermore.
from: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf113.v.iii.xix.html

Mike, you keep using the words “doctrine you've invented.” How can I have invented it if it was already spoken of by another? The unity of the Father and the Son is a teaching from Christ and the fact that Jehovah our God is God of gods and Lord of lords was written back in Deutoronomy. I am no inventor of anything. Paul taught that for us there is one God, the Father and one Lord, Jesus Christ through whom are all things. Revelations teach that salvation belongs to BOTH.

Take care,
Kathi

July 17, 2011 at 8:04 pm#252750

Participant

Pierre,
you said:

Quote

I do not understand what you are saying there is one God and one lord the son Christ,it is not because someone participate in creation that now he become a god,

all the apostles are and have participate in the creation of the kingdom they did a good work because they have become a part of it in heaven. are them as well now gods?

but they all receive there authority from God to participate in that work.so?

The Son doesn't ever BECOME a god or a God. He always was God by nature with His Father. He does not become a god or a God because He was involved in creation, He was involved in creation because He was God by nature.

Kathi

July 17, 2011 at 8:32 pm#252751

Participant

Quote (theodorej @ July 17 2011,09:03)

Quote (Lightenup @ July 15 2011,06:40)

Blessings,
Kathi

Hi Ted,
Agree. A wonderful passage…

1 Cor 13:3And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing.
4Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, 5does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, 6does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; 7bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.[/I]

Another good passage:
2 Tim 2:22Now flee from youthful lusts and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, with those who call on the Lord from a pure heart. 23But refuse foolish and ignorant speculations, knowing that they produce quarrels. 24The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, 25with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, 26and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will.

We are told to sometimes avoid men:
2 Tim 3:1But realize this, that in the last days difficult times will come. 2For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, revilers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3unloving, irreconcilable, malicious gossips, without self-control, brutal, haters of good, 4treacherous, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power; Avoid such men as these.

Love requires different responses depending on the situation by the direction of the Lord. He loves through us. It is easy to love those who are loving, not so easy to those who are not.

God bless,
Kathi

July 17, 2011 at 9:31 pm#252755

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ July 18 2011,14:04)

Pierre,
you said:

Quote

I do not understand what you are saying there is one God and one lord the son Christ,it is not because someone participate in creation that now he become a god,

all the apostles are and have participate in the creation of the kingdom they did a good work because they have become a part of it in heaven. are them as well now gods?

but they all receive there authority from God to participate in that work.so?

Kathi

:laugh: :laugh:

you really believe that ? 2=1

Pierre

July 17, 2011 at 9:50 pm#252760

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ July 17 2011,13:57)

That was not my point, my point was that a unity is identified with singular pronouns.

I KNOW that's you're point. And I'm telling you that a unity of PERSONS is never identified by a SINGULAR PERSONAL pronoun.

Quote (Lightenup @ July 17 2011,13:57)

I'm glad you brought this passage up.

6 When he saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and fell on his knees in front of him. 7 He shouted at the top of his voice, “What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? Swear to God that you won’t torture me!” 8 For Jesus had said to him, “Come out of this man, you evil spirit!”

9 Then Jesus asked him, “What is your name?”

“My name is Legion,” he replied, “for we are many.” 10 And he begged Jesus again and again not to send them out of the area.

11 A large herd of pigs was feeding on the nearby hillside. 12 The demons begged Jesus, “Send us among the pigs; allow us to go into them.” 13 He gave them permission, and the evil spirits came out and went into the pigs.
Let's start with verse 7. According to you, “God Almighty”, otherwise known as “God Most High”, is the COMBINATION of Jesus AND the Father, right? So that doesn't fit in with Jesus being the SON OF “the Most High God”, does it?

Then the SPOKESMAN of the Legion of demons, the ONE of the many who was doing the talking, said “I implore you BY GOD not to torture me”. Hmmmm………who is this “God” that the demon is asking Jesus to swear BY? Surely he is not asking Jesus to swear by HIMSELF, right? Of course not, for unlike you, this demon knows there aren't two “mighty gods” who form to make the one “Most High God”. Unlike you, this demon seems to understand that Jesus is the SON of the Most High God – not a PART of Him.

I see your point concerning verse 9, as it is worded oddly. But you must realize that referring to many PERSONS with a singular PERSONAL pronoun is NOT an accepted rule of the grammar of any language. So I understand this as the SPOKESMAN for the legion (Latin for “thousands”) of demons referring to himself as a “HE”, which he obviously is. And since Jesus is at first only talking with the SPOKESMAN for the group, it is natural for that ONE spokesman to be referred to as a “HE” in the commentary.

I don't quite know how to answer the “MY name is….” part. But it is very clear that this demon did not intend to imply that he was an individual member of the “UNITY BEING” called Legion. For it is clear from verse 10 that “HE” begged Jesus not to send “THEM” out of the area.

After that, it is made clear that the (more than one) demons asked Jesus to send “US” into the pigs. Jesus granted “THEM” permission, and so the (more than one) evil spirits entered the (more than one) pigs.

So it turns out that there were many INDIVIDUAL spirits who went their own separate ways after being expelled from the man. And the only odd thing about the wording is why the ONE demon who was originally talking with Jesus would say “MY name is……”. But if you compare the same event as reported by Luke, the phrase “My name is…..” is not included.

At any rate, as is often the case when Jack brings up things against me to support his case, the passage you brought up as support seems to have backfired on you, because it shows even more support for MY case than for yours.

Kathi, do you acknowledge that Legion was a group of individual demons and not some “UNITY BEING” made up of many members?

More later – I have to take my boy swimming.

peace,
mike

July 18, 2011 at 2:14 am#252799

Participant

Quote (terraricca @ July 17 2011,16:31)

Quote (Lightenup @ July 18 2011,14:04)

Pierre,
you said:

Quote

I do not understand what you are saying there is one God and one lord the son Christ,it is not because someone participate in creation that now he become a god,

all the apostles are and have participate in the creation of the kingdom they did a good work because they have become a part of it in heaven. are them as well now gods?

but they all receive there authority from God to participate in that work.so?

Kathi

:laugh: :laugh:

you really believe that ? 2=1

Pierre

Pierre,
2 does not equal 1
BUT
two ones when added together can equal one two.
1+1=2
If I make an equation like this:
2= 1+1
or
3= 1+1+1

Answer these questions about the above equations:
1. Are the equations correct?
2. Is there ONE number on the left and more than one number on the right?

If so, one number = the sum of two
or one number = the sum of three
depending on the equation
See how one (number) is the sum of three (numbers)
or one (number) is the sum of two (numbers)

Kathi

July 18, 2011 at 2:48 am#252802

Participant

Mike,
you said:

Quote

I KNOW that's you're point. And I'm telling you that a unity of PERSONS is never identified by a SINGULAR PERSONAL pronoun.

I just showed you that one name is for more than one and singular personal pronouns are used for the many. BLIND?

Quote

According to you, “God Almighty”, otherwise known as “God Most High”, is the COMBINATION of Jesus AND the Father, right?

No. Of course context is king but I would say that “God Most High” would be a synonym of “God of gods.” Both referring to the Father. God Almighty may refer to the Father who has an only begotten Son or God Almighty may mean the same as Jehovah our God and be the name of the unity of two beings…not the unity being.

Quote

In that context, I believe the spokesman is referring to the Most High God, the Father who already is mentioned in the context. Context is king!

Quote

Of course not, for unlike you, this demon knows there aren't two “mighty gods” who form to make the one “Most High God”

This demon knew of the most high God (God of gods, the Father) and the Son of God (Lord of lords, the Son).

The Son is not a 'part' of the most High God but 'with' Him as a unity called Jehovah our God.

Quote

This is one place you get stuck…'unity being.' That is different than the 'name of their unity.' The name of their unity is 'Jehovah our God', imo.

Quote

In the NT, it is made clear that for us there is one God, the Father and one Lord, Jesus Christ. The NT makes the OT clear in that where they thought of one in the OT, there were really two as seen in the NT.

Jehovah our God is God of gods (the Father) and Lord of lords (the Son).

Quote

Kathi, do you acknowledge that Legion was a group of individual demons and not some “UNITY BEING” made up of many members?

Yes, and I never said they were some unity 'being.' However, the name 'Legion' does seem to represent a unity of many. The name Jehovah, our God seems to represent a unity of two as in Deuteronomy where it says: Jehovah our God is God of gods and Lord of lords.

Hope you had fun swimming,
Kathi

July 18, 2011 at 3:13 am#252806

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ July 18 2011,20:14)

Quote (terraricca @ July 17 2011,16:31)

Quote (Lightenup @ July 18 2011,14:04)

Pierre,
you said:

Quote

I do not understand what you are saying there is one God and one lord the son Christ,it is not because someone participate in creation that now he become a god,

all the apostles are and have participate in the creation of the kingdom they did a good work because they have become a part of it in heaven. are them as well now gods?

but they all receive there authority from God to participate in that work.so?

Kathi

:laugh: :laugh:

you really believe that ? 2=1

Pierre

Pierre,
2 does not equal 1
BUT
two ones when added together can equal one two.
1+1=2
If I make an equation like this:
2= 1+1
or
3= 1+1+1

Answer these questions about the above equations:
1. Are the equations correct?
2. Is there ONE number on the left and more than one number on the right?

If so, one number = the sum of two
or one number = the sum of three
depending on the equation
See how one (number) is the sum of three (numbers)
or one (number) is the sum of two (numbers)

Kathi

your calculation in your demonstration is correct,

but you do not show your true demonstration what is more like this;

1 rat +1 dog +1 horse =3 rats

1rat +1 dog= 2 rats

so this is not possible

Pierre

July 18, 2011 at 3:46 am#252810