Search Members

[stroshow]

Nick,

Please read through Hebrews 1:6-1:10 God the Father is
speaking of the Son Jesus, to whom the Father says,
“(vs 8) But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O
God…(vs 10) And, Thou, Lord……”

how is it that here the Father is calling Jesus
God, and the Father is calling Jesus Lord?

Nick, why is it the Father can call Jesus God and
Lord, yet you do not do so?

[stroshow]

Nick,

You wrote:

Why is it that you believe there is only one “Lord
of lords”? To be a lord of lords one has be be in
authority over other lords and not necessarily ALL
lords. That is the role of God alone but Jesus is
lord of all lords under God.

Response, Nick it does not say Jesus is the Lord of
all lords under God, you are CHANGING the word of God.
It says he is THE (singular) Lord of Lords. By
definition the Lord of Lords, must be the ULTIMATE
Lord, or Jesus would not be the Lord of lords. Instead
he would simply be one of the lords.

Yet, JUST AS GOD is called “THE” Lord of lords, (the
Ultimate Lord.) Jesus is called “THE” Lord of lords
(the ULTIMATE Lord.)

So AGAIN Nick , Since there can ONLY BE ONE Lord of
lords, What does that make you think about what JOHN
here is saying about Jesus when he says “HE IS” Lord
of lords?

[stroshow]

You wrote “Jesus has divine nature and can be called
a god. But he is not our God as we are in him. His God
is the Father who is our God too.”

Again, since there is only ONE TRUE GOD, and since
Jesus is called “MIGHTY GOD” is Jesus THE true God, or
a “false” god?

You wrote “God is the Lord of Jesus who is
our Lord. God is Lord of lords.”

While God is referred to as the Lord of lords, so is
Jesus.

1 Timothy 6:14-15 That thou keep this commandment
without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our
Lord Jesus Christ: Which in his times he shall shew,
who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of
kings, and “Lord of lords”;

Since there can ONLY BE ONE Lord of lords, and since
both God and Jesus are referred to as “THE” Lord of
lords, what does that make you think about who Paul
here is identifying Jesus as being?

Rev. 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the
Lamb shall overcome them: for “he is” “Lord of lords”,
and King of kings: and they that are with him are
called, and chosen, and faithful.

Since there can ONLY BE ONE Lord of lords, What does
that make you think about who JOHN here is saying
about Jesus when he says “HE IS” Lord of lords?

Rev. 19:13-16 13 And he was clothed with a vesture
dipped in blood: and his name is called “The Word of
God.” And the armies which were in heaven followed
him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white
and clean. And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword,
that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall
rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the
winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name
written, KING OF KINGS, AND “LORD OF LORDS.”

Since John, identifies Jesus here, (the Word of God),
as the “LORD OF LORDS” and since there can only be ONE
Lord of lords, what does that make you think about WHO
John here is identifying Jesus as?

[stroshow]

I've asked this before but never really got an answer..

“6 yet for us there is but one God, the
Father,….there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ,…”

So my question for you is if the term “ONE God” means
that Jesus is “a lesser god” then wouldn't that mean
that the term “one Lord”, here clearly identified as
Jesus, would make the Father “a lesser Lord” than
Jesus?

If Jesus being referred to as the one Lord, does not
make the Father a lesser Lord than Jesus, then why
would the term one God, referring to the Father, make
Jesus a lesser god than the Father?

Also, if the Father is the TRUE god, than all other
gods must be false.

Even you i think, agree Jesus is referred to as “a Mighty God”
So is Jesus as “a Mighty God”, a false god or the True
God?

[stroshow]

WhiteMateria: im a supporter of Jesus being God & the trinity, i was just curious on you're thoughts on that verse

[stroshow]

WhiteMarteria:

Im still waiting for ur take on:

Revelation 3:12
Him who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of my God.
Never again will he leave it.
I will write on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on him my new name.

[stroshow]

WhiteMateria: do u have an explanation for this? And who's name is he writing down?

Revelation 3:12 (English-NIV)
Him who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of my God.
Never again will he leave it.
I will write on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on him my new name.

[stroshow]

WhiteMateria :

You seem to be full of anger

[stroshow]

t8,

       You wrote:

How many saviors are there? How many gods are there?
How many lords are there?
Is there 1 God, yet it says: “there are many “gods”
and many “lords”.

Then you refer to 1 corinthians 8:5-6 pointing out

“For even if there are so-called gods”

Paul is not teaching there are many gods, surely you
realize that “so called” does not mean real true gods,
but rather to false gods.

Then you go on to say:

“6 yet for us there is but one God, the
Father,….there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ,…”

So my question for you is if the term “ONE God”  means
that Jesus is “a lesser god” then wouldn't that mean
that the term “one Lord”, here clearly identified as
Jesus, would make the Father “a lesser Lord” than
Jesus?

If Jesus being referred to as the one Lord, does not
make the Father a lesser Lord than Jesus, then why
would the term one God, referring to the Father, make
Jesus a lesser god than the Father?

Also, if the Father is the TRUE god, than all other
gods must be false.

Even you agree Jesus is referred to as “a Mighty God”
So is Jesus as “a Mighty God”, a false god or the True
God?

You also wrote:

John 5:23
that all may honor the Son “just as” they honor the
Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor
the Father, who sent him.

What does “just as” mean to you?

How do you honor the Father? Do you Honor Jesus “JUST
AS you honor the Father. Or do you honor Jesus
“differently.

You honor the Father by Prayer?

You honor the Father by worship?

Etc.

Do you honor the Son “JUST AS” you honor the Father?

Do you honor the Son by praying to HIM, “just as” you
do the Father?

Do you honor the Son by worship, “just as” you worship
the Father?

[stroshow]

Im going to repeat what i just said

13 as we await the blessed hope, the appearance of the
glory of the great God and of our savior Jesus Christ,
who gave “himself” [Notice Nick not themselves,
HIMSELF, in this instance God and Saviour is referring
to ONE person, Jesus]

for us to deliver us from all lawlessness and to
cleanse for “himself” [Notice Nick not themselves,
HIMSELF, in this instance God and Saviour is referring
to ONE person, Jesus]a people as his own, eager to do
what is good.

So are you saying Paul is calling Jesus God and our saviour or is he referring to Two “persons”?

[stroshow]

Nick How am i being tested?

Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the
glorious appearing of the great “God and our Savior
Jesus Christ”

“himself” Notice not themselves,
HIMSELF, in this instance God and Saviour is referring
to ONE person, Jesus

for us to deliver us from all lawlessness and to
cleanse for “himself” [Notice Nick not themselves,
HIMSELF, in this instance God and Saviour is referring
to ONE person, Jesus]a people as his own, eager to do
what is good.

[stroshow]

This is out of the blue but it speaks for it self

Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the
glorious appearing of the great “God and our Savior
Jesus Christ”

[stroshow]

t8,

The new testament passages that speak of no one seeing
God, obviously do not refer to Jesus. We agree on
that. They refer to the Father. You say they refer to
the Father, because only the Father is God. I say they
refer to the Father because the context indicates that
they refer to the Father, and people have clearly seen
Jesus.

What you do is you say those who said Jehovah appeared
didn't mean Jehovah. You say it was a represntative.
Sometimes that's true. But when that is the case, we
know it's the case because the text says it. In the
verses we've been discussing the text does not,
instaed it says it is Jehovah r in the case of Acts
7:2 it says the God of Glory.

Where it says Jehovah appeared, I say it mean Jehovah
appeared. They saw Jesus prior to the incarnation and
since Jesus is Jehovah they said who they saw and were
right.

When Stephen says the God of Glory appeared to
Abraham, you say he didn't mean that. I say he did
mean that.Since Jesus is Jehovah and since that is who
Abraham saw and recognized as Jehovah God, Stephen was
right to say and MEAN that the God of Glory appeared
to Abraham.

Just wanted to clear that up . All the scriptures
regarding God, Jehovah appearing etc. MEAN what they
say and there is no conflict if Jesus is Jehovah, If
in fact the is ONE God who eternally exist as three
distinct persons.

If Jesus is not God than YOU have to change the plain
meaning of what the Bible itself says or YOU have a
contradiction.

You can disagree, but I wanted to be clear on what you
are disagreeing with. In the triune God these passages
mean what they say and there is NO contradiction.

[stroshow]

Regarding the involvement of the Holy Spirit the verse
seems clear that the conception was a result of the
Holy Spirits involvement. In what way the verse does
not say. But somehow, unexplained Jesus by the Holy
Spirit was able to enter into Mary's womb and be born
as a man.

Matthew 1:18,Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this
wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph,
before they came together, she was found with child
“of the Holy Ghost”.

Matthew 1:20 But while he thought on these things,
behold, the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a
dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to
take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is
conceived in her is “of the Holy Ghost”.

Luke 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her,
The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of
the Highest shall overshadow thee: “therefore also
that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall
be called the Son of God.”

Centainly there was no physical sexual act taking
place. And I'm sure we both agree Jesus had already
existed prior to him entering into Mary's womb.

John 1:1, 2, 14 In the beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was
in the beginning with God…And the Word was made
flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory,
the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full
of grace and truth.

It seems Jesus is called the Son of God because of the
manner in which the conception took place. Luke 1:35
“…The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power
of the Highest shall overshadow thee: “therefore also
that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be
called the Son of God.”

Two things to notice, Jesus is called the Son of God
because, 1) The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee AND
2) the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee.

This seems a distinction between the “power of the
Highest”, and the “Holy Ghost”

Also as in Acts 5:3-4, An act attributed to the Holy
Spirit is EQUATED with God. In Acts 5:3 Lying is said
to have been done TO the Holy Spirit, in verse 4 that
is equated with lying to God. Here the Holy Spirits
involment in the virgin birth is EQUATED with and is
given as reason for why Jesus is called the Son of
God.

As a Christian I am an adopted son of God. 1 John 3:1
Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed
upon us, that we should be called the sons of God:
therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew
him not.

I however am fully human.

Jesus is the ONLY begotten Son of God in that he is of
the SAME substance as God, being God. (Again John
1:1,2,14) In the incarnation he took on the additional
nature of man and is therefore both the Son of God and
Son of Man.

Certainly the Father and Son relationship is not
biological in the same way as you or I might have a
son. The Father did not “procreate” to produce Jesus,
who we both agree existed prior to the incarnation.

The scripture does not refer to the Holy Spirit as the
Father. So the Holy Spirit is the Holy Spirit, HE is
not the Father.

The Father is the Father. The Holy Spirit is the Holy
Sprit, and Jesus is the Son. All three distinct
persons. As demonstarted here at the incarnation,
later at Jesus' baptism, and again as we are told to
baptize in the name (singular) of the Father, and of
the Son and of the Holy Spirit. And as demonstrated in
the many verses I sent you, at your request, of other
verses where the three were mentioned together

[stroshow]

T8,

You wrote:

First of all if I were to believe you then it would be
at the expense of clear teachings from the
New Testament. No matter what you say, scripture
says that no man can see God, but that the only
begotten is the only one who can declare him. This
is not one scripture but many.

Response: I agree, No many has seen God, (the Father).
That is what such passages refer to the Father, not to
the Son.

Yet Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob have seen Jehovha. The
point is that they did see someone they recoginzed as
Jehovah God, but it was NOT the Father. Who was is? I
humbly submit it was Jesus, who is NOT the Father, yet
is Jehovha.

If we understand Gen. 18 where is says Jehovah
appeared to Abraham, as well as those other passages
where Abraham, Isaac and Jacob saw Jehovha as being
preincarnate appearances of Jesus it ALL fits. Jesus
is Jehovah, people have seen him, the Son, not the
Father. They is NO contradiction in scripture and
where it says Jehovah appeared it menas Jehovhah
appeared.

The way you present it T8, however is tis way.

Moses says Jehovah appeared to Abraham, but YOU say,
Moses was wrong it was not Jehovha, it was an angel.

Stephen says in Act 7:2 that Abraham saw the God of
Glory, but YOU say, no Stephen was wrong it was an
angel.

Yet the plain teaching of the passages themselves are
that Jehovha himself did appear, the God of Glory was
seen and that no man has see the Father. This is NOT a
contradiction because when Jehovha appeared, when the
God of Glory was seen it was the Son, not the Father
who appeared. As while they are “distinct” persons,
they are nonetheless ONE God.

My beliefs affirm all the scriptures and there is NO
contradiction.

It is you who go on to quote several passages where
people record that they saw GOD and you say they were
wrong they saw not God, but a angel.

Note that there are times when they see an “angel of
Jehovah” in those instances we know that because the
TEXT says it!

The ones we have been discussing do not. You are
reading something into the text that is not there.

[stroshow]

Just to be clear on WHO appeared to Abraham

Acts 7:2- [2] And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran,

So again, it is clear that GOD HIMSELF APPEARED,
(stephen is ref. to the account in Genesis 12, yet as
we discussed no man has seen the Father.

Not only does Genesis 18 make it clear 14 times that
it is Jehovah himself with Abraham, and that it is
Jehovah in Gen 12 also, but so that no one could ever
claim it was less that God HIMSELF, the HOLY SPIRIT
inspired the writers to record the word of Stephen in
Act 7:2 that say the GOD OF GLORRY APPEARED
TO…ABRAHAM!

So who is right you or Stephen?

You or the clear statements recorded in the word of
God?

[stroshow]

Just curious, i know u guys probably dont want to get into this again… but how you define essence?

Someone with mind or power does not speak, teach, send,
call, forbid, etc. all these are attributes of a
person, all of them are descriptive of the Holy
Spirit?

[stroshow]

bic….

1)It is easy to build an endless amount of false
doctrines by using one or two (or even more) verses to
'prove' a point whilst ignoring many other verses
which contradict said verses. Then as a scenario you
use Luke 24:26 to show how, out of context a person
might use that verse to justify hating their family.

Response. I agree that verses need to be taken in
context and that the Bible does not contradict itself.
During our discussions I have never used a verse out
of context nor has anything I said contradicted other
passages of scripture. This fact is proven by your own
example. Notice you did not give an example of where I
used a verse out of context, nor of where I
contradicted scripture.

a) Only in the gospel of John do we see the Holy
Spirit called a 'He'. This is obviously incorrect
usage…it should be rendered 'it'.

Response: This is not incorrect usage! A neuter
pronoun in greek is available but Jesus chose to use
a masculine pronoun when speaking of the Spirit. As
mentioned before as just one example. John 14:17 Even
the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive,
because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye
know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in
you.
———————–

2)a) Only in the gospel of John do we see the Holy
Spirit called a 'He'. This is obviously incorrect
usage…it should be rendered 'it'

I looked up this verse in 18 DIFFERENT translations,
and encourage you to do the same, including the
following: KJV, NKJV, NIV, NASB, NLT, ESV, CEV, ASV,
YLT, NLT, HCBS, NIRV, WENT, NIV (UK) The Message,
Amplified Bible, 21st Century KJV, Darby. ALL of which
translate using personal pronouns, He/Him

And if its only in John why is it used in John?

In addition, the Gospel of John is NOT the only place
where the Holy Spirit is referred to with personal
pronouns. Consider the following.

Galations 3:5 He therefore that ministereth to you the
Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth “he” it
by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

1 Corinthians 12:11 But all these worketh that one and
the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally
as “he” will.

b) Did you ever notice how there is NEVER any
mention of a PERSONAL NAME for
THE Holy Spirit and IT is always preceded by a 'THE'?
THE Holy Spirit and THE Comforter? Do we say THE Jesus
or THE God? No, of course ,It's because these are
PERSONAL NAMES and THE Holy Spirit isn't. Do a search
for every instance where Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost is
found. Notice carefully the usage. Look how in many
cases it is used in a POSSESSIVE way, such as “the
Spirit of God”.

Response: The Holy Spirit does have names. That you
choose not to recognize them as such is a different
matter. For example he is called the Spirit of Truth,
the Comforter, the Holy Spirit etc. these are his
names, which along with others defines his attributes
and his work. A person is not however determined to be
a person based on a name. Cars have names, so do pets,
these however are not person. A child, while still in
his or her mothers womb may not have been given a
name, may be referred to as “the baby”, but none the
less is still, a person.

The Holy Spirit is defined as a person because of His
characteristics, which define him as such. Also, that
“the” is used does not take away from his personality.
For example, “the God of Abraham” “the God of Isaac”
“the God of Jacob” “the Saviour” “the Christ”,” the
Son of man” “the Father” the Son of God”, none of
these take away from the fact that the Father and the
Son are persons.
3)You wrote:
a) Love: We read about God's love for His Son and we
read about Jesus' love for His Father and we read
about both of their loves for us. Show me one
scripture that speaks of Jesus or God's love for the
Holy Spirit or where the Holy Spirit loves us or God
or Jesus. If the Holy Spirit was an equal person of
the godhead, 'he' would be equally loved, wouldn't
'he'?

To begin, passages referring to the love of God would
include the Holy Spirit, since he is himself a person
of the triune God. In addition your argument here is
as valid as one would be to say Jesus loves us more
than the Father! When for example did the Father ever
die for our sins? When was the Father ever bruised for
our transgressions?

However to suggest that the Father loves us less than
Jesus I’m sure we would agree would be absurd.

However since you asked for a verse that speaks of the
Spirit’ love…

Romans 15:30 Now I beseech you, brethren, for the Lord
Jesus Christ’s sake, and “for the love of the Spirit”,
that ye strive together with me in your prayers to God
for me;

What does it mean, “for the love of the Spirit”? Only
a “person” can love.

b) Throne: Jesus has a throne (beside His Father's)
and God has a throne. Where is the Holy Spirit's
throne? Once again, if it was an equal person in some
trinitarian godhead, it too would have a throne,
wouldn't it?
Response: The form of the Spirit is just that,
“spirit”. Jesus demonstrated thing after his
resurrection, when he proved to his diciples that he
was not a spirit.
Luke 24:36-39 And as they thus spake, Jesus himself
stood in the midst of them,
and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. But they were
terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had
seen a spirit. And he said unto them, Why are ye
troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?
Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself:
handle me, and see; “for a spirit hath not flesh and
bones, as ye see me have.”

In addition to Jesus demonstrating that he was not a
spirit, by showing that his crucified body had been
resurrected, we learn that a spirit, this would
include the “Holy Spirit”, by definition does not have
flesh and bones. What then would the Holy Spirit do
with a throne?

c) Worship: Worship is offered to both God and Jesus
but there is not one instance of worship being offered
to the Holy Spirit. Have you ever wondered why?
Response: Here you make an interesting point. Worship
is offered to both God (I presume you refer to the
Father) and to Jesus? The fact that Jesus is
worshipped and that HE accepts worship also speaks of
Jesus being God, for as Jesus himself said: Luke 4:8
…for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy
God, and him only shalt thou serve.”

However, since the Holy Spirit is God, when we worship
God we are worshipping the Father, the Son and the
Holy Spirit.

Interestingly, Jesus said in Luke 3:28 Verily I say
unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of
men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall
blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the
Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of
eternal damnation.

Why is it that all blasphemies including those against
the Father and the Son shall be forgiven, but not
against the Holy Spirit? Why is that?
You wrote in response to the Holy Spirit talking: So
can a tape recorder or even a book. (Then you go on)
Notice, too, that just like a voice recorder, he will
only echo the things that Jesus had already told them.
Notice, once again, like a recorder, doesn't speak its
own thoughts but only those of Christ (what it hears).
Jesus is glorified and the HolySpirit merely relays
what Jesus says through it. 'he' should be rendered
'it'.

Response: To begin, recorders DO NOT talk. They can
not make decisions, as the
Holy Spirit does they can
not teach, guide, forbid, send forth inspire etc. all
of which and more the Spirit does. Nor can a recorder
be blasphemed.

Jesus said during his earthly ministry in John 12:49
For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which
sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say,
and what I should speak.

Does this mean that Jesus was not a person, but a mere
“thing” like a recorder? If Jesus speaking what the
Father told him does not make Jesus a mere recorder,
then why do you say that the Spirit is merely a
recorder?

Wouldn’t a better analogy be that of a messenger, a
person speaking?

Again consider the attributes of the Spirit. I
encourage you to read these, in context, not just the
verse sited.

He teaches and he reminds believers. (John 14:26)
He testifies (John 15:26)
He convicts of sin (John 16:8)He guides, hears, speaks
and shows (John 16:13)
He inspires scripture (Acts 1:16, 2 Peter 1:21)
He spoke to Phillip and told him where to minister.
(Acts 8:29)
He calls to ministry (Acts 13:2)
He sends forth his servants( Acts 13:4)
He forbids certain actions (Acts 16:6, 7)
He intercedes (Romans 8:26)
He has a will (1 Corinthians 12:11)
He has a mind (Romans 8:27)
He has knowledge (1 Corinthians 2:10, 11)

He can be treated like a person in that he can be,
Lied to (Acts 5:3)
Tempted (Acts 5:9)
Resisted (Acts 7:51)
Grieved (Ephesians 4:30)
Outraged (Hebrews 10:29)
Blasphemed against

[stroshow]

bic

Thank you for ur response…

John 14:17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world
cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither
knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with
you, and shall be in you

I looked up this verse in “18” DIFFERENT translationsincluding the following: KJV, NKJV, NIV, NASB, NLT,ESV, CEV, ASV, YLT, NLT, HCBS, NIRV, WENT, NIV (UK) The Message, Amplified Bible, 21st Century
KJV, Darby. ALL of which translate using personal
pronouns, He/Him. So i dont understand why you say John is alone.. Are you saying its being mistranslated or in ur option The Holy Spirit should me a “it”

ex:
Galations 3:5 “He” therefore that ministereth to you
the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth “he”
it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of
faith?

1 Corinthians 12:11 But all these worketh that one and
the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally
as “he” will.

1 Peter 4:14 If ye be reproached for the name of
Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of
God resteth upon you: on “THEIR” part he is evil
spoken of, but on your part he is glorified

Revelation 2:7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what
the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that
overcometh will “I” give to eat of the tree of life,
which is in the midst of the paradise of God.

Revelation 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear
what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that
overcometh will “I“ give to eat of the hidden manna,
and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a
new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that
receiveth it.

Thanks..

[stroshow]

doesnt fellowship mean hang out? or socialize

[Author]

Posts