Does 1 John 5:20 call Jesus the true God?

Participant

Quote (jammin @ Feb. 27 2013,08:23)

Quote (terraricca @ Feb. 25 2013,12:41)

Quote (jammin @ Feb. 25 2013,06:31)

Quote (terraricca @ Feb. 22 2013,13:28)

Jammin

Quote

if you want to prove your argument then you must shoe me a version that says in 1john 5.20 that Christ is NOT THE TRUE GOD.

1Jn 5:20 We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true—even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.

how can you believe that Christ his his father the God almighty, were did you pick that up ,because it is not in the scriptures not thought by Jesus disciples,???

it did not say that the son is not the true God.
dont imagine boy. show me a version.

you understand the verse the wrong way.

let me post again
1 John 5:20

GOD’S WORD Translation (GW)

20 We know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding so that we know the real God. We are in the one who is real, his Son Jesus Christ. This Jesus Christ is the real God and eternal life.

see.. that is very clear. christ is the true God in that verse.
the father is the true God
the son is also the true God

so Christ lied to all of us by telling us all that he was the son and in reality according to your bible he was truly God almighty and the father ,

could you explain why he did that

he is not lying. he is the son. did i say that Christ is not the son? LOL

but what you are telling is not the WHOLE TRUTH/

the bible say he is the son. yes he is the son of God.

but the bible also says that he is God by nature just like his father. this is the part that youy do not want to believe bec for you christ is not God but god.
God is not god.

Jammin

I do believe that Christ his the son of God almighty ;this is well said all over the scriptures even Christ says he his the son of God ,even the angel Gabriel at his birth says that Jesus will be called the son of God ;this can not be denied,

now scriptures are saying that Christ his of the same nature of God ;now what this means ???being “SPIRIT ” = HUMAN = Animal

those are all different natures ;but not all humans are the same ,and not all animals are the same ,SO IT IS NORMAL THAT ALL SPIRITS BEING ARE NOT OF THE SAME NATURE AS WELL,

but I would say that Christ would be the closes to the true NATURE of God almighty then after him comes others ,and then man little lower than angels ,

what do you think

February 27, 2013 at 9:36 pm#337107

jammin

Participant

Quote (terraricca @ Feb. 27 2013,16:01)

Quote (jammin @ Feb. 27 2013,08:23)

Quote (terraricca @ Feb. 25 2013,12:41)

Quote (jammin @ Feb. 25 2013,06:31)

Quote (terraricca @ Feb. 22 2013,13:28)

Jammin

Quote

if you want to prove your argument then you must shoe me a version that says in 1john 5.20 that Christ is NOT THE TRUE GOD.

how can you believe that Christ his his father the God almighty, were did you pick that up ,because it is not in the scriptures not thought by Jesus disciples,???

it did not say that the son is not the true God.
dont imagine boy. show me a version.

you understand the verse the wrong way.

let me post again
1 John 5:20

GOD’S WORD Translation (GW)

see.. that is very clear. christ is the true God in that verse.
the father is the true God
the son is also the true God

so Christ lied to all of us by telling us all that he was the son and in reality according to your bible he was truly God almighty and the father ,

could you explain why he did that

he is not lying. he is the son. did i say that Christ is not the son? LOL

but what you are telling is not the WHOLE TRUTH/

the bible say he is the son. yes he is the son of God.

but the bible also says that he is God by nature just like his father. this is the part that youy do not want to believe bec for you christ is not God but god.
God is not god.

Jammin

now scriptures are saying that Christ his of the same nature of God ;now what this means ???being “SPIRIT ” = HUMAN = Animal

those are all different natures ;but not all humans are the same ,and not all animals are the same ,SO IT IS NORMAL THAT ALL SPIRITS BEING ARE NOT OF THE SAME NATURE AS WELL,

but I would say that Christ would be the closes to the true NATURE of God almighty then after him comes others ,and then man little lower than angels ,

what do you think

not closes to the true nature but they have the same nature.
the father and the son have the same nature.

john 1.1-3 BNT
When the world began, the Word was already there. The Word was with God, and the nature of the Word was the same as the nature of GodThe Word was there in the beginning with God. It was through the agency of the Word that everything else came into being. Without the Word not one single thing came into being.

March 1, 2013 at 1:39 am#337174

Participant

Quote (jammin @ Feb. 28 2013,02:36)

Quote (terraricca @ Feb. 27 2013,16:01)

Quote (jammin @ Feb. 27 2013,08:23)

Quote (terraricca @ Feb. 25 2013,12:41)

Quote (jammin @ Feb. 25 2013,06:31)

Quote (terraricca @ Feb. 22 2013,13:28)

Jammin

Quote

if you want to prove your argument then you must shoe me a version that says in 1john 5.20 that Christ is NOT THE TRUE GOD.

how can you believe that Christ his his father the God almighty, were did you pick that up ,because it is not in the scriptures not thought by Jesus disciples,???

it did not say that the son is not the true God.
dont imagine boy. show me a version.

you understand the verse the wrong way.

let me post again
1 John 5:20

GOD’S WORD Translation (GW)

see.. that is very clear. christ is the true God in that verse.
the father is the true God
the son is also the true God

so Christ lied to all of us by telling us all that he was the son and in reality according to your bible he was truly God almighty and the father ,

could you explain why he did that

he is not lying. he is the son. did i say that Christ is not the son? LOL

but what you are telling is not the WHOLE TRUTH/

the bible say he is the son. yes he is the son of God.

but the bible also says that he is God by nature just like his father. this is the part that youy do not want to believe bec for you christ is not God but god.
God is not god.

Jammin

now scriptures are saying that Christ his of the same nature of God ;now what this means ???being “SPIRIT ” = HUMAN = Animal

those are all different natures ;but not all humans are the same ,and not all animals are the same ,SO IT IS NORMAL THAT ALL SPIRITS BEING ARE NOT OF THE SAME NATURE AS WELL,

but I would say that Christ would be the closes to the true NATURE of God almighty then after him comes others ,and then man little lower than angels ,

what do you think

not closes to the true nature but they have the same nature.
the father and the son have the same nature.

jammin

right the Word his the son of God and his also called Christ ,but being the son does not make you the father ;and does scriptures says that Christ WAS REALLY THE TOTAL SAME NATURE OF GOD ALMIGHTY

March 3, 2013 at 9:04 am#337296

jammin

Participant

are you sure?

i did not say that the father is the son. i did not say that the son is the father. i already told this to you many times. do you have mind problems?

now you say that they dont have the same nature. cant you read what jn 1.1 says?

let me post it again

john 1.1-3 BNT
When the world began, the Word was already there. The Word was with God, and the nature of the Word was the same as the nature of GodThe Word was there in the beginning with God. It was through the agency of the Word that everything else came into being. Without the Word not one single thing came into being.

read that over and over again. i highlighted the word for you to see it very clear.

do not fool people T
you accept that you and your father are BOTH HUMAN . but why cant you accept that the son and the father are both God by nature.
think about it

March 5, 2013 at 2:34 am#337364

Blocked

Kathi? (6th post on page 188)

March 5, 2013 at 6:14 am#337382

Participant

Jammin

Quote

i did not say that the father is the son. i did not say that the son is the father. i already told this to you many times. do you have mind problems?

your answer from down the page ;

Quote

see.. that is very clear. christ is the true God in that verse.
the father is the true God
the son is also the true God

you have no knowledge and less understanding ,you have not yet moved on in scriptures from 1John 5;20 ;

1JN 5:17 All unrighteousness is sin, and there is a sin not leading to death.
1JN 5:18 We know that no one who is born of God sins; but He who was born of God keeps him, and the evil one does not touch him.
1JN 5:19 We know that we are of God, and that the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.
1JN 5:20 And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding so that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.
1JN 5:21 Little children, guard yourselves from idols.

AND EVEN THIS SCRIPTURES YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND ;

JN 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was A ÂGod. (THIS IS THE TRUE VIEW BECAUSE IT FITS ENTIRELY WITH THE REST OF ALL SCRIPTURES )
JN 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.
JN 1:3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

READ THOSE SCRIPTURES SO THAT YOU MAY UNDERSTAND WHAT “””NATURE “”” MEANS

JN 8:44 “ You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
AC 14:15 and saying, “Men, why are you doing these things? We are also men of the same nature as you, and preach the gospel to you that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, WHO MADE THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH AND THE SEA AND ALL THAT IS IN THEM.
AC 17:29 “Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought of man.
RO 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
RO 11:24 For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree?
1CO 11:14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him,
GAL 2:15 “We are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles;
GAL 4:8 However at that time, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those which by nature are no gods.
EPH 2:3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
HEB 1:3 And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
JAS 5:17 Elijah was a man with a nature like ours, and he prayed earnestly that it would not rain, and it did not rain on the earth for three years and six months.
2PE 1:4 For by these He has granted to us His precious and magnificent promises, so that by them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world by lust

I HOPE YOU UNDERSTOOD

March 6, 2013 at 1:10 am#337406

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 24 2013,20:48)

Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 21 2013,21:42)

Mike,
A child exists before they are begotten/born. A begettal does not indicate a beginning of existence.

Kathi,

I mentioned before that surely God would have known how we humans would understand the words “son”, “father”, “begotten”, and “firstborn”……. and also what those words implied.

These following translations of Psalm 2:7 give creedence to my claim:

NET ©
This very day I have become your father!

NIV ©
today I have become your Father.

NLT ©
Today I have become your Father.

BBE ©
this day have I given you being.

Even the translators that render it as “begotten” surely understand what the word “begotten” means.

In answer to your claim in the quote box above, I offer this info from the TWOT, concerning the Hebrew word “yalad”:

In its narrowest sense yalad describes the act of a woman in giving birth to a child (e.g. Exo 1:19; 1Ki 3:17-18), but it is sometimes used of the father's part in becoming a parent (e.g. Gen 4:18; Gen 10:8, Gen 10:24, Gen 10:26; Gen 22:23; Gen 25:3; 1Ch 1:10-20, Pro 23:22).

Those bolded words above got me to thinking: What exactly IS “the father's part” in becoming a parent? Isn't it the act of CONCEPTION itself? It sure is.

So while you may be technically correct in saying that a child existed in the womb before the MOTHER begot him (by the act of childbirth), you cannot say the child existed before the FATHER begot him. Because the FATHER'S part in the act of “begetting” a child is the part where the child is actually CONCEIVED.

In other words:

A MOTHER begets a child through the process of bringing that child to term, and giving birth.

On the other hand, a FATHER begets a child through the act of CONCEPTION alone. He has no further involvement in the act of begetting a child, right?

I believe the TWOT has shot down your ludicrous claim that Jesus existed within his Father as a separate being before his Father begot him.

Mike,
LOL, so tell us who the mother was in which the Father conceived Him. I'm waiting on pins and needles.

March 6, 2013 at 2:02 am#337410

Blocked

Are you implying that Jesus, as a spirit being, had a mother?

As I understand it, he was begotten solely by “the Father”. Isn't that also your understanding?

March 6, 2013 at 4:57 am#337443

Participant

Mike,
I am not implying that Jesus, as a spirit being had a mother? You are the one implying it with your argument that the Father 'fathered' the only begotten Son in the same sense that an earthly father would beget a son (in the sense of fertilizing a female ovum with a male sperm which is the definition of conception). Your argument falls flat!

An eternal Son would not have been conceived but an eternal Son could be born/begotten having eternally existed within the Father and later brought forth from the Father before creation took place.

March 6, 2013 at 5:48 am#337450

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 06 2013,09:57)

An eternal Son would not have been conceived but an eternal Son could be born/begotten having eternally existed within the Father and later brought forth from the Father before creation took place.

What about a creation

March 6, 2013 at 10:08 am#337456

jammin

Participant

Quote (terraricca @ Mar. 05 2013,16:14)

Jammin

Quote

i did not say that the father is the son. i did not say that the son is the father. i already told this to you many times. do you have mind problems?

your answer from down the page ;

Quote

see.. that is very clear. christ is the true God in that verse.
the father is the true God
the son is also the true God

you have no knowledge and less understanding ,you have not yet moved on in scriptures from 1John 5;20 ;

AND EVEN THIS SCRIPTURES YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND ;

JN 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was A ©God. (THIS IS THE TRUE VIEW BECAUSE IT FITS ENTIRELY WITH THE REST OF ALL SCRIPTURES )
JN 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.
JN 1:3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

READ THOSE SCRIPTURES SO THAT YOU MAY UNDERSTAND WHAT “””NATURE “”” MEANS

I HOPE YOU UNDERSTOOD

ill give you a very simple example. you are like elementary to me.

your father is truly HUMAN, do you believe that?

if your father is truly HUMAN, are not you a truly human?

answer these questions and you will understand the answer to the Godhead

March 12, 2013 at 3:33 am#338108

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 05 2013,21:57)

An eternal Son would not have been conceived but an eternal Son could be born/begotten having eternally existed within the Father and later brought forth from the Father before creation took place.

All sons are conceived, Kathi. There is no exception to the rule. And all sons who are ever born/begotten are also subject to a time when they didn't exist at all. There are no exceptions to the rule.

And since Jesus was conceived SOLELY by a Father (sans mother), and the Father's role in begetting a child is the act of conception, Jesus was conceived/begotten by his Father.

Oh, and btw, I don't have to even come up with any argument at all. It's not like you're claiming scripturally supported things in the first place. You are just spouting your imagination. The only argument I even need is: Show me this teaching in scripture, Kathi.

I was trying to help you to see how ludicrous your eternally existing Father/Son thing is. If they BOTH existed from the same exact time, then why aren't they TWIN BROTHERS, instead of a Father and a Son?

The words “father” and “son” have meanings and implications, Kathi. Surely God knew how we human beings would understand those words when He decided to declare to us that Jesus was His “Son”, right?

March 12, 2013 at 3:44 am#338110

Participant

Mike,
God said that Jesus was the Word that was God and with God. So how literal are you going to be about that. Also the Son is God's OWN arm and God always had His OWN 'arm.' The Son is the eternal life that WAS WITH the Father. It doesn't say that the Son became the eternal life that began to be with the Father. Eternal life that 'WAS' with the Father in the beginning is eternal in the past. I John 1.

I have answered you so many times about how they are not twin brothers. One brother does not beget his own brother and this is one of those arguments that you pull that you know I am not even saying and you don't even believe. He is a Son because He was born to the Father by the Father and thus the Firstborn of all creation (not first created of all creation).

March 13, 2013 at 2:31 am#338216

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 11 2013,21:44)

God said that Jesus was the Word that was God and with God.

In the country of Abyssinia, the spokeman for the king was called “Kal Hatze” – which means “the Word of the King”.

In the scriptures, the main spokesman for God is called “the Word of God”.

And yes, this spokesman for God was with God in the beginning, and was himself a god (mighty one).

Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 11 2013,21:44)

Also the Son is God's OWN arm and God always had His OWN 'arm.'

The same could be said about Cyrus, Kathi……….. and you already know that, right? In fact, there are many times God spoke through “His word” and did signs and wonders through “His mighty arm”. But what scripture tells you that Jesus was ALWAYS “the word of God” mentioned, or the “arm of the Lord” mentioned?

Hebrews 1:2 says that God spoke to us through Jesus “in these latter days” – AS OPPOSED TO the various ways God spoke to us in the past, right? So the implication is if the word of the LORD came to people in the past, it was NOT Jesus at that time.

So if Jesus wasn't “the word of the LORD” in all those OT scriptures, what makes you think he was ever the “arm of the LORD” in the OT scriptures? John refers to Jesus being the “arm of the LORD” in NT times – but says nothing about the OT times.

Do you think the angel of the LORD, who struck down 185,000 Assyrians was Jesus, Kathi?

March 13, 2013 at 2:36 am#338217

Participant

Mike,
The arm of the LORD here is not another person but the LORD's OWN arm.

Isaiah 59:16 He saw that there was no one, he was appalled that there was no one to intervene; so his own arm worked salvation for him, and his own righteousness sustained him.

March 13, 2013 at 2:55 am#338221

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 11 2013,21:44)

The Son is the eternal life that WAS WITH the Father. It doesn't say that the Son became the eternal life that began to be with the Father. Eternal life that 'WAS' with the Father in the beginning is eternal in the past. I John 1.

Romans 5:21
……so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Romans 6:23
……the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

1 John 5:11
God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

Kathi, God is also called “eternal life” in 1 John 5:20. But do you suppose that means the being of God is LITERALLY “eternal life”? Or does it make more sense that it means God can GIVE us eternal life?

In John 17:3, Jesus says “eternal life” is the taking in of knowledge of him and his God. Is that knowledge LITERALLY “eternal life”? Or does it make more sense that taking in this knowledge will LEAD TO eternal life?

John 12:50
I know that his command leads to eternal life. So whatever I say is just what the Father has told me to say.

John 17:2
For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him.

You WANT 1 John 1:2 to say Jesus was “the eternally living being” who was with the Father…….. but it really doesn't say that. Have you forgotten that Jesus DIED? And that he cannot die AGAIN, because the Father has granted HIM eternal life? Our God has even granted him to give eternal life to us – as attested by the last scripture above.

Jesus gave us the opportunity to have eternal life, and because of this, John poetically called him the “eternal life” that was with the Father.

Surely you understand that Jesus isn't LITERALLY “eternal life”, right?

March 13, 2013 at 3:02 am#338223

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 12 2013,20:36)

Mike,
The arm of the LORD here is not another person but the LORD's OWN arm.

Isaiah 59:16 He saw that there was no one, he was appalled that there was no one to intervene; so his own arm worked salvation for him, and his own righteousness sustained him.

Kathi,

Are you really that slow? Or are your WISHES hindering your ability to think clearly? Are you now saying Jesus isn't even another person than the Father? Are you claiming that Jesus is LITERALLY the Father's ARM?

Kathi, tell me which scripture teaches us that the arm mentioned in Is 59:16 is Jesus.

March 13, 2013 at 3:06 am#338225

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 12 2013,21:36)

Mike,
The arm of the LORD here is not another person but the LORD's OWN arm.

Isaiah 59:16 He saw that there was no one, he was appalled that there was no one to intervene; so his own arm worked salvation for him, and his own righteousness sustained him.

Mike,
There is NO mention of the Father in my post. It mentions the LORD and the LORD is the God of gods and the Lord of lords. The Lord of the lords is Jesus and the Arm of the LORD.

The verse does not say that the Father saw that there was no one. It says that the LORD saw that there was no one. The LORD has more than one member and one of those members was His own arm that worked salvation for Him (the eternal unity).

March 13, 2013 at 3:09 am#338227

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 11 2013,21:44)

I have answered you so many times about how they are not twin brothers. One brother does not beget his own brother…………

Oh, so NOW you can understand what the word “beget” implies? You can understand that a brother doesn't “beget” his own brother, but you can't understand that a father who begets his son has lived LONGER than that son?

What I'm telling you is that YOUR idea of two beings living simultaneously from eternity does NOT fit the idea of a father and a son. Instead, it better fits two twin BROTHERS.

Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 11 2013,21:44)

He is a Son because He was born to the Father by the Father…….

Agreed. Now which scripture tells us that in the case of Jesus, a son and a father exist from the same point in time? Which scripture explains to us that in the case of Jesus, the son didn't come AFTER the father – like every other son in the history of the world?

Just show me a scripture that supports your understanding, Kathi.

March 13, 2013 at 3:13 am#338228