Home Christian Writings Supporting the Trinity Doctrine? – The Trinity Doctrine John 1:1 Page 98

John 1:1

John 1:1 says the Word was God. Does that mean that Jesus is God because he is the Word?
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

a) In the beginning was the Word, (en arch hn o logoV)
b) and the Word was with God, (kai o logoV hn proV ton qeon)
c) and the Word was God. (kai qeoV hn o logoV).

John 1:1b says that the Word was with God and John 1:1c says that the Word was God, so how can the Word be God and be with God at the same time? Well part of the answer to discovering the meaning of this verse is found in 1 John 1:1-2

“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched with our hands, concerning the word of life and the life was manifested, and we saw it, and testify to it, and proclaim to you the eternal life that was with the Father and was made manifest to us”.

First when we read 1John 1:2, it suggests to us that the God in John1:1b is the Father himself.

Secondly, we see In John 1:1c, the last word God is missing the definite article, (THE). The definite article is before all other instances of the word ‘God’ and ‘Logos’ in John 1:1. (e.g., the Word, The God.), yet is absent in the last mention of God. Read on because this can be significant as you are about to find out.

Greek sentence construction affirms that if a noun doesn’t have a preceding article, (THE) it can be read as an adjective (a predicate adjective); and if such a noun does have a preceding article it should be considered a noun (a predicate nominative). Understanding this is a game changer. Scholars see the benefit of the rule for affirming the deity of Christ in John 1:1, but haven’t made the difference clear regarding the difference between identity and nature or definite and qualitative. Don’t worry if this makes no sense to you. It will.

Look at the difference between these two sentences.

1) You are an angel
2) You are THE angel.

Notice how the first one is using the word angel in a qualitative way while the second is definite. Hence the term ‘definite article’.

In John 1:1, all instances of the word ‘God” are preceded by the definite article ‘THE’, except the last one.

So it literally says:

John1:1
a) In the beginning was THE God.
b) THE Word was with THE God
c) And THE Word was god.

Why is the last word not capitalised? Where Greek uses the definite article in English we capitalise the word. e.g., the god = God.

So it is grammatically correct to read John 1:1c with a qualitative sense rather reading it as identifying the Word as God himself. It is not only grammatically correct to read it this way, it is also theologically correct because if we read it as THE Theos, then that would be saying that the Logos is exclusively God even to the exclusion of the Father. Now we have two good reasons for reading the last word ‘god/theos’ as qualitative and not as THE God or God.

In rebuttal to this, some say that God in the New Testament doesn’t always have a preceding definite article which is true, however looking at the verse contextually, we understand that there is clearly two being spoken of, i.e., one God and one called the Word with is clearly another who is next to God and is not that God he is with.

Let’s look at Adam and Eve as an example of two beings that were with each other. Before I give an example, it is important for you at this point to understand that the Hebrew word for ‘man’ is ‘adam’. This means that qualitatively, Adam and Eve are both adam. This is similar to the word theos which is translated as the ‘God’ & god. The absence of the definite article can qualify just as the word adam qualifies. As I said before, in English we use capitals to denote when being definite. So the difference between ‘Adam’ and ‘adam’ is that Adam refers to a specific man called Adam while the latter could refer to him as well as Eve and any other member of mankind. This is clearly stated in scripture in Genesis 1:27:

So God created man (adam) in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

The word for man is adam, so it says: God created ‘adam’ male and female. So saying that ‘Eve is adam’ is a true saying.

In English, If I said “John is the man”, then I am identifying John as  a definite and particular person of the human race. But if I omit the definite article and say “John is man,” then I do not identify him, I classify him. I say “John is human; he belongs to the sphere/nature of man.” Can you see the difference now?

To understand how the article can make a big difference to a piece of text, look at this example. Have a guess as to which one is correct.

a) In the beginning was THE woman
b) and THE woman was with THE man
c) and THE Woman was THE man

a) In the beginning was THE woman
b) and THE woman was with THE man
c) and THE Woman was man

The correct one is the second example because it is saying that the woman belongs to mankind or man. Look at the next example:

a) Tools were used by man.
b) Tools were used by the man.

See how the first example is talking about mankind whereas the second example is talking of a specific man.

In other words the word ‘man’ can be used as an attribute or to describe one’s nature. It is not always used to identify a particular person and it can even refer to more than one person.

Now let’s have a look at the above example, but using Adam and Eve instead. Notice in English that we do not have the definite article preceding Adam or Eve, because capitalising both Adam and Eve leads us to view these words in a definite sense, the same way that Greek requires the definite article. Essentially THE adam/man in Greek is the same as Adam in English.

a) In the beginning was Eve,
b) and Eve was with Adam
c) and Eve was Adam

a) In the beginning was Eve,
b) and Eve was with Adam
c) and Eve was adam

Notice that the second example is still the correct one.

To further understand the important difference between identity and nature, take a look at John 6:70. When speaking of his betrayer Judas Iscariot, Jesus said, “One of you is a devil.” Did Jesus mean that Judas is actually Satan the Devil? No! He merely meant to say that Judas is like (class) a devil, or that he had the qualities or nature of a/the devil. The word “devil” here has no article in the Greek as you have probably guessed, but most translators deem it necessary to add the indefinite article “a” to complete the thought in English even though it is not present in Greek or any Greek. Greek has no indefinite articles, (a,an).

So Judas wasn’t Satan himself, rather he was diabolical, like the Devil. He had the qualities of the Devil. But that doesn’t rule out the fact that Satan is the Devil because it is not actually saying that Judas was the Devil himself. Rather Judas thought as the Devil; and acted as the Devil. He was not the Devil (definite), (Satan is); he was not an actual devil or demon, he was a devil (qualitative). He was one who had the mental disposition, the nature, of the Devil, who is Satan. So it is with John 1:1c.

The Logos was God has no definite article. It is really saying, The Logos was god. This is why the New English Bible and the Revised English Bible translate John 1:1 as “what God was, the Word was.” The TEV (1976) translates it, “the Word was the same as God.” Goodspeed translates this, “the Word was divine.” And Moffatt translates this, “the logos was divine.”

So what kind of being is Jesus then if the Word was theos (without the definite article)? The answer according to John 1:1 is that he must be a divine being if Jesus is the Word of God that was with God. In other words he is a being with God’s nature. A son possessing the nature of his Father. Not just an image, but THE image of God. He is the prototype, the firstborn. He is the mystery that was hidden but has been revealed in our time. He is all these things, but he is not THE God that he is the son of. That God is exclusively the Father and there are many scriptures to prove that which we will look at later in this page.

Many think that the word ‘theos’ and ‘elohim’ always refer to YHWH. They take instances of their choosing to try and prove that Christ is YHWH. In their ignorance they cannot see that there are indeed many god (theos) and many lords, but for true believers there is one God (theos) the Father.

In fact, the word ‘theos’ and ‘elohim’ in scripture are used in reference to God (YHWH), Christ, Man, angels, Satan and idols. So when we see the word ‘theos’ or ‘elohim’, we should ask ourselves what kind of god is being referenced. The god of this age? The Most High God? The Almighty God? The mighty god? A false god? A human? An angel? We must also understand that the word ‘theos’ proceeded by the article (the) is talking of a noun and without the article, it can be an adjective or used to describe or qualify.

Let us now look at some quotes from scholars and writers that understand this. NOTE: this is not an endorsement with all that these authors have written, rather I am appealing to their view regarding John 1:1.

One prominent scholar called Origen is sometimes quoted by Trinitarians who appeal to his wisdom for other purposes. However, they avoid this particular quotation for obvious reasons. Origen wrote in the early 200’s A.D and was a noted expert in Koine Greek.

“We next notice John’s use of the article [“the”] in these sentences. He does not write without care in this respect, nor is he unfamiliar with the niceties of the Greek tongue. In some cases he uses the article, and in some he omits it. He adds the article to the Word, but to the name of theos he adds it sometimes only. He uses the article, when the name of theos refers to the uncreated cause of all things, and omits it when the Word is named theos. Does the same difference which we observe between theos with the article and theos without it prevail also between the Word with it and without it? We must enquire into this. As the theos who is over all is theos with the article not without it, so the Word is the source of that reason (Logos) which dwells in every reasonable creature; the reason which is in each creature is not, like the former called par excellence the Word. Now there are many who are sincerely concerned about religion, and who fall here into great perplexity. They are afraid that they may be proclaiming two theos [gods] and their fear drives them into doctrines which are false and wicked. Either they deny that the Son has a distinct nature of His own besides that of the Father, and make Him whom they call the Son to be theos all but the name, or they deny divinity of the Son, giving Him a separate existence of His own, and making His sphere of essence fall outside that of the Father, so that they are separable from each other. To such persons we have to say that “the theos” on the one hand is Autotheos [God of himself] and so the Saviour says in His prayer to the Father, “That they may know Thee the only true theos [God]; “but that all beyond the theos [God] is made theos by participation in His deity, and is not to be called simply “theos” but rather “the theos “. And thus the first-born of all creation, who is the first to be with the theos , and to attract to Himself deity, is a being of more exalted rank than the other theos [gods] beside Him, of which theos is the theos [God], as it is written, “The theos [God] of theos [gods], the Lord, hath spoken and called the earth.” It was by the offices of the first-born that they became theos [gods], for He drew from the theos [God] in generous measure that they should be made theos [gods], and He communicated it to them according to His own bounty. The true theos [God], then, is “the theos ,” [“the God” as opposed to “god”] and those who are formed after Him are theos [such as the Son of God], images, as it were, of Him the prototype. But the archetypal image, again, of all these images is the word of the theos [God], who was in the beginning, and who by being with the theos [God] is at all times deity, not possessing that of Himself, but by His being with the Father, and not continuing to be theos , if we should think of this, except by remaining always in uninterrupted contemplation of the depths of the Father.”
(Origen’s Commentary on the Gospel of John, Book II, 2)

“Irenaeus [in the second century] could still interpret MK. Xiii, 32 in the following manner: the Son confessed not to know that which only the Father knew; hence ‘ we learn from himself that the Father is over all’, as he who is greater also than the Son. But the Nicene theologians had now suddenly to deny that Jesus could have said such a thing about the Son. In the long-recognized scriptural testimony for the Logos-doctrine provided by Prov. Viii, 22 ff. The exegetes of the second and third centuries had found the creation of the preexistent Logos-Christ set forth without dispute and equivocation. But now, when the Arians also interpreted the passage in this way, the interpretation was suddenly reckoned as false…. A theologian such as Tertullian by virtue of his Subordinationist manner of thinking, could confidently on occasion maintain that, before all creation, God the Father had been originally ‘alone’, and thus there was a time when ‘the Son was not’. When he did so, within the Church of his day such a statement did not inevitably provoke a controversy, and indeed there was none about it. But now, when Arius said the same thing in almost the same words, he raised thereby in the Church a mighty uproar, and such a view was condemned as heresy in the anathemas of Nicaea.” e.a.]
-pp. 155-8. The Formation of Christian Dogma, by Martin Werner, D.D.

When the writers of the New Testament speak of God they mean the God and Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ. When they speak of Jesus Christ, they do not speak of him, nor think of him as God. He is God’s Christ, God’s Son, God’s Wisdom, God’s Word. Even the prologue to St. John {John 1:1-18} which comes nearest to the Nicene Doctrine, must be read in the light of the pronounced subordinationism of the Gospel as a whole; and the Prologue is less explicit in Greek with the anarthrous theos [the word “god” at John 1:1c without the article] than it appears in English… The adoring exclamation of St. Thomas “my Lord and my god” (Joh. xx. 28) is still not quite the same as an address to Christ as being without qualification [limitation] God, and it must be balanced by the words of the risen Christ himself to Mary Magdalene (verse. 17) “Go unto my brethren and say to them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and my God and your God.” Jesus Christ is frequently spoken of in the Ignation Epistles as “our God”, “my God”, but probably never as “God” without qualification.
– John Martin Creed in The Divinity of Jesus Christ.

The word for “god” in Greek is QEOS. In John 1:1 the last occurrence of QEOS is called “a predicate noun” or, “a predicate nominative”. Such a noun tells us something about the subject, instead of telling what the subject is doing. This use of QEOS has reference to the subject, the Word, and does not have the article preceding it; it is anarthrous. This indicates that it is not definite. That is to say, it does not tell what position or office or rank the subject (the Word) occupies. The verb HN “was” follows the predicate noun QEOS; this is another factor in identifying QEOS here as qualitative. This discloses the quality or character of the Word. Of course, the gentleman up above disagrees with me, and he has used Moulton and Colwell to buttress his argument. But what have other Grammarians said about this same type of construction? There is no basis for regarding the predicate theos as definite. In John 1:1 I think that the qualitative force of the predicate [noun] is so prominent that the noun cannot be regarded as definite.
-Philip Harner, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 92:1, 1973, pp. 85, 7.

We must, then take Theos, without the article, in the indefinite [“qualitative” would have been a better word choice] sense of a divine nature or a divine being, as distinguished from the definite absolute God [the Father], ho Theos, the authotheos [selfgod] of Origen. Thus the Theos of John [1:1c] answers to “the image of God” of Paul, Col. 1:15.
-G. Lucke, “Dissertation on the Logos”, quoted by John Wilson in, Unitarian Principles Confirmed by Trinitarian Testimonies, p. 428.

As mentioned in the Note on 1c, the Prologue’s “The Word was God” offers a difficulty because there is no article before theos. Does this imply that “god” means less when predicated of the Word than it does when used as a name for the Father? Once again the reader must divest himself of a post-Nicene understanding of the vocabulary involved.
-Raymond E. Brown, The Anchor Bible, p. 25.

The most natural reading of John 1:1 shows that there are two being mentioned (not three): God and a second who was ‘theos’. They are not presented as two coequal persons in a Binity or Trinity. What we really have is one with the character of THEOS who is with TON THEOS (the God), thus he cannot be the God he is with! The LOGOS is unique however. He/it is identified further in the gospel as “a son from a father, begotten, as a visible being verses the unseen God, Now, without redefining the word THEOS we need to explain how we can have two who are both referred to as “theos.” Either there were two equal Gods or persons called God, or it is talking about a godlike one that is with the Almighty God. When we read all the scriptures we see that the scriptures including the Book of John backs up the last view, that the Father is greater than the Son; that the Father is the only God and the Son is the image of The God.

So what conclusion are we to draw from John 1:1 and the Book of John? In John’s own words he explains the conclusion for his Book. This conclusion is not the Trinity Doctrine. Read the verse below to see what the conclusion is.

John 20:30-31.
30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. “

So John wrote this gospel so that we may come to the conclusion that Jesus is truly the Christ and the Son of God. In addition to this important truth we are also told that we may receive life through his name. The Trinity Doctrine is not the conclusion that one should draw from this writing. Belief that Jesus is the Christ and the Son is the foundation of true faith and Jesus built his Church on this truth. The Trinity Doctrine is not that foundation, rather it is another foundation.

So why don’t translations of the bible translate John 1:1 as the Word was divine. Well first of all it is not incorrect to say that the Word was god, but Trinitarians translators say the Word was God which makes readers think that Jesus is the God (the person). However, in order to bring out the true meaning, some translations actually use the word ‘divine’. See below:

“In the beginning the Word existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was divine.”
An American Translation, Edgar Goodspeed and J. M. Powis Smith, The University of Chicago Press, p. 173

“The Logos (word) existed in the very beginning, and the Logos was with God, the Logos was divine”
by Dr. James Moffatt

So the idea that Jesus Christ is God is often and supposedly supported by John 1:1. However the rest of John’s Gospel makes careful distinctions between Jesus and his Father as well as Jesus and God. This same distinction and separation is found throughout the rest of the New Testament too. The New Testament actually goes much further than merely distinguishing and separating the two. In John 17:3 Jesus, in prayer to his Father, refers to him as “the only true God”. In John 20:17 the resurrected Jesus refers to his Father as “my Father, and your Father; and… my God, and your God.” In I Corinthians 8:6 the Apostle Paul says of Christians, “to us there is but one God, the Father.” In I Timothy 2:5 Paul states, “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” In Ephesians 1:17 Paul refers to the Father as “the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory.” And in Revelation 3:12 the resurrected and glorified Jesus says, “Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.”

We must also remember that the judges of Israel were called gods/theos. This doesn’t mean that they were part of God or part of the Trinity, it just means that they had authority given to them by God. It is also written that we can partake of divine nature, so that could also make us divine just as partaking in flesh makes us man. It must be noted though, that being divine or partaking in divine nature is different to actually being the Divine himself.

Also see John 10:34-35:
34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, I have said you are gods” (theos).
35 If he called them gods (theos), to whom the word of God (ho theos) came, and the Scripture cannot be broken,

2 Peter 1:4
Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature and escape the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.

Also Jesus said that he was one with his Father and he also prayed that we would be one with them. See John 17:21
that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.

We humans were intended to share in the divine nature too, yet we are not the God. John 1:1 shows us that the Word was god (divine), not (the Word was/is the God, Yahweh) which many seem to think it says. The Word came from God, is of God, is like God, and this is consistent with the scriptures we have looked at thus far. 1 Corinthians 11:3 reinforces this statement because the word “head” in the Greek is translated “from”, source or authority. Remember that the woman came from Man and Man came from Christ and Christ came from God. This is the divine order.

Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

Jesus Christ is the Word of God, Jesus wasn’t created, rather the Word was born from God in eternity and that is why Jesus is called the Only Begotten of the Father. (John 1:14) (John 1:18) (John 3:16 ) (John 3:18 ) (1 John 4:9 ). The word begotten means (only child, single of its kind). Notice that our spirits are born from God, but through his Word, and our spirits will go back to God who gave it (Ecclesiastes 12:7) . But Jesus was not begotten through the Word because he is the Word, this is why Jesus is unique because he is the only one begotten of the Father and therefore he is the image of his Father. That is why he is called the Image of God and the Firstborn of all creation (Colossians 1:15) and it is also why the Bible says in (Hebrews 1:5) For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son; today I have become your Father” Or again, “I will be his Father, and he will be my Son”

Unlike his Father who is the invisible Spirit, Jesus does have a body and is visible. Jesus was born from God. We must remember that although his Father is greater than himself, he is also not just a man like us. Yes he partook of flesh and came as a man like us, but he also existed in the form of God as the Word or Logos. We are told that he resides between God and Man and as a man he is our mediator to God. It was indeed the Word that became flesh. God did not  become flesh, instead God resided in Christ who came in the flesh. So just like us, God can be in us who are made of flesh, but God himself did not become flesh. God is not a man and never will be a man. It was the Word who came to us as a man and it was the Word that all things  were created though. See John 1:3.
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

And to compliment the fact that God made all things through his Word, and that Jesus is the Word of God, even ignoring the fact that Jesus wears a title, “The Word of God” as recorded in the Book of Revelation, we are specifically told, that God created everything through Jesus Christ. See :Hebrews 1:2
but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. 

So Jesus was begotten not created and again, this is why he is called God’s only begotten Son and this is why he is unique. He is seated at the right hand of God and situated between God & Man. This is also why he is the only mediator between God & Man and the only name under heaven whereby Man can be saved. God made creation through him and for him and God redeemed creation through him too. God cannot fellowship with sin that is why he sent his Son into the world, so he could bring us back to himself through his mediator. Jesus came from God and he was in the beginning with God. So what does it mean when it says ‘beginning’? The Greek word for beginning, in John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word” is ‘arche’ and this word means the following:

1) beginning, origin
2) the person or thing that commences, the first person or thing in a series, the leader
3) that by which anything begins to be, the origin, the active cause
4) the extremity of a thing
4a) of the corners of a sail
5) the first place, principality, rule, magistracy
5a) of angels and demons

Below I will show you a verse where the word “beginning” or ‘arche’ is also mentioned and I think you will agree that it is rather obvious from this verse that it does not mean eternity or eternal. The verse is John 8:44
You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him.

Just for good measure, I will also throw in the first verse in the bible, which also uses the word beginning (note that this a Hebrew word). I am sure we can all agree that the earth has not been in existence for all of eternity.

Genesis 1:1
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Certainly if we read John 1:1 correctly and in context with all scripture, we see that it is not teaching that God is a Trinity.

← Go back to ‘Supporting the Trinity Doctrine‘.

Discussion

Viewing 20 posts - 1,941 through 1,960 (of 26,008 total)
123…979899…1,2991,3001,301
  • Author
    Posts
  • November 9, 2008 at 4:22 am#111533
    epistemaniac
    Participant

    Quote (t8 @ Nov. 08 2008,22:40)

    Quote (epistemaniac @ Nov. 08 2008,04:41)
    Yeah… funny…. I say exactly the same sorts of things about poeple like you…. especially things like “If a person can't see the obvious, then they have a form of blindness. Bias, indoctrination, institutions, pride of the learned, all play their part.” :) In fact, I would even go so far as to say that I know how this blindness is caused:

    2 Corinthians 4:4 (ESV) In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

    blessings,
    Ken


    Hi Ken.

    In a different time and different politics, I wonder if you would approve of me being burned at the stake for my words and belief?


    I would have done exactly what the culture and church leadersdhip at the time called for, to have done otherwise would have been unscriptural for we are to obey our earthly authorities, and just as there were stonings for heresy, basically capital punishment for all sorts of crimes against God, just as you are committing now because you are guilty of gross heresy, you have downtrodden the glory of Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father….. And whoever wants to be saved should above all cling to the universal faith….. Whoever does not guard it whole and inviolable will doubtless perish eternally. Now this is the universal faith: We worship one God in trinity and the Trinity in unity, neither confusing the persons nor dividing the divine being. For the Father is one person, the Son is another, and the Spirit is still another. But the deity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is one, equal in glory, coeternal in majesty. What the Father is, the Son is, and so is the Holy Spirit. Uncreated is the Father; uncreated is the Son; uncreated is the Spirit. The Father is infinite; the Son is infinite; the Holy Spirit is infinite. Eternal is the Father; eternal is the Son; eternal is the Spirit: And yet there are not three eternal beings, but one who is eternal; as there are not three uncreated and unlimited beings, but one who is uncreated and unlimited. Almighty is the Father; almighty is the Son; almighty is the Spirit: And yet there are not three almighty beings, but one who is almighty.”

    But today t8… well today you are free to be wrong, and God will judge your fate, as he will judge mine.

    As far as judges and demons being called gods, these are clearly different cases. You won't see the judges of Israel or demons being called “God” AND being called Messiah, Savior, the only begotten Son, the Son of God, Judge of the world, the one before whom every knee will bow and every tongue confess that He is Lord, Alpha and Omega, first and last, Son of Man, etc etc etc… so I am a bit surprised that people who are supposedly biblical students continue to use such weak, faulty, incoherent “arguments” that since the term “gods” is used of other beings you think that this somehow weakens Jesus' deity. The fact is, and everyone knows it, Jesus is called “God”…this combined with all the other titles and attributes that are used of Him lead me to believe that he is equal to God in essence, yet subordinate because He willingly emptied Himself and took on the form of a servant, being obedient unto death on the cross. All things considered, with all the other titles applied to Jesus, that eternal life is only found in Him, that He claims to forgive sin, etc which really separates Him from all the other beings… so much so, that for thousands of Christians for thousands of years, we think that the biblical data is best reconciled by thinking of God as triune. You disagree. That's fine, its your right to do so. Its my right to disagree with you, and I know that I have history and the weight of the majority of the Christian church on my side, so that fact that a few persons here and there disagree with so much biblical and extra-biblical evidence for the Trinity, its really no threat at all that you and others like you disagree.

    This is because there have always been fringe cults, whether they be well organized like the Jehovah's Witnesses, Unitarians or Christadelphians, or scattered individuals like those found here at this site that reject the Trinity, like Gene, you, Nick, etc etc. In fact, its quite useful for me to find persons who are heretical and argue against the historic doctrines of the Christian Church, for time and time again my own faith is strengthened by your objections, so I appreciate all that all of you do, while at the same time pitying all of you.

    But through it all, I get to be obedient to God, in particular to 1 Peter 3:15 (ESV) but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect,” as I share biblical truth with those who deny it. And the great thing about God's word is that ALWAYS goes forth and accomplishes His will. In some cases people are moved by God, the scales fall from their eyes and they come to see that Jesus is in fact God and their hearts are softened. However, in other cases, as people continue to hear the truth and continue to reject it, their hearts are hardened, and that too is God's will. In either case, I have the privilege and honor of being used of God to accomplish His will.

    John 12:39-41 (ESV) 39 Therefore they could not believe. For again Isaiah said, 40 “He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and turn, and I would heal them.” 41 Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory and spoke of him.

    Romans 11:7-10 (ESV) 7 What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened, 8 as it is written, “God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day.” 9 And David says, “Let their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them; 10 let their eyes be darkened so that they cannot see, and bend their backs forever.”

    So yeah…. I get to provide reasons for my belief, being completely free of the need to convince you. I only have to provide reasons I believe as I do, I don't have to worry about whether or not any of the people here find the reasons compelling. That is, in one sense, utterly irrelevant. Of course, in another I hope that someone might find the reasons compelling as well. On the other hand, if my reasons for believing in the Trinity do not convince others, and they surely will not be reason enough for many, that is perfectly fine. In other words, the fact that someone disagrees with me about the Trinity in no way shakes my belief in the slightest bit. After all, if I only believed in the things that the other people I encounter likewise believed, my beliefs would be constantly changing and my worldview would be chaos, in fact, I would be able to believe almost nothing at all, because very few people agree in all their beliefs.

    blessings,
    Ken

    November 9, 2008 at 4:33 am#111534
    epistemaniac
    Participant

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Nov. 09 2008,05:07)

    Quote (t8 @ Nov. 08 2008,22:40)

    Quote (epistemaniac @ Nov. 08 2008,04:41)
    Yeah… funny…. I say exactly the same sorts of things about poeple like you…. especially things like “If a person can't see the obvious, then they have a form of blindness. Bias, indoctrination, institutions, pride of the learned, all play their part.” :) In fact, I would even go so far as to say that I know how this blindness is caused:

    2 Corinthians 4:4 (ESV) In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

    blessings,
    Ken


    Hi Ken.

    In a different time and different politics, I wonder if you would approve of me being burned at the stake for my words and belief?


    T8…..i feel the same way, I wonder who would get the biggest fire me or you.   :(

    love and peace to you and yours……………gene


    not to worry Gene….. everyone is a heretic in someone's eyes…. including me…. and at one time people n the church would have pursued me with blood in their eyes, in particular, the Roman Catholic church would have killed me had they gotten the chance, because I specifically adhere to the doctrines of many of the Reformers, and Rome is clear that, to this day, I stand under their “damning”, their “anathema”, because I believe in salvation by faith through grace alone. In particular, the Council of Trent listed these crimes which I am guilty of:

    “If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.” Sixth Session CANON IX

    “If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema.” Sixth Session CANON XII

    Going to a time just after the Reformation got under way, I would have been persecuted to the death because I do not believe that infants should be baptized, and thus could well have been martyred by Lutherans, Congregationalists, or perhaps Presbyterians, as well as Rome, who all had it out for Baptists or Anabaptists…. and again, Rome said:
    “If any one saith, that little children, for that they have not actual faith, are not, after having received baptism, to be reckoned amongst the faithful; and that, for this cause, they are to be rebaptized when they have attained to years of discretion; or, that it is better that the baptism of such be omitted, than that, while not believing by their own act, they should be baptized in the faith alone of the Church; let him be anathema.” Seventh Session CANON XIII

    blessings,
    Ken

    November 9, 2008 at 4:37 am#111535
    epistemaniac
    Participant

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 08 2008,12:16)

    Quote (epistemaniac @ Nov. 08 2008,04:00)

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 21 2008,13:31)
    WJ….Jesus is indeed my lord but he is (NOT) my GOD. His GOD is MY GOD and we have the same Father who is GOD. The Fathers Presence was in Jesus via the Holy Spirit , but was not Him, Just as the Fathers Spirit can be in us, but not us. Remember Jesus said He could do (NOTHING) Himself and went to say the (FATHER) in me, He doth the works. God was in Jesus reconciling the world unto Himself, but being in Jesus does not make him Jesus. Why would Jesus say He was going to the Father if He was the Father. Didn't he Quote ” Hear O Israel the LORD our GOD is (ONE) LORD”. The (OUR) included Him also.

    Peace………. gene


    the only reason Jesus said that He could do nothing apart from the Father was because He would not want to. His and the Father's will are one….. again, just as in the “Father is greater than I” type of passages that  some people might want to appeal to as some kind of evidence that the Son is a lesser ontological being than the Father, they do so at the expense of good exegesis and by taking passages out of their context to make them say something that they do not say. The 3 “do nothing” passages are:

    ESV Jn 5:19 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you,  the Son  can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father  does, that the Son does likewise.
     
    ———————————————————————-
    ESV Jn 5:30 “I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge, and  my judgment is just, because  I seek not my own will  but the will of him who sent me.
     
    ———————————————————————-
    ESV Jn 8:28 Jesus said to them, “When you have  lifted up the Son of Man,  then you will know that  I am he, and that  I do nothing on my own authority, but  speak just as the Father taught me.

    ———————————————————————-

    Tolle Lege:

    “The principal thrust of v. 19 is that whatever ‘making himself equal with God’ (v. 18) might mean, for Jesus it does not mean complete or even partial independence from his Father (cf. 7:18). The truth is that the Son can do nothing by himself—or, better, ‘on his own initiative’ (aph’ heautou, lit. ‘from himself’). Though he is the unique Son of God (cf. notes on 1:49), and may truly be called God (1:1, 18; 20:28) and take to himself divine titles (e.g. 8:58) and, as in this context, divine rights (5:17), yet is he always submissive to the Father. Not only does the Son always do what pleases the Father (8:29), but he can do only what he sees his Father doing.….. The Greek text of verses 19–23 is structured around four gar (‘for’ or ‘because’) statements. The first introduces the last clause of v. 19. The thought runs like this: It is impossible for the Son to take independent, self-determined action that would set him over against the Father as another God, for all the Son does is both coincident with and coextensive with all that the Father does. ‘Perfect Sonship involves perfect identity of will and action with the Father’ (Westcott, 1. 189). It follows that separate, self-determined action would be a denial of his sonship. But if this last clause of v. 19 takes the impossibility of the Son operating independently and grounds it in the perfection of Jesus’ sonship, it also constitutes another oblique claim to deity; for the only one who could conceivably do whatever the Father does must be as great as the Father, as divine as the Father.
    Carson, D. A. (1991). The Gospel according to John (251). Leicester, England;  Grand Rapids, Mich.: Inter-Varsity Press;  W.B. Eerdmans.

    “The passage under discussion (Jn 5:19) may be paraphrased as follows.
    “Do you Jews accuse me of transgressing the Father’s sabbath-ordinance and of blaspheming his name by claiming equality with him? The charge is absurd, for in that case the will of the Son would be separate (not merely distinct) from the will of the Father and would even oppose the latter. But as a matter of fact the Son can do nothing whatever (οὐ δύναται … ποιεῖν … ουδέν) of himself, but only what he sees the Father doing; for here, indeed, is the perfect pattern of that which is so often seen on earth; namely, that whatever he (the Father) does that the Son does likewise (here, indeed, there is flawless correspondence).
    Hendriksen, W., & Kistemaker, S. J. (1953-2001). Vol. 1-2: New Testament commentary : Exposition of the Gospel According to John. Accompanying biblical text is author's translation. New Testament Commentary (1:198). Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.

    “Although the Jews had focused their hostility on the equality aspect of Jesus’ relation to the Father (5:18), Jesus countered their anger by highlighting his dependency on the Father (5:19). Here then are two perspectives about Jesus: the powerful divine Son of God and the humble Messenger of God. Christian theology always struggles with these two aspects (sometimes called the two personae) of Jesus. The dangerous tendency today of some is to de-emphasize the divine exalted nature, and the tendency of others is to de-emphasize the self-effacing human nature of Jesus. The key is to find the balance between the two.—New American Commentary  

    “Jesus explains his relationship with the Father through a series of four explanatory clauses (John 5:19-23), each headed by the conjunction gar (variously translated in the NIV). He begins by saying he can only do what he sees the Father doing because [gar] whatever the Father does the Son also does (v. John 5:19). Here the same unity of action is stated, yet it is not in terms of limitation (the Son can only do what he sees the Father doing), but through a mind-boggling claim of completeness. He does everything (ha gar an, translated whatever) the Father does. That is, not only is everything in Jesus' life reflective of God the Father, but also everything the Father does is reflected in Jesus' life. Jesus is claiming to be the full revelation of the Father (cf. John 15:15; John 16:13, John 16:15; John 17:10).
    —The IVP New Testament Commentary Series

    Lastly, in regard to

    Quote
    Why would Jesus say He was going to the Father if He was the Father.

    Well, because Jesus is not the Father! Pretty simple ehhhh? This fundamental superficial elementary error is really beneath you Gene…. state your objections, fine, but please do not stoop, as so many others seem to do, the JW at your door trying to get in a quick cheeky apparently to them anyway 'profound” objection to the Trinity by saying ridiculous things like “if Jesus is God, who ran heaven while Jesus was dead for 3 days?” or “if Jesus is God, then He was the Father, if He was the Father, how could He be going to the Father” such silly, infantile (really this is the best thing that can be said of them) “objections” are not really objections at all, but fund
    amental misunderstanding of what the trinity teaches, in other words, its a straw man, a caricature, a tilting at windmills by arguing against a position that no Trinitarian believes, or at least, they ought not believe. Jesus is not the Father, OK? The Father is not the Son who is not the Holy Spirit…. etc

    Selah

    blessings,
    Ken


    Hi Ken

    Very good points put forth in a better way than I ever could myself though I have spoken the same truths many times before.

    It seems that so many do not look at the whole council of God, by taking all scriptural data together as one.

    Instead they ignore or carry a bottle of white out concerning scriptures as you have so beautifully explained and of which our forefathers also taught.

    I appreciate your stand on the truth and your willingness to take the lonely road here.

    Blessings!

    WJ


    Thank you WJ :) A word of encouragement here at this site is kind of like a cold drink of water for a man stumbling through the desert…. :) And blessings to you for your encouraging posts, you motivate me to continue to fight the good fight, to encourage you to do the same is all I could hope for.

    blessings,
    Ken

    November 9, 2008 at 5:54 am#111540
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi E,
    You really need to put aside these men and their ideas and let the Spirit teach you.
    The Spirit teaches from what is written, not speculation.

    November 10, 2008 at 5:37 am#111616
    pulivarthy
    Participant

    gene & others,

    What the Bible has to say about the Holy Spirit

    (1 Corinthians 6:19 KJV)
    (19) What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost {which is} in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

    (Romans 5:5 KJV)
    (5) And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.

    (John 14:16-17 KJV)
    (16) And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; (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.

    (John 16:7,13 KJV)
    (7) Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. (13) Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, {that} shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

    Philippians 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

    Philippians 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

    holy spririt is personalised and it is doing works that are even impossible by men.Jesus christ is equal with God.Our pattern (structure is only similar to God, and all others are opponents to God i.e rebellion ways through blindness. For me, jesus christ is also a feature of God i.e in the pattern of man which God shares with man.Though trinity is not there in the bible, Jesus christ happened to be comforter when he had been on this earth and His role is taken by Holy spirit.Therefore, for me all three are same and one only in every nature. I want to say the words like 'unitarian' , Jehovah witness etc. will not be found in the bible.Though trinity is not there, many reasonings from the available scriptures imply the same meaning as trinity.
    peace and love,get cool
    babu

    November 10, 2008 at 5:50 am#111617
    pulivarthy
    Participant

    ken and wj,
    good points and convictions. God our Lord may bless you.
    babu

    November 12, 2008 at 6:40 am#111741
    david
    Participant

    Eppy,

    Quote
    As far as judges and demons being called gods, these are clearly different cases.

    Obviously.
    They're not the same case, are they?
    But it does tell us something about the use of the word “god.” In the Bible, angels, and humans are called “gods.”

    Quote
    You won't see the judges of Israel or demons being called “God” AND being called Messiah, Savior, the only begotten Son, the Son of God, Judge of the world, the one before whom every knee will bow and every tongue confess that He is Lord, Alpha and Omega, first and last, Son of Man, etc etc etc… so I am a bit surprised that people who are supposedly biblical students continue to use such weak, faulty, incoherent “arguments” that since the term “gods” is used of other beings you think that this somehow weakens Jesus' deity.

    (Quick little point–many men were called anointed one or literally “messiah.”)

    And No, no one is saying that human judges were called “son of man” “son of God” “judge of the world” etc.

    We're simply saying that they are sometimes called “gods.” And what does that tell us?

    IT TELLS US THAT THE WORD “GOD” HAS MEANING. It's not a name.

    Jesus, the only begotten God has vast amounts of power and mightiness, being given all authority and power, by his father, so the word “god” (Mighty one/strong one) fits, obviously.

    But, 5 times in scripture, we're told that Jesus had a “God.”

    Almighty God, the Father, has unlimited power. He is the only one who doesn't have a God, or someone with more mightiness to look up to.

    Of course, Satan has a lot of power, being the “ruler of the world.” He is a god as well, a mighty one.

    Angels have far more mightiness than humans. So, with reference to us, they are gods (mighty ones)

    Human judges had more power than the average Israelite, so they were called “gods” in that scripture (mighty ones.)

    Of course, this is all relative. There is only one who is above all others.
    PSALM 83:18
    “That people may know that you, whose name is Jehovah, You alone are the Most High over all the earth.”

    Quote
    supposedly biblical students continue to use such weak, faulty, incoherent “arguments” that since the term “gods” is used of other beings you think that this somehow weakens Jesus' deity.

    Our only argument is that we understand what the word “god” means. We get it. “God” is a word that has an actual meaning. Once you understand that meaning, you may “get it” as well.

    Quote
    The fact is, and everyone knows it, Jesus is called “God”…this combined with all the other titles and attributes that are used of Him lead me to believe that he is equal to God in essence,


    So it's the titles?

    Just for a second, imagine the king of the universe, or the king of a great land, or whatever. He has a multitude of titles and credentials. He's the king.
    Imagine he has a son. The Son, also would obviously have many titles, and signs of authority. (He's the king's son.)
    THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD EXPECT OF THE “son of God” ISN'T IT?

    Quote
    that eternal life is only found in Him, that He claims to forgive sin, etc which really separates Him from all the other beings…

    Yes, all other beings, except his God and Father, Jehovah.

    November 12, 2008 at 9:00 am#111759
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    Quote (david @ Nov. 12 2008,17:40)

    But it does tell us something about the use of the word “god.”  In the Bible, angels, and humans are called “gods.”

    Where David? ???

    Where is there a scripture of any being with “divine attributes” or “divine qualities” called gods?

    Where is the word “el” “eloyhim” or “theos” ascribed to any being that has “divine attributes” or “divine qualities” other than Jesus?

    You still have not answered this question.

    Surely there is at least one example in 66 books of the Bible!

    Where is there a scripture that calls an Angel of God “el” “eloyhim” or “theos”?

    You keep making this claim about the definition of the word “theos”, but you and t8 do not give us one example where a servant of God ever calls any being God unless they were referring to The Father or Jesus who is True God, or “false gods” “idols” or wicked kings or judges!

    So your definition of the word ascribed to Jesus is putting him in the same class as “false gods” or wicked men and is in fact anathema.

    The Apostles called Jesus God because he is God!

    WJ

    November 12, 2008 at 6:08 pm#111768
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Quote (epistemaniac @ Nov. 09 2008,15:22)

    Quote (t8 @ Nov. 08 2008,22:40)

    Quote (epistemaniac @ Nov. 08 2008,04:41)
    Yeah… funny…. I say exactly the same sorts of things about poeple like you…. especially things like “If a person can't see the obvious, then they have a form of blindness. Bias, indoctrination, institutions, pride of the learned, all play their part.” :) In fact, I would even go so far as to say that I know how this blindness is caused:

    2 Corinthians 4:4 (ESV) In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

    blessings,
    Ken


    Hi Ken.

    In a different time and different politics, I wonder if you would approve of me being burned at the stake for my words and belief?


    I would have done exactly what the culture and church leadersdhip at the time called for, to have done otherwise would have been unscriptural for we are to obey our earthly authorities, and just as there were stonings for heresy, basically capital punishment for all sorts of crimes against God, just as you are committing now because you are guilty of gross heresy, you have downtrodden the glory of Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father….. And whoever wants to be saved should above all cling to the universal faith….. Whoever does not guard it whole and inviolable will doubtless perish eternally. Now this is the universal faith: We worship one God in trinity and the Trinity in unity, neither confusing the persons nor dividing the divine being. For the Father is one person, the Son is another, and the Spirit is still another. But the deity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is one, equal in glory, coeternal in majesty. What the Father is, the Son is, and so is the Holy Spirit. Uncreated is the Father; uncreated is the Son; uncreated is the Spirit. The Father is infinite; the Son is infinite; the Holy Spirit is infinite. Eternal is the Father; eternal is the Son; eternal is the Spirit: And yet there are not three eternal beings, but one who is eternal; as there are not three uncreated and unlimited beings, but one who is uncreated and unlimited. Almighty is the Father; almighty is the Son; almighty is the Spirit: And yet there are not three almighty beings, but one who is almighty.”

    But today t8… well today you are free to be wrong, and God will judge your fate, as he will judge mine.

    As far as judges and demons being called gods, these are clearly different cases. You won't see the judges of Israel or demons being called “God” AND being called Messiah, Savior, the only begotten Son, the Son of God, Judge of the world, the one before whom every knee will bow and every tongue confess that He is Lord, Alpha and Omega, first and last, Son of Man, etc etc etc… so I am a bit surprised that people who are supposedly biblical students continue to use such weak, faulty, incoherent “arguments” that since the term “gods” is used of other beings you think that this somehow weakens Jesus' deity. The fact is, and everyone knows it, Jesus is called “God”…this combined with all the other titles and attributes that are used of Him lead me to believe that he is equal to God in essence, yet subordinate because He willingly emptied Himself and took on the form of a servant, being obedient unto death on the cross. All things considered, with all the other titles applied to Jesus, that eternal life is only found in Him, that He claims to forgive sin, etc which really separates Him from all the other beings… so much so, that for thousands of Christians for thousands of years, we think that the biblical data is best reconciled by thinking of God as triune. You disagree. That's fine, its your right to do so. Its my right to disagree with you, and I know that I have history and the weight of the majority of the Christian church on my side, so that fact that a few persons here and there disagree with so much biblical and extra-biblical evidence for the Trinity,  its really no threat at all that you and others like you disagree.

    This is because there have always been fringe cults, whether they be well organized like the Jehovah's Witnesses, Unitarians or Christadelphians, or scattered individuals like those found here at this site that reject the Trinity, like Gene, you, Nick, etc etc. In fact, its quite useful for me to find persons who are heretical and argue against the historic doctrines of the Christian Church, for time and time again my own faith is strengthened by your objections, so I appreciate all that all of you do, while at the same time pitying all of you.

    But through it all, I get to be obedient to God, in particular to 1 Peter 3:15 (ESV) but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect,” as I share biblical truth with those who deny it. And the great thing about God's word is that ALWAYS goes forth and accomplishes His will. In some cases people are moved by God, the scales fall from their eyes and they come to see that Jesus is in fact God and their hearts are softened. However, in other cases, as people continue to hear the truth and continue to reject it, their hearts are hardened, and that too is God's will. In either case, I have the privilege and honor of being used of God to accomplish His will.

    John 12:39-41 (ESV) 39 Therefore they could not believe. For again Isaiah said, 40 “He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and turn, and I would heal them.” 41 Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory and spoke of him.

    Romans 11:7-10 (ESV) 7 What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened, 8 as it is written, “God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day.” 9 And David says, “Let their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them; 10 let their eyes be darkened so that they cannot see, and bend their backs forever.”

    So yeah…. I get to provide reasons for my belief, being completely free of the need to convince you. I only have to provide reasons I believe as I do, I don't have to worry about whether or not any of the people here find the reasons compelling. That is, in one sense, utterly irrelevant. Of course, in another I hope that someone might find the reasons compelling as well. On the other hand, if my reasons for believing in the Trinity do not convince others, and they surely will not be reason enough for many, that is perfectly fine. In other words, the fact that someone disagrees with me about the Trinity in no way shakes my belief in the slightest bit. After all, if I only believed in the things that the other people I encounter likewise believed, my beliefs would be constantly changing and my worldview would be chaos, in fact, I would be able to believe almost noth
    ing at all, because very few people agree in all their beliefs.

    blessings,
    Ken


    Hi E,
    So if you can provide REASONS for your beliefs that JUSTIFIES THEM?

    Surely you should rather follow Jesus and scripture?

    Reason and justifications and rationalisations do not help us.

    November 12, 2008 at 6:52 pm#111772
    Tiffany
    Participant

    W H O I S G O D?
    Ken I hope you will read all of what my Husband wrote here

    Ask this question today in our 21st Century and the answer would be obvious. Most people would point upwards and say, “God is God”. 2000 years ago the answer would not have been so obvious. The Romans had many gods; a god of thunder, a god of lightening, a god of rain, a god of war, a god of love, ect, ect. There is something else people associate with the word god, supernatural powers. In ancient times people would chisel a statue out of rock, or carve a figure out of wood, or shape a figure out of metal, and then call it their god. They would then worship and sacrifice before this god. We may laugh at that today, but then, this was serious business, because people were sacrificed to these gods. But in those days there were also none deities’ gods. People with great political power were gods, so were strong military leaders, or wealthy businessmen. They were all considered mighty men, gods, minus the supernatural powers.
    Ps. 82: 1 “ God (the Almighty God) standeth in the congregation of the mighty, he judges among the gods.”
    v. 6 “ I have said, ye are gods, and all of you are children of the most High,”
    Today we no longer think of them as gods, if we work for them, we would call them Boss. And really that is what the word god stands for, a strong one, a powerful one, and a mighty one. Except when we speak of thee God in heaven, he is the Almighty God, the all-powerful one.
    Ps. 86:8 “Among the gods there is none like unto thee O LORD…”
    And just as all the gods had names, so does the Almighty God.
    Ps. 83:18 “ That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most High over all the earth.”
    Is. 42:8 “ I am the LORD (Jehovah): that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images”.
    “Jehovah” is the name of the Almighty God, “Yahweh” in Hebrew. The name occurs 6823 times in the O.T., and yet in my bible, the King James, it is only written four times; other translation mentions the name at all. No wonder people think “God” is God’s name. There is a reason why God’s name was omitted. The “Scribes”, a Jewish religious sect, in charge of copying the scriptures, had such a reverence for the name, a fear of using the name in vain, they would not speak it or write it; and so they replaced the name Jehovah with “the LORD”, LORD in capital letters. So, where ever you read “the LORD”, you should know it should say, “Jehovah”
    Why can nobody else call himself by that name? Because the definition of the name is;
    The everlasting one;
    The self-existing one;
    The immortal one;
    What this means is simply this; God’s existence depends on nothing and no one else; He has always existed, and he can never die, he is immortal, death is impossible. Paul tells us only God is immortal.
    1 Tim. 1:17 “Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.”
    1 Tim. 6:16 “Who only has immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man has seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.”
    The bible also speaks of only one God.
    Ex. 8:10 “… know that there is none like unto the LORD (Jehovah) God.”
    Deut. 4:35”…know that the LORD (Jehovah) he is God, there is none else beside him”.
    Is. 40:13 “Who has directed the spirit of the LORD, or being his counsellor hath taught him?”
    v. 25 “ To whom then will ye liken me, or shall I be equal? Saith the Holy One “.
    Is. 45:18 “For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he has established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.”
    Is. 46:9 “Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, there is none like me.”
    Mark 12:32“…well, Master, thou has said the truth, for there is one God and there is none other but he.”
    1 Cor. 8:4 “… and that there is none other God but one”.
    v. 5 “ For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many “.)
    v. 6 “ But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him”.
    Why is it, that we have so many clear scriptures that teach us, there is only one God? And why are there no scriptures that clearly show God is a trinity? Because there are none, God is not the author of confusion.
    1 Cor. 14:33 “For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.”
    There is absolutely nothing in these scriptures above that indicates there are three persons. Infect they emphasize that Jehovah, the Father, is God. If Jesus was God, and equal to God, Is. 40:25 should not be in your bible, and Jesus should not be called his son. God has no equal.
    History tells us, a triune god is nothing new. The Egyptians worshiped a triune god long before Christ, Osiris the father, Horus the son, and Ises the virgin. I find the resemblance to the present doctrine of the trinity very interesting, to say the least. India too, is worshiping a triad god, Siva, Brahma and Vishnu. So did the Babylonians, Ishtar, Sin and Shamash. Doesn’t that make you wonder at all? We read in,
    1 John 4:12 “No one has seen God at any time…”
    If Jesus were “God”, that scripture would not be true, especially since Jesus was the one that said it.
    John 1:18 “No man hath seen God at any time…”
    Paul says, whether we call someone else god, either in heaven or hear on earth, there is only one God, the Father, the Almighty God. Why do we call God, Father? The definition of the word is, life giver. All life begins with God, and that includes his son Jesus. Why is Jesus called the son? The son is he who receives life from the Father. That is why we read in;
    John 3:16 “ For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son…”
    v. 17 “ For God sent not his son into the world…”
    God gave his son, God sent his son. In other words, Jesus did not become the Fathers son when he was born of Mary, he was his son long before then. After all, did he not create everything?
    Col. 1:16 “ For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth…”
    If Jesus had become a son when he was born of Mary; should not the Holy Spirit be his father?
    Mat. 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.”
    You must have wondered about that yourself. Speaking of the Holy Spirit, is he God? Is he a person? Do we know his name? Does he have a name? I don’t mean “helper” or “comforter”; those are not names, that is what God’s Holy Spirit does, he helps us, and comforts us. Should it not surprise us that everything in the Universe has a name?
    Ps. 147:4 “ He telleth the number of the stars, he calleth them all by their names”.
    Except the one (person?), whom we credit with being most influential in our Christian life, the Holy Spirit? If the Holy Spirit was a person, was God, God would have made that very clear in scripture, and again, it would make the Holy Spirit another equal to God. This is only more confusion. Many will reason and say, Jesus spoke of the Holy Spirit as a “he”, that is prove of a person.
    John 14:26 “But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send, in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.”
    If one little word, “he”, is prove that the Holy Spirit is a person, than the same must
    be said of another little word, “her”.
    Mk. 13:28 “Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near.”
    Now you may not find the word “her” in all translation, but it is in my bible, “The Ryrie Study Bible, King James version”. And even if it were present in every bible, no one would assume the fig tree was a woman.
    There is not a single scripture that says, the Spirit is God, all scriptures say, the Spirit of God, God’s Holy Spirit, or the Spirit of the Lord. Never is the Spirit addressed in the way we address the Father or the Son; and both are called by their name, so why is the Holy Spirit never called by his name? He has no name, he does not exist, as a third person that is.
    Have you ever wondered, why did Jesus say?
    John 16:7 “Nevertheless I tell you the truth; it is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter (Spirit) will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.”
    Why was it so expedient, so important, for Jesus to go back to the Father? Why would God not send us his Holy Spirit if Jesus had not returned first? God is holy and pure; he cannot look at sin, much less dwell in sinful men. Jesus had to ascend to heaven, where he presented himself as our sacrifice for our sins, had God not accepted his offering, there would have been no atonement for our sins, and God would not have been able to send us his Holy Spirit. It is when WE accept Jesus as our personal Lord and Savior, that God will forgive us all our sins.
    Col. 2:13 “And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, has he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses.”
    Only then can, and will, the Father send us HIS Holy Spirit, the Comforter. Only then can, and will, the Father dwell in us.
    John 14:23 “Jesus answered and said unto him, if a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and WE will come unto him, and make our abode with him.”
    Let me ask you this, who raised up Jesus from the dead, God, meaning the Father, or the Spirit?
    Acts 13:30 “But God raised him from the dead.”
    So, is Paul contradicting himself when he says in Romans it was the Spirit?
    Rom. 8:11 “But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.”
    It was the Spirit OF God that raised up Jesus, not another person. God has a spirit, Christ has a spirit, Paul had a spirit, I have a spirit, you have a spirit, everybody has a spirit; we call it a mind. You never heard any one say; are you out of your spirit? Or, have you lost your spirit? Whether we call it spirit or mind, its all the same, the difference is; God’s Spirit is Holy, ours is not.
    May I also bring to your attention that Paul’s letters, Peter’s and John’s, all start with, “Grace be to you and peace from God our Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ”, never a mentioning of the “Holy Spirit.” If I was the Holy Spirit I would feel left out, wouldn’t you?
    Paul always gives thanks to the Father.
    Rom. 1:8 “First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all…”
    1 Cor. 1:4 “I thank my God always on your behalf…”
    Phil. 1:3 “I thank my God upon every remembrance of you.”
    Col. 1:3 “We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ…”
    1Thes. 1:2 “We give thanks to God always for you all…”
    My point is this; considering what the Holy Spirit does for us, would he not deserve some thanks too?
    John says, if we abide in the doctrine of Christ we have both, the father and the Son; should we not have all three?
    2 John 9 “Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he has both the Father and the Son.”
    v. 10 “If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God’s speed.”
    Very powerful words should really make us think!
    Why would we even think that our God, who is all wise and all-powerful, would need another person to do all his work? When God wants something done, all he has to do speak the word and it is done;
    Ps. 33:9 “For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.”
    Let me make another point.
    Rev. 3:1 “And unto the angel of the church in Sardis write; these things says he that has the seven Spirits of God…”
    Why haven’t we heart about God’s seven Spirits? Are they all persons? Seven is God’s number of perfection. The seven Spirits of God only emphasize his perfect Holy Spirit. Paul says there is a spirit in man;
    1 Cor. 2:11 “For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which
    is in him? Even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.”
    This spirit in us, should we ask who is he? Or should we ask what is it? This spirit is our mind; it is what sets us apart from the animals. This mind enables us to learn how to read and write to calculate, to think, to plan and build, with it we make choices, all the things God does. That is the image of God he has created us in, but it is not another person. We influence other people by example and by what we teach them. God influences us with his Holy Mind, his Holy Spirit. Paul writes to the Philippians.
    Phil. 2:5 “ Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus.’
    This mind that was in Jesus was the mind of God, Gods spirit, his Holy Spirit.
    Why would Paul say?
    Eph. 1:3 “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ…”
    Eph. 4:6 “One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all”.
    Col. 1:3 “We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ…”
    And what else can this next scripture mean except what it says.
    1 Cor. 15:28 “And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also
    himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.”
    Some people think God is to complicate to be understood, that’s because some people have made God to complicated to be understood. God in his word, the bible, has given us everything we need to know about him, if we go beyond that, its like going to the moon, trying to find out how life began.
    Anyone that dares to tamper and distort these scriptures should keep in mind what Paul says in,
    Gal. 1:9 “As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.”
    If we want God to answer our prayers, should we not first listen what he is saying to us?
    Those who are our teachers should take this last scripture very serious.

    November 12, 2008 at 11:30 pm#111774
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    Tiffany

    Your husband says…

    Quote (Tiffany @ Nov. 13 2008,05:52)
    Some people think God is to complicate to be understood, that’s because some people have made God to complicated to be understood. God in his word, the bible, has given us everything we need to know about him, if we go beyond that, its like going to the moon, trying to find out how life began.


    So let me see if I understand.

    66 books of the Bible tells us “everything we need to know about him”?  ???

    Is the Bible infinite?

    So then the folowing words must mean nothing to you then, is that right?…

    For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. Isa 55:9

    O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! Rom 11:33

    Or how about the Apostle Johns own words concerning Jesus himself…

    And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen. John 21:25

    So then you think that the finite 66 books in the Bible reveal everything there is to know about the nature of an “infinite” God? ???

    If so, then your God is too small!

    WJ

    November 13, 2008 at 5:17 am#111801
    david
    Participant

    Quote
    Where David? ???

    Where is there a scripture of any being with “divine attributes” or “divine qualities” called gods?

    Where, did I say that the human judges who were called “gods” or the angels who were called “gods” were described as having “divine attributes”?

    Did I do that? I don't remember doing that.

    Both the angels and the human judges who were described as “gods” obviously had “godly” attributes (meaning, they were “mighty ones” in their own respect.)

    WJ, you seem to think the word God means: “All powerful spirit, the author of the Bible.”

    It does not. It has meaning.

    Quote
    You still have not answered this question.

    Surely there is at least one example in 66 books of the Bible!

    Here's how it breaks down:

    Jehovah called God some almost 7000 times.
    Jesus called “God” or “god” or “a god” some 3-8 times, depending on interpretation.
    angels called “gods” once.
    human judges called “gods” once.
    Moses was called once called “a god” to pharoah. (Neither this scripture, nor the one with the angels and human judges mean that they were “God Almighty.”
    We know, or should know that the word “god” means “Mighty One” or “Strong One” or “Powerful One.”

    And so we understand the reference to Moses being a god to Pharoah, the reference to the angels being called “gods” for they are mighty compared to us, of Israelite judges being gods, for they were mighty compared to other Israelites.
    And, of course, Jesus is called “God” as well.

    If that word “God” is applied to these other ones, obvioulsy, it would be applied to the son of Almighty God, someone who has been bestowed (By his Father) with all authority and power.

    So, yes, Jesus is a God, a mighty one.

    This does not mean he is “the” God of the Bible.

    It does not mean he is “the” ultimate mighty one, the Almighty God.

    Quote
    You keep making this claim about the definition of the word “theos”, but you and t8 do not give us one example where a servant of God ever calls any being God unless they were referring to The Father or Jesus who is True God

    You ask for a 'servant of God.' I'll do you one better. I'll give you an example of “God” calling another being God.

    And Jehovah saith unto Moses, `See, I have given thee a god to Pharaoh, and Aaron thy brother is thy prophet; (Ex 7:1, Youngs literal translation)

    “And Jehovah said to Moses, See, I have made thee God to Pharaoh; and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.” (Darby Tranaslation)

    “I have made you God to Pharaoh.” (NWT)

    Jehovah made Moses a “mighty one” a “god” to Pharoah.

    There's your example.

    “oh, but that's in the OT so it doesn't count?”

    Really? Is the word “God” in the OT different than the word “God” in the NT? Do they mean different things? “All scripture is inspired of God.” (2 Tim 3:16)

    Quote
    So your definition of the word ascribed to Jesus is putting him in the same class as “false gods” or wicked men and is in fact anathema.


    YOU'LL HAVE TO EXPLAIN THIS BETTER.

    The “false gods” were “false” because they had no power, strength, might. Yet, they were looked up to, but shouldn't have been, for they were useless.

    PSALM 115:5-7
    “A mouth they have, but they cannot speak; Eyes they have, but they cannot see; Ears they have, but they cannot hear. A nose they have, but they cannot smell. Hands are theirs, but they cannot feel. Feet are theirs, but they cannot walk; They utter no sound with their throat.”

    Quote
    So your definition of the word [God] ascribed to Jesus is putting him in the same class as “false gods” or wicked men and is in fact anathema.

    Explain, logically, how this is true.

    November 13, 2008 at 12:38 pm#111816
    TimothyVI
    Participant

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 13 2008,10:30)
    Tiffany

    Your husband says…

    Quote (Tiffany @ Nov. 13 2008,05:52)
    Some people think God is to complicate to be understood, that’s because some people have made God to complicated to be understood. God in his word, the bible, has given us everything we need to know about him, if we go beyond that, its like going to the moon, trying to find out how life began.


    So let me see if I understand.

    66 books of the Bible tells us “everything we need to know about him”?  ???

    Is the Bible infinite?

    So then the folowing words must mean nothing to you then, is that right?…

    For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. Isa 55:9

    O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! Rom 11:33

    Or how about the Apostle Johns own words concerning Jesus himself…

    And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen. John 21:25

    So then you think that the finite 66 books in the Bible reveal everything there is to know about the nature of an “infinite” God? ???

    If so, then your God is too small!

    WJ


    Hi WorshippingJesus,

    You made a couple of good points, but George never said that the bible told us everything that there is to know about God.
    He only said that it told us everything that we needed to know about God. He could be right. Do we really need to know everything that there is to know about God?

    Tim

    November 13, 2008 at 9:30 pm#111833
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    Hi David

    Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2008,16:17)

    Where, did I say that the human judges who were called “gods” or the angels who were called “gods” were described as having “divine attributes”?

    Did I do that?  I don't remember doing that.


    Well then scripturally if they do not have “divine attributes” then that means they are not gods at all.

    Here is how the Apostle Paul describes them…

    So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one. For even if there are “so called gods”, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords.. 1 Cor 8:4, 5

    Earthly Pharaoh’s and kings and rulers and judges were called gods by men and worshipped as gods. However, this practice was forbidden by God for the Jewish nation.

    Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Exod 20:3

    Paul’s own words in declaring “there is no God but one” and calling these false gods as “so-called” gods agrees totally with YHWH's own words…

    Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was “no God” formed, neither shall there be after me. Isa 43:10

    Do you hear that David?

    “before me there was “no God” formed, neither shall there be after me.“

    Now since John is inspired to write John 1:1-3 declaring Jesus to be the Word that was with God and was God and that by him all things were made and without him was not anything made that was made, then we have a checkmate, or how do you put it…”CASE CLOSED”.

    You insult the writer John by claiming he would use the same word “theos” for Jesus in John 1:1c as in John 1:1b by saying he is trying to convey Jesus as “a” lesser “theos” (God), than the Father in nature, and that your own theology says that Jesus is “a god” when the scriptures (which I am quite sure John knew very well), declares…

    “before me there was “no God” formed, neither shall there be after me.”

    If John was saying Jesus was simply “a mighty one or divine”, there were other Greek words for that meaning, but John used the same word “theos” not only in John 1:1 but also John 1:18 and John 20:28 and 1 John 5:20 with the definite article in referring to Jesus. John better than you and I knew the Hebrew scriptures or Septuagint which brings over the word “el”, “'elohiym” into the Greek as “theos”.

    But if that is not enough for you and you still insist there are other gods and Jesus is just one of those other gods, then how about believing your own translation…

    “This is what Jehovah has said, the King of Israel and the Repurchaser of him, Jehovah of armies, ‘I am the first and I am the last, and besides me there is no God. Isa 44:6 NWT

    How much clearer can it be David. When YHWH speaks of other gods he speaks of them in a derogatory sense or else he is contradicting his own words. The gods or lords of this world are not gods at all, but merely what men have made them.

    In fact they were commanded not to acknowledge or make mention of these false gods or idols of men as gods at all.

    And in all things that I have said unto you be circumspect: and make no mention of the name of other gods, neither let it be heard out of thy mouth. Exod 23:13

    Its a false dichotomy to claim that Jesus is “a god” by somehow linking him through the misuse of the word “theos”, to the false or so-called gods of this world that were created by men and not God! There is one true “Theos” and all others are false.

    Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2008,16:17)

    Both the angels and the human judges who were described as “gods” obviously had “godly” attributes (meaning, they were “mighty ones” in their own respect.)


    In whose eyes David? God’s eyes, the Jews, or ungodly men that followed and worshipped men or idols as gods?

    Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2008,16:17)

    WJ, you seem to think the word God means: “All powerful spirit, the author of the Bible.”


    You put the quotation marks as if that is my own words. No David, I believe there is “One True God” and all other so-called gods are not gods at all.

    Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was “no God” formed, neither shall there be after me. Isa 43:10

    And Yes, God is Spirit who is all powerful and is the author who inspired the Holy Scriptures.

    Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2008,16:17)

    It does not.  It has meaning.  


    What meaning? Your meaning or Watchtowers? Can you show me where the definition of “theos” is “a mighty one”. Surely God is mighty, but that is not the definition of “theos”. You say Jehovah is the “almighty”, so does that mean that every time you see the word “theos” referring to the Father it means “almighty one” but when the word “theos” is referring to the son it only means “mighty one”? What authority do you have to define “theos” as such? Idols are considered “gods” by men , but does that mean they are “mighty”?

    You still have not answered this question.

    Surely there is at least one example in 66 books of the Bible!

    Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2008,16:17)
    Here's how it breaks down:

    Jehovah called God some almost 7000 times.


    And how many times was YHWH seen, when the scriptures are clear that no man can see God or has seen him…

    No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known. John 1:18

    How many times was YHWH’s voice heard when Jesus made it clear that no man can know YHWH apart from him

    All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.  Matt 11:27

    You simply deny the fact that many times YHWH in the Hebrew scriptures is speaking of Jesus.

    Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2008,16:17)
    Jesus called “God” or “god” or “a god” some 3-8 times, depending on interpretation.


    One time should be enough David. The Bible says one time “God is a Spirit”, but d
    oes that mean that you do not believe that God is a Spirit?

    Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2008,16:17)

    angels called “gods” once.


    What Angel? If Angels are gods then surely there would be one scripture somewhere in the 66 books of the Bible that calls an Angel of God “el” “elohiym” or “theos”.

    What angel David, satan the god of this world who is no god at all to a Monotheistic believer? ???

    Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2008,16:17)
    human judges called “gods” once.


    A derogatory statement made to wicked judges and kings who were considered gods by man but were not gods at all.

    Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2008,16:17)
    Moses was called once called “a god” to pharoah. (Neither this scripture, nor the one with the angels and human judges mean that they were “God Almighty.”


    No what it means is they were not gods at all, but were seen by men as being gods.

    Then the Lord said to Moses, “See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet. Exod 7:1 NIV

    Remember the words of YHWH…

    Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was “no God” formed, neither shall there be after me. Isa 43:10

    Is he contradicting himself? Moses is perceived by Pharaoh as “a god”!

    And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people: and he shall be, “even he shall be to thee instead of a mouth“, and “thou shalt be to him instead of God“. Exod 4:16

    Was Aaron literally Moses mouth? Do you agree with Pharaoh that Moses was “a god”? Was Moses a man, who was made “a god”? Where do we find Joshua or Aaron or any of the children of Israel calling Moses “a god”?

    Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2008,16:17)

    We know, or should know that the word “god” means “Mighty One” or “Strong One” or “Powerful One.”


    Is this Watchtowers definition for the word “el”, “elohiym” or “theos”, because it sure is not the scriptural definition of the words.

    Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2008,16:17)
    And so we understand the reference to Moses being a god to Pharoah, the reference to the angels being called “gods” for they are mighty compared to us, of Israelite judges being gods, for they were mighty compared to other Israelites.
    And, of course, Jesus is called “God” as well.

    If that word “God” is applied to these other ones, obviously, it would be applied to the son of Almighty God, someone who has been bestowed (By his Father) with all authority and power.


    See above. There are no contradictions in scriptures.

    Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was “no God” formed, neither shall there be after me. Isa 43:10

    Yet John and the Apostles and many of the church Fathers call Jesus God! So you live with the contradiction!

    Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2008,16:17)
    So, yes, Jesus is a God, a mighty one.  

    This does not mean he is “the” God of the Bible.

    It does not mean he is “the” ultimate mighty one, the Almighty God.


    Again…

    So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one. For even if there are “so called gods”, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords.. 1 Cor 8:4, 5

    Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was “no God” formed, neither shall there be after me. Isa 43:10

    And again John and the Apostles and many of the church Fathers call Jesus God! So you live with the contradictions!

    Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2008,16:17)

    You ask for a 'servant of God.'  I'll do you one better.  I'll give you an example of “God” calling another being God.

    And Jehovah saith unto Moses, `See, I have given thee a god to Pharaoh, and Aaron thy brother is thy prophet; (Ex 7:1, Youngs literal translation)

    “And Jehovah said to Moses, See, I have made thee God to Pharaoh; and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.” (Darby Tranaslation)

    “I have made you God to Pharaoh.” (NWT)

    Jehovah made Moses a “mighty one” a “god” to Pharoah.

    There's your example.  

    “oh, but that's in the OT so it doesn't count?”


    Of course the Old Testament counts, that is the point…

    Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was “no God” formed, neither shall there be after me. Isa 43:10

    Notice David it says ““I have made you God to Pharaoh.” (NWT)

    To who David? To Pharaoh who worshipped many gods.

    The scriptures clarify this…

    And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people: and he shall be, “even he shall be to thee instead of a mouth“, and “thou shalt be to him instead of God“. Exod 4:16

    Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2008,16:17)
    Really?  Is the word “God” in the OT different than the word “God” in the NT?  Do they mean different things?  “All scripture is inspired of God.”  (2 Tim 3:16)


    No, that is the point David! There is no difference except there are “false”, “so-called” gods and then there is the “True God”.

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 12 2008,20:00)
    So your definition of the word ascribed to Jesus is putting him in the same class as “false gods”
    or wicked men and is in fact anathema.

    Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2008,16:17)
    YOU'LL HAVE TO EXPLAIN THIS BETTER.  

    The “false gods” were “false” because they had no power, strength, might.  Yet, they were looked up to, but shouldn't have been, for they were useless.

    But you said the definition of the words “el”, “elohiym” or “theos” is “Mighty One” or “Strong One” or “Powerful One.”

    You should ponder on the scripture you quoted…

    PSALM 115:5-7
    “A mouth they have, but they cannot speak; Eyes they have, but they cannot see; Ears they have, but they cannot hear. A nose they have, but they cannot smell. Hands are theirs, but they cannot feel. Feet are theirs, but they cannot walk; They utter no sound with their throat.”

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 12 2008,20:00)
    So your definition of the word [God] ascribed to Jesus is putting him in the same class as “false gods” or wicked men and is in fact anathema.


    Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2008,16:17)
    Explain, logically, how this is true.


    I have! Here are a few more scriptures that affirm that there is “Only One True God” and all other “so-called” gods are false.

    See now that I, even I, am he, and “there is no god with me”: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand. Deut 32:39

    And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company, and came, and stood before him: and he said, Behold,”now I know that there is no God in all the earth”, but in Israel: now therefore, I pray thee, take a blessing of thy servant. 2 Kings 5:15

    And he said, LORD God of Israel, “there is no God like thee, in heaven above, or on earth beneath”, who keepest covenant and mercy with thy servants that walk before thee with all their heart: 1 Kings 8:23

    And said, O LORD God of Israel, “there is no God like thee in the heaven”, nor in the earth; which keepest covenant, and shewest mercy unto thy servants, that walk before thee with all their hearts: 2 Chron 6:14

    Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; “I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God”. Isa 44:6

    Only Jesus is both like him and called God in scriptures. John says “the Word was with God and was God, and Jesus claims he is the “Alpha and Omega” and “the First and the Last”.

    And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last: Rev 1:17

    And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive; Rev 2:8

    And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward [is] with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. Rev 22:12, 13

    WJ

    November 13, 2008 at 9:33 pm#111834
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi WJ,
    So if he is like Him
    he is not Him.

    November 13, 2008 at 10:16 pm#111835
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 14 2008,08:33)
    Hi WJ,
    So if he is like Him
    he is not Him.


    Hi NH

    Of course Jesus is not the Father.

    The Father is like Jesus!

    Does that also mean he is not God.

    Men can be like their Fathers, but does that mean they are not human?

    Your foolish questions and comments pile up.

    WJ

    November 13, 2008 at 10:33 pm#111836
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi WJ,
    God is the Father.
    Do you have other gods? Surely not

    November 13, 2008 at 10:46 pm#111837
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi WJ,
    The Jews worshiped God.
    Jesus told them God was the Father[Jn8.54]

    Jesus did not teach that he was God Himself but taught about the Father God.
    He told men true worshipers would worship the Father[jn4]

    Surely you are a true worshiper?

    November 13, 2008 at 11:19 pm#111839
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    WJ.

    Scripture promotes one God, you promote a triune God, one that is alien to scripture.
    Scripture promotes One God the Father, you promote one God the Father, Son, Spirit.

    John 1:1 promotes God and the Logos, you say it backs up the Trinity which is 3 persons. But John 1:1 is not talking about 3 persons as God. It is talking of God and the Logos.

    You are adding and taking away from scripture to suit your own understanding. That is not a good thing WJ.

    November 13, 2008 at 11:54 pm#111841
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    Quote (t8 @ Nov. 14 2008,10:19)
    WJ.

    Scripture promotes one God, you promote a triune God, one that is alien to scripture.
    Scripture promotes One God the Father, you promote one God the Father, Son, Spirit.

    John 1:1 promotes God and the Logos, you say it backs up the Trinity which is 3 persons. But John 1:1 is not talking about 3 persons as God. It is talking of God and the Logos.

    You are adding and taking away from scripture to suit your own understanding. That is not a good thing WJ.


    t8

    Does the scriptures call Jesus God? ???

    You live with the contradictions or just white out the scriptures that do!

    You continue teaching Jesus is less than the Father in nature, therfore you make the “visible image of the invisble God” as less than God and in doing so cause men to create a false image of God!

    Anathema!

    WJ

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 20 posts - 1,941 through 1,960 (of 26,008 total)
123…979899…1,2991,3001,301
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

 

CREATE NEW TOPIC
ACTIVE TOPICS
POPULAR TOPICS
SITE SEARCH
SUPPORT US
REGISTER

Recent Replies

ALL REPLIES →

© 1999 - 2026 Heaven Net

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

Create Account