Should You Believe In The Trinity?

[Warrior4God]

Only for you, my friend, only for you . . .

I am glad you see that the parables do not reveal that Jesus is God.

Heck they do not even imply it.

[Tucson Jim]

I am glad you see that the parables do not reveal that Jesus is God.

Heck they do not even imply it.

Yeah, and I have a hard time proving the Trinity from Numbers too!

See, you're not supposed to look at parts of scripture that DO NOT teach a doctrine for support of that doctrine! Not finding evidence of the Trinity in Numbers does not prove there is no evidence of the Trinity in scripture.

You focus where you want, you see what you want to see.

It's really kind of sad . . .

[Tucson Jim]

In response to Warrior's post #8496 below, here is info I have posted several times:

WHO IS JESUS?

• JESUS IS GOD
* John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ...All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made...l4 And the Word was madeflesh, and dwelt among us,...
* John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
* Philippians 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 4 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
* Heb. 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
* Psa. 45:6 Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre.

• JESUS IS THE ONE LORD, THE ONE SAVIOUR, AND THE ONE REDEEMER (GOD)
* Isaiah 43:3 For I am the LORD thy God... thy Saviour... 1l I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. 45:21 ...there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour: there is none beside me. 49:26 ...and all flesh shall know that I the LORD) am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer... 60:16 ...and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer...

* John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him (Jesus), My Lord and my God.
* Galatians 3:13 Christ hath redeemed us...
* Titus 2:14...he might redeem us from all iniquity... Luke 2:11 ...a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. John 4:42 ...this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.
* Ephesians 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism.
* 1’Timothy 6: 15 ...the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
* Revelation l7: 14 ... and the Lamb shall overcome them:for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings... 19: 16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
* Romans 1;3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord,... 6;11 ...through Jesus Christ our Lord.
* 2Corinthians 4: 10 ...the dying of the Lord Jesus...
* Epesians 3:14 ...of our Lord Jesus Christ,
* l Timothv 1:4 ...by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ...
* Titus 1:4 ...the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.

• In the New Testament, "LORD JESUS” is found in the KJV about 120 times. Jesus is referred to as "THE SAVIOUR” 25 times. The Apostle Paul uses the phrase "GOD THE SAVIOUR” 7 times!

• JESUS IS THE ALPHA AND OMEGA, THE BEGINNING AND THE END, THE FlRST AND THE LAST, THE ALMIGHTY
* Isaiah 44:6 Thus saith the LORD...; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
* Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. 8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
* Revelation 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, 11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book... 12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw ...13... one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle. 14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; 15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. 16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength. 17 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: 18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.
* Revelation 22: 12 ...behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me... 13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last... 16 I, Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things...

God bless you Jim for having the patience to go through this material yet again. I know you do it because you love God and you love those who might be searching for truth on this forum.

Your faithfulness is truly humbling.

Again may our Lord Jesus Christ richly bless you!

[Warrior4God]

Yeah, and I have a hard time proving the Trinity from Numbers too!

See, you're not supposed to look at parts of scripture that DO NOT teach a doctrine for support of that doctrine! Not finding evidence of the Trinity in Numbers does not prove there is no evidence of the Trinity in scripture.

You focus where you want, you see what you want to see.

It's really kind of sad . . .

The focus of scripture is on Jesus Christ.

You focus on such few scripture to try to prove the trinity when I have shown with every verse posted on it that you err.

You Sir can not even see what Jesus thought there in and of itself you start in error.

Back to logic

You can't have a God you pray to and be the God you pray to,yeah yeah you say thats the man part.
Thats just plain spin.

God is not a man Jesus is.

Even as he sits on his own right hand........wait thats not right.

Even as he sits on Gods right hand he is a man hmmmmmmm.


1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

If the trinity were true the above verse is a lie.

Gal 3:20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.

I must refresh your memory on the truth and the spin that you try makes no sense that God became man.

God is Spirit. Words of Jesus.
There is not even a trinity formula in the Bible. well wait there are a few verses added or corrupted by man maybe they should count.

Naaaaa God said it best.

Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.


12. Jesus is called the “son of God” more than 50 times in the Bible. Not once is he called “God the Son.”

[DispensationalJim]

Posted on every verse you just posted proving to you that you are misunderstanding or misinterpreting every single one.

Jim why do you never comment on any verses I post but try to turn it around with other verses?


The verses you post I have dealt with.
You do not agree but non the less I do not buy what you you think.

Nevermind on the question above I already know the answer.

So do you.

The best you can do is post others to stay away from what is clear and plain truth on what God reveals.

Heres a verse that shares what God revealed to Peter.

Mat 16:13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
Mat 16:14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
Mat 16:15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
Mat 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

God revealed this to Peter and God does not lie.

Either you are the Son of God or you are God.

It is impossible for God to lie and God revealed to Peter the truth.
Think how you wish when you take titles given to Jesus when he has every right to have the titles as being the Son of God.

Think how you wish when there are so very very few misunderstood verses used to support a doctrine that is not revealed by Peter,Paul,Jesus or any other man of 3 that equal 1 God.

You want to accept that then you accept something that Jesus Christ did not reveal and the Word is clear about doing this.

1Ti 6:3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;


I would seriously think about what you teach or even accept as truth.

I know what Jesus said and I know what you say is different then what Jesus said.

read the next verses in 1 Tim.

I believe in my Lord Jesus and what he said and that is truth,I will NOT consent to any doctrine that is and was not revealed by Jesus on who God is.

My dear Warrior, I and others have responded at least a couple of times to EVERY VERSE you have posted. When I have more time (my weekends are always busy), I will REPEAT those responses, since you have either missed them or ignored them.

Your response to the verses I posted is to say that WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT OR WHERE GOD'S WORD IS TODAY. You must constantly run to MAN'S OPINIONS OF WHAT GOD SAID INSTEAD OF TO GOD'S WORD to attempt to disprove the doctrine that is clearly in God's Word that people have been studying and counting on for 400 years.

It is amazing that you use the King James for verses that seem to support your point of view, but when we use it to show ours, it is a bad translation or a poor interpretation.

And, Warrior, as I recall, you have never responded to my posts pointing out that your "corrected verses" to the King James are I believe from the corrupted Wescott and Hort Greek lexicon, which you even admitted has produced "worse" translations than the King James Bible. Of course, you are aware that the JW Translation is from the Wescott and Hort, also.

Since in your thinking, Warrior, no one has had the true or correct Word of God for hundreds of years (apparently until Wescott and Hort's "Theory of Textual Criticism" came along, that is) maybe you should publish your own Bible from the W & H Greek version. You could call it "The Warrior4God translation and Greek to English Dictionary." That has a nice ring to it, doesn't it?

I'll be back later to deal with EVERY sentence you posted earlier... OK?

[Warrior4God]

My dear Warrior, I and others have responded at least a couple of times to EVERY VERSE you have posted. When I have more time (my weekends are always busy), I will REPEAT those responses, since you have either missed them or ignored them.

Your response to the verses I posted is to say that WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT OR WHERE GOD'S WORD IS TODAY. You must constantly run to MAN'S OPINIONS OF WHAT GOD SAID INSTEAD OF TO GOD'S WORD to attempt to disprove the doctrine that is clearly in God's Word that people have been studying and counting on for 400 years.

It is amazing that you use the King James for verses that seem to support your point of view, but when we use it to show ours, it is a bad translation or a poor interpretation.

And, Warrior, as I recall, you have never responded to my posts pointing out that your "corrected verses" to the King James are I believe from the corrupted Wescott and Hort Greek lexicon, which you even admitted has produced "worse" translations than the King James Bible. Of course, you are aware that the JW Translation is from the Wescott and Hort, also.

Since in your thinking, Warrior, no one has had the true or correct Word of God for hundreds of years (apparently until Wescott and Hort's "Theory of Textual Criticism" came along, that is) maybe you should publish your own Bible from the W & H Greek version. You could call it "The Warrior4God translation and Greek to English Dictionary." That has a nice ring to it, doesn't it?

I'll be back later to deal with EVERY sentence you posted earlier... OK?

You did not even adress what was posted in this post that you responded to.
You spun your way around.

OK Jim adress the scriptures .

Whats funny is that you think we only had Gods Word for 400 years.
Is that when tongues ceased?
KJV was a biased translation toward the trinity getting in any corruption they could to try to prove the trinity.
Thats my opinion and you have yours.

Once again I will base mine on the Words of Jesus in regards to God is and who Jesus is.


Jesus Christ is as distinct a being from God the Father as one man is distinct from another. “It is written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true. I am one who bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me,” John 8:17, 18.

Christ calls everyone who obeys God his brother. “Whosoever shall do the will of my Father in heaven, the same is my brother,” Matt. 12:50.

Jesus said, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” Matt. 27:46 Can he who uttered this be the Supreme God?

Not my God.

Jesus expressly disclaims the possession of the Divine attribute of omniscience. “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but my Father only,” Matt.24:36, Mark 13:32.

Sound like God Almighty?

Jesus positively denies that he is possessed of the Divine attribute of omnipotence. “I can of mine own self do nothing,” John 5:30.

Not the words of God but the one God sent ,yet we are to consent to the wholesome words of Jesus.

1Ti 6:3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;


Turn your eyes upon Jesus.

One of my favorite songs.

[Tucson Jim]

The focus of scripture is on Jesus Christ.

You focus on such few scripture to try to prove the trinity when I have shown with every verse posted on it that you err.

At the end of the day, Warrior, you know in your heart that we have soundly refuted every one of your unorthodox interpretations of scripture.

When you dared anyone to explain John 17:3, I did exactly that and you completely ignored my explanation, not even attempting to deal with any of the points I made.

You know in your heart you are wrong about the Trinity.

Why do you keep on resisting the Holy Spirit? (Acts 7:51)

You Sir can not even see what Jesus thought there in and of itself you start in error.

I see clearly what Jesus taught. And I also see what is taught throughout scripture, not just the words of Jesus while He was on the earth.

You really shouldn't ignore scriptures because they refute your doctrine - in fact that is exactly how God tries to teach you. But will you listen?

Back to logic

You can't have a God you pray to and be the God you pray to,yeah yeah you say thats the man part.
Thats just plain spin.

Ah so you know the truth, you just reject the truth as "spin". That's really too bad . . .

God is not a man Jesus is.

That's right, God the Father did not become a man, God the Son did. Good, good.

Even as he sits on his own right hand........wait thats not right.

Even as he sits on Gods right hand he is a man hmmmmmmm.

That's right, mock doctrines you don't understand.


1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

If the trinity were true the above verse is a lie.

Not at all, simply another example of your lack of understanding of the very beliefs you mock.

There is absolutely NO problem for trinitarian belief to say Jesus is both God and the mediator between God and man. A Triune Being has no problem whatsoever accomplishing that. But you can't grasp it, so you mock it .

It's OK, I understand, Jesus and those who follow Him have been mocked for 2,000 years.

Gal 3:20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.

I must refresh your memory on the truth and the spin that you try makes no sense that God became man.

God is Spirit. Words of Jesus.

God also became man. Word of God.

There is not even a trinity formula in the Bible. well wait there are a few verses added or corrupted by man maybe they should count.

Naaaaa God said it best.

Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

This verse is so apt for you to quote - and you don't even realize it.

You worship your own logic, your own understanding, you reject Godly counsel, you follow the teachings of men in the Uni websites, then you aim a verse at us that actually applies to you.

And you don't even realize it.

Amazing.

12. Jesus is called the “son of God” more than 50 times in the Bible. Not once is he called “God the Son.”

He is called the Son of God.

He is called God.

God gave you a brain - figure it out.

[Warrior4God]

http://www.geocities.com/athens/olympus/5257/kjverror.htm

Many people who insist that we should only use the KJV say that the KJV is the only true word of God in the English language. That the Greek manuscripts (Received Text a.k.a. Textus Receptus) that were used to translate the KJV from, are the only ones that should be used because they are the only ones that are not corrupt. Let us examine this insistence of the Textus Receptus.

The origin of the TR (Textus Receptus) can be traced to a Dutch scholar named Erasmus who in 1516 published the first Greek New Testament using the newly invented printing press. Erasmus was not able to find a single Greek manuscript that contained all of the New Testament. As such, he had to combine the few manuscripts he had in order to make one complete text.

Erasmus published five editions of his Greek New Testament which became the basis for the text used to translate the KJV. Erasmus had a corrupt, incomplete text of Revelation to work from, and hence this book has many errors in the KJV. To get around this problem, he translated the missing verses from the Latin. (Protestant translators sometimes did not have access to all of the Received Greek Official Text, and being familiar with the Vulgate, they sometimes put words into their translations based upon the Latin which were never there in the original Greek). Schaff points out that in about 80 places in the New Testament, the KJV adopts Latin readings not found in the Greek.

From its origin it is hard to see how the TR can lay claim to being the only true Word of God. Since Erasmus combined several manuscripts and translated some portions from the Latin, the resulting text was in many ways unique. An identical text had never existed before. Thus if the TR is the only true word of God, the true word of God did not exist until the 16th century!

Since as they claim, the King James Version is the only true word of God, it should therefore possess no errors. Guess again.
keep reading at the site posted.

[DispensationalJim]

Warrior4God claims we have not responded to his posts, so here are my thoughts regarding his post #8496:

=========================
Warrior's 1st verse: Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
------------------------------------------
Jim: Yes, we know Jesus Christ was a man. HE MADE HIMSELF INTO A MAN...
• Phil. 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Now, since we know from the OT and NT that there is only one Lord, that clearly makes Jesus GOD!
• Deut. 6:4 ¶ Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:
• Zech. 14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

And who, Warrior, is to be THE KING OVER ALL THE EARTH???? Answer: Jesus Christ!
• 1Tim. 6:15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
• Rev. 17:14 ¶ These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings:
• Rev. 19:16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

• Mark 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:
• 1Cor. 8:6 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.
• Eph. 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

Yup, Warrior ... there is only one Lord, and that one LORD is JESUS CHRIST, God the Son!
=========================

Warrior's 2nd verse: 1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
--------------------------------------------
Jim: Paul clearly specifies "the man Christ Jesus" as the one mediator. Since Jesus is "THE ONE LORD" which make Him God, then as the "God-man" He alone qualifies to be the one mediator. No ordinary man could be the "one sacrifice" for our sins or the one mediator. It had to be a special man, a God-man, Jesus Christ.
• Heb. 1:3 Who (God the Son) being the brightness of his (God the Father) glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding ALL things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
=========================

Warrior's 3rd verse: Gal 3:20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.
----------------------------------------------
Jim: I have rarely seen a verse taken out of context as obviously as that verse was, Warrior. Here is some context for you:
• Gal. 3:11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. 12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. 13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: 14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. 15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man’s covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto. 16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. 17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. 18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise. 19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. 20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. 21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. 22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

So, can you see, Warrior, that passage is showing how Jesus Christ provided us with redemption from THE CURSE OF THE LAW as He became BOTH THE REDEEMER AND MEDIATOR for us? And, since there is ONE REDEEMER, that makes Jesus God again!!
• Psa. 78:35 And they remembered that God was their rock, and the high God their redeemer.

And, who is THE Rock, Warrior?
• 1Cor. 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

• Is. 43:14 Thus saith the LORD, your redeemer, the Holy One of Israe...

• Is. 44:6 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.

Do you notice in that last verse that there are TWO PERSONS spoken of ... the LORD the King of Israel AND HIS REDEEMER the LORDX of hosts? Who is HIS REDEEMER? Why, it is Jesus, of course! That makes Jesus God again, doesn't it?

And exactly who is THE FIRST AND THE LAST? What a surprise!! It is Jesus who is God!!
• Rev. 1:11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last:.. 17 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. 2:8 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. 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

• Is. 60:16 ... and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.

There He is again! Jesus Christ is THE ONE AND ONLY SAVIOUR AND REDEEMER! Therefore He is God! Isn't that simple and clear?
==========================

Warrior's 4th verse: Rom 15:6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
--------------------------------------------
Jim: Please see Philippians 2:10-11 again above.
===========================

Warrior's 5th verse: Rom 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
---------------------------------------------------
Jim: Remember, Jesus HUMBLED HIMSELF AND MADE HIMSELF INTO A MAN SO HE COULD DIE FOR OUR SINS (see Phil. 2 above again). We should all be thankful for that!
=============================

From Jim to Warrior: I will skip your personal comments for now and deal with them later...
==============================

Warrior's final verse: Num 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
-------------------------------------------------------
Jim: Please check the context of that verse, Warrior. Who is speaking? Who is that person speaking to? Why was that statement made? Lots of details that could confuse the issue, aren't there?
==================================

Out of time for now...

[DispensationalJim]

At the end of the day, Warrior, you know in your heart that we have soundly refuted every one of your unorthodox interpretations of scripture.

When you dared anyone to explain John 17:3, I did exactly that and you completely ignored my explanation, not even attempting to deal with any of the points I made.

You know in your heart you are wrong about the Trinity.

Why do you keep on resisting the Holy Spirit? (Acts 7:51)

I see clearly what Jesus taught. And I also see what is taught throughout scripture, not just the words of Jesus while He was on the earth.

You really shouldn't ignore scriptures because they refute your doctrine - in fact that is exactly how God tries to teach you. But will you listen?

Ah so you know the truth, you just reject the truth as "spin". That's really too bad . . .

That's right, God the Father did not become a man, God the Son did. Good, good.

That's right, mock doctrines you don't understand.


Not at all, simply another example of your lack of understanding of the very beliefs you mock.

There is absolutely NO problem for trinitarian belief to say Jesus is both God and the mediator between God and man. A Triune Being has no problem whatsoever accomplishing that. But you can't grasp it, so you mock it .

It's OK, I understand, Jesus and those who follow Him have been mocked for 2,000 years.


God also became man. Word of God.


This verse is so apt for you to quote - and you don't even realize it.

You worship your own logic, your own understanding, you reject Godly counsel, you follow the teachings of men in the Uni websites, then you aim a verse at us that actually applies to you.

And you don't even realize it.

Amazing.

He is called the Son of God.

He is called God.

God gave you a brain - figure it out.

Tucson Jim, I applaud you for your appropriate answers to Warrior's blatantly arrogant post to you. He wonders why we get upset at him, but yet he blasts you once more with his amazingly haughty attitude. I'm afraid he just "can't see the forest for the trees."

We must continue to pray for him and keep on witnessing as best we can.

[DispensationalJim]

http://www.geocities.com/athens/olympus/5257/kjverror.htm

Many people who insist that we should only use the KJV say that the KJV is the only true word of God in the English language. That the Greek manuscripts (Received Text a.k.a. Textus Receptus) that were used to translate the KJV from, are the only ones that should be used because they are the only ones that are not corrupt. Let us examine this insistence of the Textus Receptus.

The origin of the TR (Textus Receptus) can be traced to a Dutch scholar named Erasmus who in 1516 published the first Greek New Testament using the newly invented printing press. Erasmus was not able to find a single Greek manuscript that contained all of the New Testament. As such, he had to combine the few manuscripts he had in order to make one complete text.

Erasmus published five editions of his Greek New Testament which became the basis for the text used to translate the KJV. Erasmus had a corrupt, incomplete text of Revelation to work from, and hence this book has many errors in the KJV. To get around this problem, he translated the missing verses from the Latin. (Protestant translators sometimes did not have access to all of the Received Greek Official Text, and being familiar with the Vulgate, they sometimes put words into their translations based upon the Latin which were never there in the original Greek). Schaff points out that in about 80 places in the New Testament, the KJV adopts Latin readings not found in the Greek.

From its origin it is hard to see how the TR can lay claim to being the only true Word of God. Since Erasmus combined several manuscripts and translated some portions from the Latin, the resulting text was in many ways unique. An identical text had never existed before. Thus if the TR is the only true word of God, the true word of God did not exist until the 16th century!

Since as they claim, the King James Version is the only true word of God, it should therefore possess no errors. Guess again.
keep reading at the site posted.

Warrior, you should put the words of others in quotes, so we can separate your words from theirs. I have read the web site and I will respond to it soon. There is a lot of info about dear old Erasmus that you probably have never heard.

But I am waiting for you to tell me what and where is God's Word? Has God been playing a "Hunt and Seek" game with us for all of these years? Must we all hope and pray and guess that we have found His Word, or must we all depend on experts like yourself to tell us what God really meant to say?

Must we take every Bible version available in the English and in the Greek and compare them all and then decide which one is God's Word, or can we just pick one randomly to be our Bible?

I am very serious about this. Please tell me so I can get myself straightened out. After all, according to you, I have been telling people bad information about God's Word for over 50 years now, so I want you to get me on the right road so I can help all those people to find the real truth.

[Tucson Jim]

Tucson Jim, I applaud you for your appropriate answers to Warrior's blatantly arrogant post to you. He wonders why we get upset at him, but yet he blasts you once more with his amazingly haughty attitude. I'm afraid he just "can't see the forest for the trees."

We must continue to pray for him and keep on witnessing as best we can.

Yes, we must, and we do.

[Warrior4God]

Warrior, you should put the words of others in quotes, so we can separate your words from theirs. I have read the web site and I will respond to it soon. There is a lot of info about dear old Erasmus that you probably have never heard.

But I am waiting for you to tell me what and where is God's Word? Has God been playing a "Hunt and Seek" game with us for all of these years? Must we all hope and pray and guess that we have found His Word, or must we all depend on experts like yourself to tell us what God really meant to say?

Must we take every Bible version available in the English and in the Greek and compare them all and then decide which one is God's Word, or can we just pick one randomly to be our Bible?

I am very serious about this. Please tell me so I can get myself straightened out. After all, according to you, I have been telling people bad information about God's Word for over 50 years now, so I want you to get me on the right road so I can help all those people to find the real truth.

Your smart butt way of responding would indicate to me that you have your mind made up to the KJV and you don't see any errors.

I think you err in the usage of KJV as the perfect Word.

It is not.
To compare and study other versions would be most helpful to you so you can see Gods Perfect Word.
You asked I will tell you.

I will be glad to help you get on the right road so you don't tell people things that are in error like the KJV being perfect.
It is a trinity driven version.

You equate knowing fact to being arrogant.
I see your arrogance of your view as blinding you from truth.

All my very very humble opinion based on the mountains of evidence to support this.

We have had Gods perfect Word since that Word became flesh and dwelt amng us Gods Word did not appear 400 years ago.

You guys have made very clear that my view is error.
I base my view on the Words of Jesus Christ, If hes wrong I am wrong.
If he is right you are wrong.
Arrogance is a perception of the mind.
Knowing the truth is renewing ones mind to the truth.

See Jim I get tired of you guys trying to make this a personality thing by using the blatant arrogance etc. etc. etc.etc. etc. etc.etc. etc. etc.etc etc. etc. etc.. etc. etc.and spin away from the truth of the scripture.

You don't see that Paul refers to God the Father AND Jesus Christ.(not God the Son).
You and Jim keep saying things like " trinity,incarnation, God the Son"

You have NO scriptural support for these except a few misunderstood or maybe intentionally spun verses by translators and readers of Gods Word.

See my quote"The Word Of God is the Will of God"
It could also be said "The Will of God is the Word of God"

Jesus Christ is Gods Word he would as Gods messiah anointed by God to reveal God to us and he did just that.

I will continue to expose the errors of the trinity and phrases like" God the Son" that are so very unscriptural and contrary to truth.
I have been told that unity with me would be wrong yet I post nothing and believe nothing but what scripture in context unfolds point blank.

If you feel that unity with me would be wrong that is your decision,BUT,I WILL espose the truth of The real Jesus Christ and will not buckle at mens doctrine.
If thats arrogant so be it.
Been called worse by lesser men.
I have the utmost respect for your stance and how you conduct yourself MOST of the time.
But for me to sit here and see MY God the Father of Jesus Christ turned into 1/3 man,would be contrary to what God shows the truth to be.

So we continue to little by little show your doctrines holes.

I am convinced you will see some of them and see the real Jesus,and,that God did become a baby but rather a baby grew into our Lord and Saviur Jesus Christ.

[Ignorance Breeds Contempt]

Your smart butt way of responding would indicate to me that you have your mind made up to the KJV and you don't see any errors.

I think you err in the usage of KJV as the perfect Word.

It is not.
To compare and study other versions would be most helpful to you so you can see Gods Perfect Word.
You asked I will tell you.

I will be glad to help you get on the right road so you don't tell people things that are in error like the KJV being perfect.
It is a trinity driven version.

You equate knowing fact to being arrogant.
I see your arrogance of your view as blinding you from truth.

All my very very humble opinion based on the mountains of evidence to support this.

We have had Gods perfect Word since that Word became flesh and dwelt amng us Gods Word did not appear 400 years ago.

You guys have made very clear that my view is error.
I base my view on the Words of Jesus Christ, If hes wrong I am wrong.
If he is right you are wrong.
Arrogance is a perception of the mind.
Knowing the truth is renewing ones mind to the truth.

See Jim I get tired of you guys trying to make this a personality thing by using the blatant arrogance etc. etc. etc.etc. etc. etc.etc. etc. etc.etc etc. etc. etc.. etc. etc.and spin away from the truth of the scripture.

You don't see that Paul refers to God the Father AND Jesus Christ.(not God the Son).
You and Jim keep saying things like " trinity,incarnation, God the Son"

You have NO scriptural support for these except a few misunderstood or maybe intentionally spun verses by translators and readers of Gods Word.

See my quote"The Word Of God is the Will of God"
It could also be said "The Will of God is the Word of God"

Jesus Christ is Gods Word he would as Gods messiah anointed by God to reveal God to us and he did just that.

I will continue to expose the errors of the trinity and phrases like" God the Son" that are so very unscriptural and contrary to truth.
I have been told that unity with me would be wrong yet I post nothing and believe nothing but what scripture in context unfolds point blank.

If you feel that unity with me would be wrong that is your decision,BUT,I WILL espose the truth of The real Jesus Christ and will not buckle at mens doctrine.
If thats arrogant so be it.
Been called worse by lesser men.
I have the utmost respect for your stance and how you conduct yourself MOST of the time.
But for me to sit here and see MY God the Father of Jesus Christ turned into 1/3 man,would be contrary to what God shows the truth to be.

So we continue to little by little show your doctrines holes.

I am convinced you will see some of them and see the real Jesus,and,that God did become a baby but rather a baby grew into our Lord and Saviur Jesus Christ.

Yes, I'm sure you will single handedly debunk the doctrine of the Trinity. :rolleyes:

[Tucson Jim]

I will be glad to help you get on the right road so you don't tell people things that are in error like the KJV being perfect.
It is a trinity driven version.


Ha Ha - EVERY version is "Trinity-driven because that's the truth! (except maybe a couple like the NWT)

[Tucson Jim]

Yes, I'm sure you will single handedly debunk the doctrine of the Trinity. :rolleyes:

Actually he gets plenty of help from his favorite anti-trinitarian websites!

[Angryamerican]

See, that's what I think happened to you Warrior.

This is all just conjecture on my part, but I think you read some of the slick Uni stuff, and/or maybe some JW or other anti-trinitarian stuff, and you got caught up in the slick presentation and got led away into unitarian world.

I don't think you were sufficiently grounded in the Word to be able to see through their unscriptural claims.

You bought their story. And no wonder - they make it all sound so "logical" and everything.

Problem is, it just isn't true!

It's too bad and I wouldn't want to see that happen to anyone else.

Jim you don't think enough.

Why does non trinitarian bibles agree with trinitarian bibles on the scriptures that contradict your doctrine ?

The only place they are not in agreement is on your key scriptures that you say prove your doctrine.

But your bible says no man has ever seen God at any time.

Your bible also says The father is Greater then Jesus.

Your bible says that Jesus is not here to do his own will but to do his fathers will.

Your bible says that the father made Jesus heir to all things.


Your bible says That only the father knows the day and hour. This shows That Jesus is not what you say he is.

Yes funny isn't it Jesus said all these things and never called himself God.

[Angryamerican]

If Jesus was created, then he, like every other aspect of creation is a "created thing."

If Jesus is a "created thing" then he did not create "all things" since he could not have created himself.

And yet scriptures says that Jesus created all things. Without him, nothing that was made is made.

If Jesus was created then he did not create all things and scritpure has a serious contradiction.

So you are telling me angels are not capable of miracles?

Sorry your logic lost me.

[Angryamerican]

Impeccable logic drmilo!

Unfortunately, our friends on the other side seem to abandon logic entirely when it clearly contradicts their OPINIONS.

You have to be kidding me :rolleyes::wall::pray::hand:

[Angryamerican]

In response to Warrior's post #8496 below, here is info I have posted several times:

WHO IS JESUS?

• JESUS IS GOD
* John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ...All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made...l4 And the Word was madeflesh, and dwelt among us,...
* John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
* Philippians 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 4 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
* Heb. 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
* Psa. 45:6 Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre.

• JESUS IS THE ONE LORD, THE ONE SAVIOUR, AND THE ONE REDEEMER (GOD)
* Isaiah 43:3 For I am the LORD thy God... thy Saviour... 1l I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. 45:21 ...there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour: there is none beside me. 49:26 ...and all flesh shall know that I the LORD) am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer... 60:16 ...and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer...

* John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him (Jesus), My Lord and my God.
* Galatians 3:13 Christ hath redeemed us...
* Titus 2:14...he might redeem us from all iniquity... Luke 2:11 ...a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. John 4:42 ...this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.
* Ephesians 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism.
* 1’Timothy 6: 15 ...the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
* Revelation l7: 14 ... and the Lamb shall overcome them:for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings... 19: 16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
* Romans 1;3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord,... 6;11 ...through Jesus Christ our Lord.
* 2Corinthians 4: 10 ...the dying of the Lord Jesus...
* Epesians 3:14 ...of our Lord Jesus Christ,
* l Timothv 1:4 ...by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ...
* Titus 1:4 ...the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.

• In the New Testament, "LORD JESUS” is found in the KJV about 120 times. Jesus is referred to as "THE SAVIOUR” 25 times. The Apostle Paul uses the phrase "GOD THE SAVIOUR” 7 times!

• JESUS IS THE ALPHA AND OMEGA, THE BEGINNING AND THE END, THE FlRST AND THE LAST, THE ALMIGHTY
* Isaiah 44:6 Thus saith the LORD...; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
* Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. 8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
* Revelation 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, 11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book... 12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw ...13... one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle. 14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; 15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. 16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength. 17 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: 18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.
* Revelation 22: 12 ...behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me... 13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last... 16 I, Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things...

Nice try but anyone can take scripture out of context to support their belief or quote scripture that is in error as warrior has made clear.

[Angryamerican]

Warrior4God claims we have not responded to his posts, so here are my thoughts regarding his post #8496:

=========================
Warrior's 1st verse: Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
------------------------------------------
Jim: Yes, we know Jesus Christ was a man. HE MADE HIMSELF INTO A MAN...
• Phil. 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Now, since we know from the OT and NT that there is only one Lord, that clearly makes Jesus GOD!
• Deut. 6:4 ¶ Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:
• Zech. 14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

And who, Warrior, is to be THE KING OVER ALL THE EARTH???? Answer: Jesus Christ!
• 1Tim. 6:15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
• Rev. 17:14 ¶ These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings:
• Rev. 19:16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

• Mark 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:
• 1Cor. 8:6 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.
• Eph. 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

Yup, Warrior ... there is only one Lord, and that one LORD is JESUS CHRIST, God the Son!
=========================

Warrior's 2nd verse: 1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
--------------------------------------------
Jim: Paul clearly specifies "the man Christ Jesus" as the one mediator. Since Jesus is "THE ONE LORD" which make Him God, then as the "God-man" He alone qualifies to be the one mediator. No ordinary man could be the "one sacrifice" for our sins or the one mediator. It had to be a special man, a God-man, Jesus Christ.
• Heb. 1:3 Who (God the Son) being the brightness of his (God the Father) glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding ALL things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
=========================

Warrior's 3rd verse: Gal 3:20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.
----------------------------------------------
Jim: I have rarely seen a verse taken out of context as obviously as that verse was, Warrior. Here is some context for you:
• Gal. 3:11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. 12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. 13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: 14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. 15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man’s covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto. 16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. 17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. 18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise. 19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. 20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. 21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. 22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

So, can you see, Warrior, that passage is showing how Jesus Christ provided us with redemption from THE CURSE OF THE LAW as He became BOTH THE REDEEMER AND MEDIATOR for us? And, since there is ONE REDEEMER, that makes Jesus God again!!
• Psa. 78:35 And they remembered that God was their rock, and the high God their redeemer.

And, who is THE Rock, Warrior?
• 1Cor. 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

• Is. 43:14 Thus saith the LORD, your redeemer, the Holy One of Israe...

• Is. 44:6 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.

Do you notice in that last verse that there are TWO PERSONS spoken of ... the LORD the King of Israel AND HIS REDEEMER the LORDX of hosts? Who is HIS REDEEMER? Why, it is Jesus, of course! That makes Jesus God again, doesn't it?

And exactly who is THE FIRST AND THE LAST? What a surprise!! It is Jesus who is God!!
• Rev. 1:11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last:.. 17 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. 2:8 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. 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

• Is. 60:16 ... and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.

There He is again! Jesus Christ is THE ONE AND ONLY SAVIOUR AND REDEEMER! Therefore He is God! Isn't that simple and clear?
==========================

Warrior's 4th verse: Rom 15:6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
--------------------------------------------
Jim: Please see Philippians 2:10-11 again above.
===========================

Warrior's 5th verse: Rom 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
---------------------------------------------------
Jim: Remember, Jesus HUMBLED HIMSELF AND MADE HIMSELF INTO A MAN SO HE COULD DIE FOR OUR SINS (see Phil. 2 above again). We should all be thankful for that!
=============================

From Jim to Warrior: I will skip your personal comments for now and deal with them later...
==============================

Warrior's final verse: Num 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
-------------------------------------------------------
Jim: Please check the context of that verse, Warrior. Who is speaking? Who is that person speaking to? Why was that statement made? Lots of details that could confuse the issue, aren't there?
==================================

Out of time for now...

You and all trinitarians lose my respect when you say things that are not scriptural only in your mind it is. God the son. Please show us where that is in the scriptures.

[Angryamerican]

Yes, I'm sure you will single handedly debunk the doctrine of the Trinity. :rolleyes:

And i'm sure you can prove the trinity right :rolleyes:

[Angryamerican]

Ha Ha - EVERY version is "Trinity-driven because that's the truth! (except maybe a couple like the NWT)


Please you are offending me with your ignorance.

[Ignorance Breeds Contempt]

And i'm sure you can prove the trinity right :rolleyes:

I don't remember claiming that I could, nice try though.:D

[Angryamerican]

I don't remember claiming that I could, nice try though.:D

Thats what i thought :D

[Ignorance Breeds Contempt]

Thats what i thought :D

I prefer to avoid making claims about one point or the other given that nothing will ever effectively end the debate on the issue. Well, nothing short of death.

[Warrior4God]

Yes, I'm sure you will single handedly debunk the doctrine of the Trinity. :rolleyes:

Jesus did that for me.

Joh 17:1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:
Joh 17:2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
Joh 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.


As his ministry developed and his fame grew, Jesus asked his disciples a question of his own: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” (Matt. 16:13). After they reported to him the various opinions circulating among the people concerning who they thought he was, Jesus asked them: “But what about you? Who do YOU say that I am?” Peter’s response was “You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God.” Jesus affirmed that not only was that the correct answer, but that Peter knew it because God Himself had revealed it to him.

His question continues to hang in the air even two thousand years later, and it is the question that one day every man and woman will be required to answer. Why? Because God “has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by THE MAN he has appointed” (Acts 17:31). There is no more important quest facing mankind than finding out the true identity of Jesus Christ and understanding the significance of his life. The issue is a matter of life and death, both in regard to the quality of one’s life now, and his future eternal destiny.

Now if God revealed this to Peter and what he revealed was that Jesus is the Son of the living God then I would put my faith in God and the truth that Jesus is Gods Son.

If anyone can show where the phrase God the Son is used that would be helpful otherwise please refrain from such unscriptural doctrine of the one true God and making the one that the one true God sent into God.

God is not a man but in contrast Spirit.

The words of Jesus himself.

Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

[Tucson Jim]

Jim you don't think enough.

Sticks and stones . . .

Why does non trinitarian bibles agree with trinitarian bibles on the scriptures that contradict your doctrine ?

Impossible - there are no scriptures that contradict the Trinity . . .

The only place they are not in agreement is on your key scriptures that you say prove your doctrine.

Nope - examples please.

But your bible says no man has ever seen God at any time.

Already explained that - Jesus clarified in John 6:46 it is speaking of the Father - no one has seen the Father at any time.

Your bible also says The father is Greater then Jesus.

Greater - not better - does not even hint that Jesus is not God.

Your bible says that Jesus is not here to do his own will but to do his fathers will.

So what? That doesn't contradict trinity at all.

Your bible says that the father made Jesus heir to all things.


Your bible says That only the father knows the day and hour. This shows That Jesus is not what you say he is.

Yes funny isn't it Jesus said all these things and never called himself God.

Funny how the rest of the Bible calls Him God numerous times and you ignore that.

Funny , , , but tragic.

[Tucson Jim]

So you are telling me angels are not capable of miracles?

Sorry your logic lost me.

That's cause you're not even trying.

It's simple - If Jesus created "all things" He cannot be a thing.

[Tucson Jim]

Nice try but anyone can take scripture out of context to support their belief or quote scripture that is in error as warrior has made clear.

Ha ha ha! I would say BOTH you and Warrior have made that crystal clear!!

[Tucson Jim]

You and all trinitarians lose my respect when you say things that are not scriptural only in your mind it is. God the son. Please show us where that is in the scriptures.

Already have.

Jesus is God.

Jesus is the Son.

Do the math.

[Hadassah]

The history of the Church shows us that even early on, when some of the apostles were still alive, belief in the Trinity was present. Yet, nowhere is there any disputation of that belief. In fact, the heresy that was taught against in the Bible was Gnosticism.

The Didache

"After the foregoing instructions, baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living [running] water. . . . If you have neither, pour water three times on the head, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (Didache 7:1 [A.D. 70]).


The Letter of Barnabas

"And further, my brethren, if the Lord [Jesus] endured to suffer for our soul, he being the Lord of all the world, to whom God said at the foundation of the world, ‘Let us make man after our image, and after our likeness,’ understand how it was that he endured to suffer at the hand of men" (Letter of Barnabas 5 [A.D. 74]


Hermas

"The Son of God is older than all his creation, so that he became the Father’s adviser in his creation. Therefore also he is ancient" (The Shepherd 12 [A.D. 80]).


And we also have writings from the 2nd century Christians:


Ignatius of Antioch

"Jesus Christ . . . was with the Father before the beginning of time, and in the end was revealed. . . . Jesus Christ . . . came forth from one Father and is with and has gone to one [Father]. . . . [T]here is one God, who has manifested himself by Jesus Christ his Son, who is his eternal Word, not proceeding forth from silence, and who in all things pleased him that sent him" (Letter to the Magnesians 6–8 [A.D. 110] ).


Justin Martyr

"God speaks in the creation of man with the very same design, in the following words: ‘Let us make man after our image and likeness.’ . . . I shall quote again the words narrated by Moses himself, from which we can indisputably learn that [God] conversed with someone numerically distinct from himself and also a rational being. . . . But this offspring who was truly brought forth from the Father, was with the Father before all the creatures, and the Father communed with him" (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 62 [A.D. 155]).


Polycarp of Smyrna

"I praise you for all things, I bless you, I glorify you, along with the everlasting and heavenly Jesus Christ, your beloved Son, with whom, to you and the Holy Spirit, be glory both now and to all coming ages. Amen" (Martyrdom of Polycarp 14 [A.D. 155])

[Tucson Jim]

Please you are offending me with your ignorance.

So which religion are you this week AA?

[Tucson Jim]

Jesus did that for me.

Joh 17:1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:
Joh 17:2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
Joh 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.


As his ministry developed and his fame grew, Jesus asked his disciples a question of his own: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” (Matt. 16:13). After they reported to him the various opinions circulating among the people concerning who they thought he was, Jesus asked them: “But what about you? Who do YOU say that I am?” Peter’s response was “You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God.” Jesus affirmed that not only was that the correct answer, but that Peter knew it because God Himself had revealed it to him.

His question continues to hang in the air even two thousand years later, and it is the question that one day every man and woman will be required to answer. Why? Because God “has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by THE MAN he has appointed” (Acts 17:31). There is no more important quest facing mankind than finding out the true identity of Jesus Christ and understanding the significance of his life. The issue is a matter of life and death, both in regard to the quality of one’s life now, and his future eternal destiny.

Now if God revealed this to Peter and what he revealed was that Jesus is the Son of the living God then I would put my faith in God and the truth that Jesus is Gods Son.

If anyone can show where the phrase God the Son is used that would be helpful otherwise please refrain from such unscriptural doctrine of the one true God and making the one that the one true God sent into God.

God is not a man but in contrast Spirit.

The words of Jesus himself.

Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Ever going to answer my explanation of John 17:3 Warrior? Or are you just going to keep on pretending no one has explained it to you?

[Angryamerican]

So which religion are you this week AA?

The same as usual you?

[Warrior4God]

Ever going to answer my explanation of John 17:3 Warrior? Or are you just going to keep on pretending no one has explained it to you?

I read your explanation, commented on it and it still did not adress the scripture John 17:3 ,you spun out of adressing it and posted more scripture.

There is no explanation needed other then what Jesus said.

[Angryamerican]

Sticks and stones . . .



Impossible - there are no scriptures that contradict the Trinity . . .



Nope - examples please.



Already explained that - Jesus clarified in John 6:46 it is speaking of the Father - no one has seen the Father at any time.



Greater - not better - does not even hint that Jesus is not God.



So what? That doesn't contradict trinity at all.



Funny how the rest of the Bible calls Him God numerous times and you ignore that.

Funny , , , but tragic.

Another case of denial Jim ?

We tried.

[Angryamerican]

That's cause you're not even trying.

It's simple - If Jesus created "all things" He cannot be a thing.

I'm not sure Jesus created all things after warrior's post.


All i have to know is that Jesus is not equal and was created making him Inferior to God the Father.

[Warrior4God]

So which religion are you this week AA?

You sound like a weak sad man as you attack AA any way you can with your smart butt remarks.

Your beginning to sound even more hateful toward him as time goes on.

I am so fed up with people like you that take a debate and make it personal with remarks like that.
You sound like a little 3rd grader sometimes and it disgusts me as I read your venom.

Grow up and deal with the subject not the people who disagree with your doctrine.

This is not a personality thing, its a issue on scripture,stop making it such.
AA has more guts and meekness then most men do and you need to stop cutting at him with those remarks as it shows too much about your own personality Sir.

I applaud AA for having the guts to realize that when scripture reveals what and who God is that he adapts his thinking.

Its not easy to do as it was not easy for me when I saw the truth.

You constantly try to go after the messenger to deflect from the message because your doctrine can't stand up to what Jesus Christ himself said.

If you have any scripture that shows where Jesus refers to himself as God post them.

If I sound mad its because I am.
If I sound mean I do not mean to,Its just time for you to deal with the matter and not the people who disagree with what you believe.

[cfinstr]

The Trinity is self evident. People have, however, the freedom of choice to believe, or not. We need only spread the message and invite the people to , quietly and in their own time and manner, learn study, pray and determine for their life, their answer. Our job is done; we need to move on and spread the Gospel to others - Remember, the parable of the seed that falls in fertile soil versus the seed that falls on rocky barren soil. The choice is not ours; The choice is with the individual who hears the word.

cfinstr

[DispensationalJim]

Warrior4God wrote to DJim: Your smart butt way of responding would indicate to me that you have your mind made up to the KJV and you don't see any errors.

DJim replies: I am waiting to see if you can point me to the perfect Word of God.
============================================

From Warrior: I think you err in the usage of KJV as the perfect Word. It is not. To compare and study other versions would be most helpful to you so you can see Gods Perfect Word. You asked I will tell you.

From DJim: I already asked, and I am still waiting. How can I see God's perfect written Word if I must compare all 150+ Bible versions. I do have about 25 different versions already, and every time I have compared them, I have concluded that the King James is correct and the others have mistakes, so I must need your help, since you are claiming that I am totally wrong and that you are totally right. Won't you please save me some time and tell me which one it is?

=======================================

Warrior: I will be glad to help you get on the right road so you don't tell people things that are in error like the KJV being perfect. It is a trinity driven version.

DJim: Well, if you say so, it must be true. But which Bible is NOT a Trinity driven version? I'm pretty sure that the New World Translation fits that description, but I believe you said it was not a good translation, so please tell me which one Bible is perfect.
=========================================

Warrior: You equate knowing fact to being arrogant. I see your arrogance of your view as blinding you from truth.

DJim: So you know the facts and I don't. How humble of you.
========================================

Warrior: All my very very humble opinion based on the mountains of evidence to support this.

DJim: Well, if there are mountains of evidence, please tell me where. All the studies I have made show mountains of evidence against the other versions, so I must be looking in all the wrong places.
======================================

Warrior: We have had Gods perfect Word since that Word became flesh and dwelt amng us Gods Word did not appear 400 years ago.

DJim: So that eliminates the Old Testament, doesn't it? Seems like you have referred back to the OT a few times, haven't you? Now you imply that the OT isn't perfect?

And so you believe the perfect Word of God is Jesus (who is The Living Word), but not His written Word? Do I understand you correctly on that? Or are you referring to that man-made concept of "the Word" as in John 1:1 to be not the real Jesus, but simply the foreknowledge of God about Jesus or something like that, a concept which as I recall drmilo totally refuted some time back?

================================

Warrior: You guys have made very clear that my view is error. I base my view on the Words of Jesus Christ, If hes wrong I am wrong. If he is right you are wrong. Arrogance is a perception of the mind. Knowing the truth is renewing ones mind to the truth.

DJim: But I thought you quoted Paul and Peter and others in the NT. Are those also the words of Jesus or not?

-===============================

Warrior: See Jim I get tired of you guys trying to make this a personality thing by using the blatant arrogance etc. etc. etc.etc. etc. etc.etc. etc. etc.etc etc. etc. etc.. etc. etc.and spin away from the truth of the scripture.

DJim: Goodness, Warrior, as I recall, it was you who first began making this a personality issue. It seem I remember you apologizing for making some personal comments about us. Then I am quite sure I posted a list of other comments you had made which I felt were derogatory toward us, but to which you did not respond.
=================================

Warrior: You don't see that Paul refers to God the Father AND Jesus Christ.(not God the Son). You and Jim keep saying things like " trinity,incarnation, God the Son"

DJim: Well, Warrior, you don't like us to say "God the Son" and we don't like you to tell us that Jesus is not God, or that Jesus was created (which has been repeatedly and soundly refuted by several on this thread, IMO), etc... So I guess that makes us even...
================================

Warrior: You have NO scriptural support for these except a few misunderstood or maybe intentionally spun verses by translators and readers of Gods Word.

DJim: That is -- as I keep saying -- YOUR OPINION, not a fact. T-Jim, ralittlefield, drmilo and several others have shown clearly that your "man's interpretation" of John 1:1 and other well known Trintarian verses is not at all supported by your claims.
=================================

Warrior: See my quote"The Word Of God is the Will of God"
It could also be said "The Will of God is the Word of God"

DJim: I agree with both statements, but how would you know what the "will of God" is without the perfect written Word of God copied down in a book for us all? I believe it is impossible to know the will of God without God's perfect Written Word along with His Holy Spirit to guide us in our study of His perfect written Word. If we do not know what and where His perfect written Word is, IMO we are doomed to live in ignorance of God's will.

===================================

Warrior: Jesus Christ is Gods Word he would as Gods messiah anointed by God to reveal God to us and he did just that.

DJim: Yes, He revealed Himself to us through His written Word. We would know very little about Him except for His written Word. Further, I believe that Paul's epistles are specifically for us and to us in this Age of Grace.
==================================

Warrior: I will continue to expose the errors of the trinity and phrases like" God the Son" that are so very unscriptural and contrary to truth.

DJim: I will continue to expose the errors of Unitarian Arminianism and phrases like "Jesus is not God" or "Jesus was created" which are very unscriptural and contrary to the truth.
=====================================

Warrior: I have been told that unity with me would be wrong yet I post nothing and believe nothing but what scripture in context unfolds point blank.

DJim: I agree with T-Jim that unity with someone as convinced of your Unitarian doctrine as you are might be practically impossible.
====================================

Warrior: If you feel that unity with me would be wrong that is your decision,BUT,I WILL espose the truth of The real Jesus Christ and will not buckle at mens doctrine.
If thats arrogant so be it. Been called worse by lesser men.
I have the utmost respect for your stance and how you conduct yourself MOST of the time.
But for me to sit here and see MY God the Father of Jesus Christ turned into 1/3 man,would be contrary to what God shows the truth to be.

DJim: And for me to allow you to demean my Jesus, THE ONE AND ONLY LORD, ONE AND ONLY SAVIOUR, ONE AND ONLY REDEEMER, ONE AND ONLY "FIRST AND THE LAST," ONE AND ONLY CREATOR, etc., etc. is absolutely unacceptable to me and IMO totally unacceptable to my Lord and Saviour.

====================================

Warrior: So we continue to little by little show your doctrines holes.

DJim: Not even a little bit as I see it. I do see gigantic holes in yours, though.

====================================

Warrior: I am convinced you will see some of them and see the real Jesus,and,that God did become a baby but rather a baby grew into our Lord and Saviur Jesus Christ.

DJim: I base my understanding of truth strictly on God's written Word. I don't need any web sites or men's opinions of what God meant to say, since I am quite confident that God already said it loud and clear not only through the Living Word, Jesus Christ, but also through His Written Word, the Holy Bible.

And FINALLY, Warrior, are you saying that there is NO BIBLE that can be called "God's PERFECT Written Word" today in the English language? I would appreciate a simple "Yes" or "No" answer. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[Tucson Jim]

The same as usual you?

:)

[Tucson Jim]

I read your explanation, commented on it and it still did not adress the scripture John 17:3 ,you spun out of adressing it and posted more scripture.

Sure you did . . . As I recall, your "response" to my multiple, detailed lines of reasoning from the scriptures about the verse was to say something like "You're all wrong".

Not really a response Warrior.

But if you want to pretend like you dealt with my explanation of John 17:3, go right ahead.

There is no explanation needed other then what Jesus said.

Just keep telling yourself that . . .

[Tucson Jim]

Another case of denial Jim ?

Only on your part, AA, only on your part . . .

[Tucson Jim]

I'm not sure Jesus created all things after warrior's post.

Warrior's post took the scripture and inserted his opinions throughout.

You take the opinions of men over God's word??

That explains a lot.


All i have to know is that Jesus is not equal and was created making him Inferior to God the Father.

He cannot be created because He created everything, as the Bible makes abundantly, irrefutably clear.

"All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made." John 1:3

What part of "all things" is hard for you to understand?

[Tucson Jim]

You sound like a weak sad man as you attack AA any way you can with your smart butt remarks.

Yeah well I am the second person today you have called a "smart butt". Your remarks sound pretty hateful to me.

Your beginning to sound even more hateful toward him as time goes on.

I'm just kind of sick of his insulting, sarcastic attitude, that's all. He referred to my "ignorance" and was sarcastic to me and others several other times today. I don't see you scolding him for that.

I actually felt my reactions were rather, I don't know . . . measured . . . in comparison to his.

I am so fed up with people like you that take a debate and make it personal with remarks like that.

Freud would have a field day with this, coming from someone who always makes it personal.

Look up the psychological defense mechanism of "projection" and I think you'll see what I mean . . .

You sound like a little 3rd grader sometimes and it disgusts me as I read your venom.

Grow up and deal with the subject not the people who disagree with your doctrine.

That's really funny, you telling me to grow up - you who came to this thread with a big chip on your shoulder, insulting everyone, acting like you know it all.

You who practically started crying when I said you were acting like a baby - then we didn't hear from you for 4 days because you were pouting!

Yeah, I need to grow up! :))


This is not a personality thing, its a issue on scripture,stop making it such.

I will if you will.

The difference is, I can - I don't believe you are even capable of civil discussion on this topic.

D'Jim tried to explain to you all the ways you insult people in your posts but it just went right over your head.

I dare you to post on the Trinity for one week without being insulting or demeaning to others.

One week.

I bet you can't do it!

AA has more guts and meekness then most men do and you need to stop cutting at him with those remarks as it shows too much about your own personality Sir.

Baloney! AA acts like a smart aleck. I don't think he has a "meek" bone in his body. If he does, it's a small bone - probably a metacarpal . . . and he isn't showing it off much!

I applaud AA for having the guts to realize that when scripture reveals what and who God is that he adapts his thinking.

Come on . . . you applaud him because he agrees with you about the Trinity!

Its not easy to do as it was not easy for me when I saw the truth.

You constantly try to go after the messenger to deflect from the message because your doctrine can't stand up to what Jesus Christ himself said.

You accuse me of exactly what you do! Take a good look in the mirror Warrior. Remember - "projection" . . . look it up

If you have any scripture that shows where Jesus refers to himself as God post them.

If I sound mad its because I am.
If I sound mean I do not mean to,Its just time for you to deal with the matter and not the people who disagree with what you believe.

Projection . . . projection . . .

[Tucson Jim]

The Trinity is self evident. People have, however, the freedom of choice to believe, or not. We need only spread the message and invite the people to , quietly and in their own time and manner, learn study, pray and determine for their life, their answer. Our job is done; we need to move on and spread the Gospel to others - Remember, the parable of the seed that falls in fertile soil versus the seed that falls on rocky barren soil. The choice is not ours; The choice is with the individual who hears the word.

cfinstr

Thank you for a very thoughtful post. I agree with everything you said - in "real" life.

But here, I cannot sit by and let Warrior and AA trash my beliefs on a daily basis without at least attempting to show where they are in error.

Others are reading what they post and I don't want some newbie to come in here and think the stuff they are posting has any basis in scripture.

This is more like anti-defamation league work . . .

[Angryamerican]

Warrior's post took the scripture and inserted his opinions throughout.

You take the opinions of men over God's word??

That explains a lot.




He cannot be created because He created everything, as the Bible makes abundantly, irrefutably clear.

"All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made." John 1:3

What part of "all things" is hard for you to understand?

Well if thats not the pot calling the kettle black.:D

I'm sorry JIM but i agree with warrior that you seem to let your pride get in the way of truth.

Truth is Jesus told you exactly who and what he was and never said anything about being God Almighty. So what you bought in to is a theory thats just the plain truth of the matter.

And if Jesus was who you say he is why would he contradict his own words please try to be honest here and leave the spin and pride out of your answer?

God never dies and you said he did. God never has served anyone and you say he is a servant.

You say Jesus is all knowing but by Jesus own words he is not. And it goes on and on. This is not my opinion that is scripture saying this.

I don't need a whole new vocabulary to explain my God and what my God is , Gods word was enough.

[Angryamerican]

Warrior's post took the scripture and inserted his opinions throughout.

You take the opinions of men over God's word??

That explains a lot.




He cannot be created because He created everything, as the Bible makes abundantly, irrefutably clear.

"All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made." John 1:3

What part of "all things" is hard for you to understand?

Jesus had a beginning when did God have a beginning ?

Your whole theory goes up in smoke with the words Jesus spoke about himself.

You are leaving out that Jesus was the only begotten and the first-born son.

Common sense and reasoning and along with scripture my friend thats how you get to the truth of the matter.

[DispensationalJim]

Nice try but anyone can take scripture out of context to support their belief or quote scripture that is in error as warrior has made clear.

So that is the best you can do to respond to the info I posted??? Does that mean you concede that Jesus is God the Son?

[tracifish]

So that is the best you can do to respond to the info I posted??? Does that mean you concede that Jesus is God the Son?

I do! I concede that Jesus is God the Son.

[DispensationalJim]

You and all trinitarians lose my respect when you say things that are not scriptural only in your mind it is. God the son. Please show us where that is in the scriptures.

Come on, AA...

You are allowed to insult my God and Saviour, Jesus Christ, by saying "Jesus is NOT God" as often as you wish but I am not allowed to say that Jesus, my Lord and Saviour, is God? Please, AA, give me a break... And then to use the "you lose my respect" line to boot, whew, that takes a lot of nerve. And you expect us to respect you??

[DispensationalJim]

I do! I concede that Jesus is God the Son.

Hey, thank you for that testimony, traci. Nice to hear from you again. Hope all is well.

[tracifish]

And i'm sure you can prove the trinity right :rolleyes:

Please, get yourself a King James bible...then start by reading the Gospel of John. It is hard to come to any other conclusion. It really is....especially after reading the Gospel of John...and then, the book of Revelation...I would start with those two.

[tracifish]

Hey, thank you for that testimony, traci. Nice to hear from you again. Hope all is well.

Thank you. I hope all is well with you too! :hug:

[DispensationalJim]

Thank you. I hope all is well with you too! :hug:

Dear traci, I'm not sure if you have had much contact with AA, but he seems to vacilate between the Jewish position regarding Jesus and the JW position, so sometimes it is difficult to know just which position he is taking today, but one thing is pretty much for sure...

... he will be against the Trintarian view.

Just a fair warning for you based on my experiences with him, dear traci.

Oh, yeah, thanks for the hug. I need lots of hugs and prayers right now... some tough problems with some very dear family members.

[tracifish]

Dear traci, I'm not sure if you have had much contact with AA, but he seems to vacilate between the Jewish position regarding Jesus and the JW position, so sometimes it is difficult to know just which position he is taking today, but one thing is pretty much for sure...

... he will be against the Trintarian view.

Just a fair warning for you based on my experiences with him, dear traci.

Oh, yeah, thanks for the hug. I need lots of hugs and prayers right now... some tough problems with some very dear family members.

Many hugs and prayers for you and your family.

:hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::pray::pray::pray::pray:: pray:

I just lost my grandma. She passed away last thursday....so I need many hugs, too.

[apostolicconservative]

Please, get yourself a King James bible...then start by reading the Gospel of John. It is hard to come to any other conclusion. It really is....especially after reading the Gospel of John...and then, the book of Revelation...I would start with those two.

I have a KJV, NIV, and many others... still haven't found God the son.

I have found the son of man describing the humanity of Christ. I have also found the son of God describing the deity of Christ.

Haven't found the persons of God, but I do see that God was manifest in the flesh, seen by angels... and I have read about Jesus being the same I AM that spoke to Moses. Yet, when I read about it in Genesis I only read about Moses talking to one God... not two.

Weird. Are we using the same KJV?

[tracifish]

I have a KJV, NIV, and many others... still haven't found God the son.

I have found the son of man describing the humanity of Christ. I have also found the son of God describing the deity of Christ.

Haven't found the persons of God, but I do see that God was manifest in the flesh, seen by angels... and I have read about Jesus being the same I AM that spoke to Moses. Yet, when I read about it in Genesis I only read about Moses talking to one God... not two.


So...what do you think that means? He is one God, not two....but He is one God and three persons, all existing at the same time. It's different than any earthly thing we understand...but if Jesus is the I Am, the Father is the I Am and the Holy Spirit is the I Am...and there is only one I Am...that has to mean one God, three persons....but not modes...or that would be modalism (more on that, later).

[tracifish]

Weird. Are we using the same KJV?

I don't know. Zondervon put out a King James Study Bible...but I heard it is really not a King James. The best King James is a 1611. That's all I know.

[DispensationalJim]

Many hugs and prayers for you and your family.

:hug::hug::hug::hug::hug::pray::pray::pray::pray:: pray:

I just lost my grandma. She passed away last thursday....so I need many hugs, too.

Thanks, traci, and bless you.

If I may add my two cents worth regarding the King James Bible, I do have a copy of the "original" 1611 (which is now "mass marketed" in Christian Book Stores) and a list of the so-called "errors" which unfortunately were a part of that first 1611 printing. I will admit that some of those "errors" (when compared to the present King James) are a problem for any true King James adherant, but a check of the explanations given by King James historians clears them up for me, at least, since it was the first printing of the texts and printing itself was at that time a relatively new field of endeavor, so there were many typos, mis-spellings, and just plain breakdowns in communication between what was written down by the translators and what was "type-set" by the printing folks.

There were four later "revisions." the first, in 1629, was an attempts to correct those aforementioned spelling and typo "errors." Then in 1638, another edition was printed with a few more corrections. Finally, in 1762 and 1769, further effrts were made to "standardize" the spelling problems. For instance, many words had an extra "e" at the end, which needed to be removed. If you would actually see the wierd type styles of certain letters appearing in the 1611, you would understand. The "j" looked like an "i" and the "s" looked like an "f."

The KJ historians will insist that there were few if any actual revisions of the text, but simply corrections of "poor printing and type setting practices" of that day.

Even today, you can find spelling differences between the OT and NT on some proper names, etc., mostly due to the difference in the OT Hebrew text and the NT Greek text But I am sure that the King James Bible I have been using for the past 10 years is the same as the four previous King James Bibles which "gave out" on me. So I am confident that I am reading the Word of God with the good old KJV!

[tracifish]

Thanks, traci, and bless you.

If I may add my two cents worth regarding the King James Bible, I do have a copy of the "original" 1611 (which is now "mass marketed" in Christian Book Stores) and a list of the so-called "errors" which unfortunately were a part of that first 1611 printing. I will admit that some of those "errors" (when compared to the present King James) are a problem for any true King James adherant, but a check of the explanations given by King James historians clears them up for me, at least, since it was the first printing of the texts and printing itself was at that time a relatively new field of endeavor, so there were many typos, mis-spellings, and just plain breakdowns in communication between what was written down by the translators and what was "type-set" by the printing folks.

There were four later "revisions." the first, in 1629, was an attempts to correct those aforementioned spelling and typo "errors." Then in 1638, another edition was printed with a few more corrections. Finally, in 1762 and 1769, further effrts were made to "standardize" the spelling problems. For instance, many words had an extra "e" at the end, which needed to be removed. If you would actually see the wierd type styles of certain letters appearing in the 1611, you would understand. The "j" looked like an "i" and the "s" looked like an "f."

The KJ historians will insist that there were few if any actual revisions of the text, but simply corrections of "poor printing and type setting practices" of that day.

Even today, you can find spelling differences between the OT and NT on some proper names, etc., mostly due to the difference in the OT Hebrew text and the NT Greek text But I am sure that the King James Bible I have been using for the past 10 years is the same as the four previous King James Bibles which "gave out" on me. So I am confident that I am reading the Word of God with the good old KJV!


I do not have a 1611 yet, but would love to get one. Mine is a King James, but it doesn't have the extra e's at the end, or s's that look like f's. It must have been hard back then, not having the printing that we do. Typagraphical errors back then are understandable...and they did have a different way of spelling...but I'd love to have one. It would be my favorite bible.

[G-LOVE]

So...what do you think that means? He is one God, not two....but He is one God and three persons, all existing at the same time. It's different than any earthly thing we understand...but if Jesus is the I Am, the Father is the I Am and the Holy Spirit is the I Am...and there is only one I Am...that has to mean one God, three persons....but not modes...or that would be modalism (more on that, later).

Not to make a joke of this discussion, but when Jesus was on the earth, he set the best example of teaching that we can all learn from and that is through parables. When he offered a parable, he often said before or after, "if he has ears to hear, let him hear" I'm paraphrasing of course.

The writers of the books of the Bible were also quoted as saying the same things that they were taught.

Now with this in mind, take all the scriptures that give evidence that there is a God, the Father of all, and Jesus Christ His Son, and The Holy Ghost, are we supposed to take each account as a parable? Something we are to look for deeper meaning? Or is it as simple as the teachings themselves...straight forward not needing interpretation.

I find it odd that people who claim to be Christians and to know of Him they call Christ, they will say that the structure of the "Trinity" is a mystery and something we will figure out when we cross to the other side. I say they will learn when God the Father introduces His Son to you "This is My Beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased".

[DispensationalJim]

I find it odd that people who claim to be Christians and to know of Him they call Christ, they will say that the structure of the "Trinity" is a mystery and something we will figure out when we cross to the other side. I say they will learn when God the Father introduces His Son to you "This is My Beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased".

The concept of the Trinity may or may not actually be considered a mystery in God's Word, but the word "mystery" itself was used many times in the NT. See for yourself:

• Mark 4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
• Rom. 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
• Rom. 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,
• 1Cor. 2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
• 1Cor. 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
• Eph. 1:9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
• Eph. 3:3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, 4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) ... 9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:
• Eph. 5:32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
• Eph. 6:19 And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel,
• Col. 1:26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: 27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:
• Col. 2:2 That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ;
• Col. 4:3 Withal praying also for us, that God would open unto us a door of utterance, to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds:
• 2Th. 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
• 1Tim. 3:9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. ... 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
• Rev. 1:20 The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.
• Rev. 10:7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.
• Rev. 17:5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. ... 7 And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.

It is my conviction that God put a few mysteries into His Word so that we would follow this admonition from Paul:
• 2Tim. 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

[Warrior4God]

The concept of the Trinity may or may not actually be considered a mystery in God's Word, but the word "mystery" itself was used many times in the NT. See for yourself:

• Mark 4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
• Rom. 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
• Rom. 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,
• 1Cor. 2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
• 1Cor. 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
• Eph. 1:9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
• Eph. 3:3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, 4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) ... 9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:
• Eph. 5:32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
• Eph. 6:19 And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel,
• Col. 1:26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: 27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:
• Col. 2:2 That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ;
• Col. 4:3 Withal praying also for us, that God would open unto us a door of utterance, to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds:
• 2Th. 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
• 1Tim. 3:9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. ... 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
• Rev. 1:20 The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.
• Rev. 10:7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.
• Rev. 17:5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. ... 7 And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.

It is my conviction that God put a few mysteries into His Word so that we would follow this admonition from Paul:
• 2Tim. 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

I do not see a verse that the mystery is used to describe anything about God being a mystery.

All the mysteries have been revealed and none of them apply to God being a mystery to us.

[Warrior4God]

Warrior's post took the scripture and inserted his opinions throughout.

You take the opinions of men over God's word??

That explains a lot.




He cannot be created because He created everything, as the Bible makes abundantly, irrefutably clear.

"All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made." John 1:3

What part of "all things" is hard for you to understand?

All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made. (KJV)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1. Trinitarians use this verse to show that Christ made the world and its contents. However, that is not the case. What we have learned from the study of John 1:1 above will be helpful in properly interpreting this verse.

John 1:1-3
(1) In the beginning was the Word [the wisdom, plan or purpose of God], and the Word was with God, and
the Word was divine.
(2) The same was in the beginning with God.
(3) All things were made by it [the Word]; and without it was not anything made that was made.

2. The pronoun in verse 3 can legitimately be translated as “it.” It does not have to be translated as “him,” and it does not have to refer to a “person” in any way. A primary reason why people get the idea that “the Word” is a person is that the pronoun “he” is used with it. The Greek text does, of course, have the masculine pronoun, because like many languages, including Spanish, French, German, Latin, Hebrew, etc., the Greek language assigns a gender to all nouns, and the gender of the pronoun must agree with the gender of the noun. In French, for example, a table is feminine, la table, while a desk is masculine, le bureau, and feminine and masculine pronouns are required to agree with the gender of the noun. In translating from French to English, however, we would never translate “the table, she,” or “the desk, he.” And we would never insist that a table or desk was somehow a person just because it had a masculine or feminine pronoun. We would use the English designation “it” for the table and the desk, in spite of the fact that in the original language the table and desk have a masculine or feminine gender.

This is true in the translation of any language that assigns a gender to nouns. In Spanish, a car is masculine, el carro, while a bicycle is feminine, la bicicleta. Again, no English translator would translate “the car, he,” or “the bicycle, she.” People translating Spanish into English use the word “it” when referring to a car or bicycle. For another example, a Greek feminine noun is “anchor” (agkura), and literally it would demand a feminine pronoun. Yet no English translator would write “I accidentally dropped the anchor, and she fell through the bottom of the boat.” We would write, “it” fell through the bottom of the boat. In Greek, “wind” (anemos) is masculine, but we would not translate it into English that way. We would say, “The wind was blowing so hard it blew the trash cans over,” not “the wind, he blew the trash cans over.” When translating from another language into English, we have to use the English language properly. Students who are studying Greek, Hebrew, Spanish, French, German, etc., quickly discover that one of the difficult things about learning the language is memorizing the gender of each noun—something we do not have in the English language.

Greek is a language that assigns gender to nouns. For example, in Greek, “word” is masculine while “spirit” is neuter. All languages that assign gender to nouns demand that pronouns referring to the noun have the same gender as the noun. Once we clearly understand that the gender of a pronoun is determined by the gender of the noun, we can see why one cannot build a doctrine on the gender of a noun and its agreeing pronoun. No student of the Bible should take the position that “the Word” is somehow a masculine person based on its pronoun any more than he would take the position that a book was a feminine person or a desk was a masculine person because that is the gender assigned to those nouns in French. Indeed, if one tried to build a theology based on the gender of the noun in the language, great confusion would result.


Because the translators of the Bible have almost always been Trinitarians, and since “the Word” has almost always been erroneously identified with the person of Christ, the pronouns referring to the logos in verse 3 have almost always been translated as “him.” However, if in fact the logos is the plan, purpose, wisdom and reason of God, then the Greek pronoun should be translated into the English as “it.” To demand that “the Word” is a masculine person and therefore a third part of a three-part Godhead because the pronouns used when referring to it are masculine, is poor scholarship.

The opening of John reveals this simple truth in a beautiful way: “In the beginning there was one God, who had reason, purpose and a plan, which was, by its very nature and origin, divine. It was through and on account of this reason, plan and purpose that everything was made. Nothing was made outside its scope. Then, this plan became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ and tabernacled among us.” Understanding the opening of John this way fits with the whole of Scripture and is entirely acceptable from a translation standpoint.

http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=86

[DispensationalJim]

I do not see a verse that the mystery is used to describe anything about God being a mystery.

All the mysteries have been revealed and none of them apply to God being a mystery to us.

I agree, Warrior. I prefaced all those verses with a note which implied that, but maybe you missed it. The verses were strictly for G-Love due to his comments earlier about "the mystery" just to make sure he was aware of the concepts. Sorry if I mislead you.

[DispensationalJim]

All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made. (KJV)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1. Trinitarians use this verse to show that Christ made the world and its contents. However, that is not the case. What we have learned from the study of John 1:1 above will be helpful in properly interpreting this verse.

John 1:1-3
(1) In the beginning was the Word [the wisdom, plan or purpose of God], and the Word was with God, and
the Word was divine.
(2) The same was in the beginning with God.
(3) All things were made by it [the Word]; and without it was not anything made that was made.

2. The pronoun in verse 3 can legitimately be translated as “it.” It does not have to be translated as “him,” and it does not have to refer to a “person” in any way. A primary reason why people get the idea that “the Word” is a person is that the pronoun “he” is used with it. The Greek text does, of course, have the masculine pronoun, because like many languages, including Spanish, French, German, Latin, Hebrew, etc., the Greek language assigns a gender to all nouns, and the gender of the pronoun must agree with the gender of the noun. In French, for example, a table is feminine, la table, while a desk is masculine, le bureau, and feminine and masculine pronouns are required to agree with the gender of the noun. In translating from French to English, however, we would never translate “the table, she,” or “the desk, he.” And we would never insist that a table or desk was somehow a person just because it had a masculine or feminine pronoun. We would use the English designation “it” for the table and the desk, in spite of the fact that in the original language the table and desk have a masculine or feminine gender.

This is true in the translation of any language that assigns a gender to nouns. In Spanish, a car is masculine, el carro, while a bicycle is feminine, la bicicleta. Again, no English translator would translate “the car, he,” or “the bicycle, she.” People translating Spanish into English use the word “it” when referring to a car or bicycle. For another example, a Greek feminine noun is “anchor” (agkura), and literally it would demand a feminine pronoun. Yet no English translator would write “I accidentally dropped the anchor, and she fell through the bottom of the boat.” We would write, “it” fell through the bottom of the boat. In Greek, “wind” (anemos) is masculine, but we would not translate it into English that way. We would say, “The wind was blowing so hard it blew the trash cans over,” not “the wind, he blew the trash cans over.” When translating from another language into English, we have to use the English language properly. Students who are studying Greek, Hebrew, Spanish, French, German, etc., quickly discover that one of the difficult things about learning the language is memorizing the gender of each noun—something we do not have in the English language.

Greek is a language that assigns gender to nouns. For example, in Greek, “word” is masculine while “spirit” is neuter. All languages that assign gender to nouns demand that pronouns referring to the noun have the same gender as the noun. Once we clearly understand that the gender of a pronoun is determined by the gender of the noun, we can see why one cannot build a doctrine on the gender of a noun and its agreeing pronoun. No student of the Bible should take the position that “the Word” is somehow a masculine person based on its pronoun any more than he would take the position that a book was a feminine person or a desk was a masculine person because that is the gender assigned to those nouns in French. Indeed, if one tried to build a theology based on the gender of the noun in the language, great confusion would result.


Because the translators of the Bible have almost always been Trinitarians, and since “the Word” has almost always been erroneously identified with the person of Christ, the pronouns referring to the logos in verse 3 have almost always been translated as “him.” However, if in fact the logos is the plan, purpose, wisdom and reason of God, then the Greek pronoun should be translated into the English as “it.” To demand that “the Word” is a masculine person and therefore a third part of a three-part Godhead because the pronouns used when referring to it are masculine, is poor scholarship.

The opening of John reveals this simple truth in a beautiful way: “In the beginning there was one God, who had reason, purpose and a plan, which was, by its very nature and origin, divine. It was through and on account of this reason, plan and purpose that everything was made. Nothing was made outside its scope. Then, this plan became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ and tabernacled among us.” Understanding the opening of John this way fits with the whole of Scripture and is entirely acceptable from a translation standpoint.

http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=86

OPINIONS, OPINIONS, AND MORE OPINIONS. Not one word of that Unitarian stuff can rob us of what God said in His Word. God said it and I believe it.

[Warrior4God]

OPINIONS, OPINIONS, AND MORE OPINIONS. Not one word of that Unitarian stuff can rob us of what God said in His Word. God said it and I believe it.

I know you do believe what you believe but theres still hope for you.

Just kidding Jim.

[ralittlefield]

All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made. (KJV)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1. Trinitarians use this verse to show that Christ made the world and its contents. However, that is not the case. What we have learned from the study of John 1:1 above will be helpful in properly interpreting this verse.

John 1:1-3
(1) In the beginning was the Word [the wisdom, plan or purpose of God], and the Word was with God, and
the Word was divine.
(2) The same was in the beginning with God.
(3) All things were made by it [the Word]; and without it was not anything made that was made.

2. The pronoun in verse 3 can legitimately be translated as “it.” It does not have to be translated as “him,” and it does not have to refer to a “person” in any way. A primary reason why people get the idea that “the Word” is a person is that the pronoun “he” is used with it. The Greek text does, of course, have the masculine pronoun, because like many languages, including Spanish, French, German, Latin, Hebrew, etc., the Greek language assigns a gender to all nouns, and the gender of the pronoun must agree with the gender of the noun. In French, for example, a table is feminine, la table, while a desk is masculine, le bureau, and feminine and masculine pronouns are required to agree with the gender of the noun. In translating from French to English, however, we would never translate “the table, she,” or “the desk, he.” And we would never insist that a table or desk was somehow a person just because it had a masculine or feminine pronoun. We would use the English designation “it” for the table and the desk, in spite of the fact that in the original language the table and desk have a masculine or feminine gender.

This is true in the translation of any language that assigns a gender to nouns. In Spanish, a car is masculine, el carro, while a bicycle is feminine, la bicicleta. Again, no English translator would translate “the car, he,” or “the bicycle, she.” People translating Spanish into English use the word “it” when referring to a car or bicycle. For another example, a Greek feminine noun is “anchor” (agkura), and literally it would demand a feminine pronoun. Yet no English translator would write “I accidentally dropped the anchor, and she fell through the bottom of the boat.” We would write, “it” fell through the bottom of the boat. In Greek, “wind” (anemos) is masculine, but we would not translate it into English that way. We would say, “The wind was blowing so hard it blew the trash cans over,” not “the wind, he blew the trash cans over.” When translating from another language into English, we have to use the English language properly. Students who are studying Greek, Hebrew, Spanish, French, German, etc., quickly discover that one of the difficult things about learning the language is memorizing the gender of each noun—something we do not have in the English language.

Greek is a language that assigns gender to nouns. For example, in Greek, “word” is masculine while “spirit” is neuter. All languages that assign gender to nouns demand that pronouns referring to the noun have the same gender as the noun. Once we clearly understand that the gender of a pronoun is determined by the gender of the noun, we can see why one cannot build a doctrine on the gender of a noun and its agreeing pronoun. No student of the Bible should take the position that “the Word” is somehow a masculine person based on its pronoun any more than he would take the position that a book was a feminine person or a desk was a masculine person because that is the gender assigned to those nouns in French. Indeed, if one tried to build a theology based on the gender of the noun in the language, great confusion would result.

We certainly have a different take on John 1. I can not read that chapter and not see the the deity of Christ.

Translating the pronoun "it" poses no problem for me. I do not believe that God is either male or female, so what difference does it make what pronoun is used as far as the deity of Christ is concerned?


Because the translators of the Bible have almost always been Trinitarians, and since “the Word” has almost always been erroneously identified with the person of Christ, the pronouns referring to the logos in verse 3 have almost always been translated as “him.” However, if in fact the logos is the plan, purpose, wisdom and reason of God, then the Greek pronoun should be translated into the English as “it.” To demand that “the Word” is a masculine person and therefore a third part of a three-part Godhead because the pronouns used when referring to it are masculine, is poor scholarship.

The opening of John reveals this simple truth in a beautiful way: “In the beginning there was one God, who had reason, purpose and a plan, which was, by its very nature and origin, divine. It was through and on account of this reason, plan and purpose that everything was made. Nothing was made outside its scope. Then, this plan became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ and tabernacled among us.” Understanding the opening of John this way fits with the whole of Scripture and is entirely acceptable from a translation standpoint.

http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=86


How can anyone read John 1 and say that it is wrong to identify the Word as preincarnate Christ?

The bible clearly identifies Christ as the Creator so when John 1 says "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made." who else can it be referring to?

When John says that "the word became flesh and dwelt among us." do you really not see Jesus being described?

When he says that "John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me." do you really not see Jesus being described? Who do you think that John (The Baptist) bore witness of?

[DispensationalJim]

Warrior4God posted what I would like to call a "perversion" of God's Word from a Unitarian web-site. Here it is:

"John 1:1-3
(1) In the beginning was the Word [the wisdom, plan or purpose of God], and the Word was with God, and the Word was divine. (2) The same was in the beginning with God. (3) All things were made by it [the Word]; and without it was not anything made that was made."

Here is the passage as recorded in God's Word, the King James Bible:
• John 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

=============================

For those who have not been following this lo-o-o-ong thread from the beginning, the above passage has been discussed several times. Some time back, John 1:1 was quoted from a large collection of Bible versions, and the ONLY ONE which seemed to disagree with the King James rendering was the Watchtower Bible (or "The New World Translation" or the Jehovah's Witness Bible).

So I am curious, folks. Can ANYONE show ANY reason or justification for adding the words "the wisdom, plan or purpose of God" in the place we see it in Warrior's version above?? If consistent, the new Bible version would therefore go like this:
• John 1 In the beginning was the wisdom, plan or purpose of God, and the wisdom, plan or purpose of God was with God, and the wisdom, plan or purpose of God was God. 2 The wisdom, plan or purpose of God was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by the wisdom, plan or purpose of God; and without the wisdom, plan or purpose of God was not any thing made that was made.

Does that work for anyone here besides Warrior?

Now, I am pretty sure that Warrior is a big fan of the Greek text, especially of the now well known Wescott and Hort Greek lexicon from which practically every new English Bible version of the New Testament has been translated since the King James. The New Testament of the King James was translated from what has become known as the Textus Receptus group of Greek manuscripts. And may I say that I strongly feel that the Wescott and Hort Greek text is corrupt. However, just to be fair, I checked with a 1958 translation known as "The Amplified New Testament" in which the Wescott and Hort Greek was "pursued with meticulous care" in completing the work (according to the Preface written by it's Editorial Committee). In other words, they relied mostly on the W & H Greek to justify the words they "added" to produce their version.

May I now show you how they translated the above passage?
John 1:1 "In the beginning [before all time] was the Word [Christ], and the Word was with God, and the Word was God Himself. (2) He was present originally with God. (3) All things were made and came into existence through Him, and without Him was not even one thing made that has come into being."

Did anyone see the phrase "the wisdom, plan or purpose of God" in there anywhere?? Nope... me neither.

I just wanted to make sure you all noticed that...

See you later.

[drmilo]

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

If the trinity were true the above verse is a lie.



This statement in and of itself proves that you do not understand what the doctrine of the trinity says, nor do you understand what the trinity is. And you continue to criticize it making points that DO NOT CONTRADICT what the trinity doctrine states. Why do we not deal with the verses you post? Because they do not contradict the trinity. All they do is show that Jesus was a man and Jesus was the Son of God. WE AGREE. Jesus was a man and Jesus was the Son of God. But that is only half of the complete revelation of who Jesus is.

Your agruments against the trinity are not arguments against the trinty. They are arguments against your misunderstanding of the trinity.

We have posted numerous verses (not merely "a few") that show that Jesus is God. Taking the entire picture, the whole of scripture, we see that Jesus is a man and that Jesus is God. You tell us that we are misunderstanding the scriptures that say Jesus is God. In fact you say that you have "proven" that we misunderstand those scriptures. All you have done is post pages of interpretation trying to find a way to interpret clear passages in such a way as to show that what the scripture says isn't really what the scripture says. We see John chapter 1 and see that it directly says that Jesus is the Word, and that the Word was in the beginning with God, and that the Word was God. You post pages of interpretation telling us that is not what it says. Those pages make sense to you because you can't seem to reconcile that Jesus is both God and man. The Bible teaches that Jesus was both God and man. You can't reconcile it because you have a hard time believing that can be true, therefore the passages that say Jesus was God must be misunderstood by those who believe what they actually say. That's where the pages of interpretation are born. Those interpretations fall short, IMHO, of what the text says, and try to make it say the opposite of what it says. And those interpretations far from "prove" anything except that you are of the opinion that your interpretations are correct.

1. The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is a man -- and is the Son of God.
2. The Bible also clearly teaches that Jesus is God.

You can't reconcile the two, and believe that only #1 is correct. You then seek to interpret all the verses that reveal Jesus' deity in such a way that they say the opposite of what they truely say.

We trinitarians accept the dichonomy of what is taught. Instead of reconciling it by aceepting one truth and denying the other. We accept the truth of both. We "reconcile" the seeming contradiction by accepting that the nature of Jesus and God is triune -- that The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, while three separate persons, consist of the single being known as God.

[drmilo]

Jim you don't think enough.

Why does non trinitarian bibles agree with trinitarian bibles on the scriptures that contradict your doctrine ?

I have yet to see a scripture quoted that "contradicts" the Doctrine of the Trinity. I've see verses quoted that anti-trinitarians believe contradicts the doctrine. Namely, quotes that show Jesus to be a man, but I have yet to see one that actually does contradict.

The only place they are not in agreement is on your key scriptures that you say prove your doctrine.

Since a scripture that shows Jesus is a man is not contradictory to the doctrine of the trinty, the verses that are not in agreement are verses that show Jesus is God. You seem to claim that those verses are corrupted to show Jesus' deity. We say that any version of scripture that shows otherwise are the corrupted versions. WE ALL AGREE ON VERSES THAT SHOW CHRIST WAS A MAN. As I said, I've yet to see a scripture that disproves the trinity posted here.

[drmilo]

So you are telling me angels are not capable of miracles?

Sorry your logic lost me.

Read the quote again:


If Jesus was created, then he, like every other aspect of creation is a "created thing."

If Jesus is a "created thing" then he did not create "all things" since he could not have created himself.

And yet scriptures says that Jesus created all things. Without him, nothing that was made is made.

If Jesus was created then he did not create all things and scritpure has a serious contradiction.


Where does it say that angels can't perform miracles? What does that have to do with anything?

The Bible says that Jesus created ALL things, not SOME things, not MOST things, not ALL THINGS OTHER THAN HIMSELF. He created ALL things.

If Jesus was created, then he COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE CREATED ALL THINGS, since he could not have CREATED HIMSELF. But the bible says that Jesus CREATED ALL THINGS. Therefore, Jesus was not created. The only being that was not created and created all things was God. THEREFORE JESUS IS GOD.

[drmilo]

All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made. (KJV)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1. Trinitarians use this verse to show that Christ made the world and its contents. However, that is not the case. What we have learned from the study of John 1:1 above will be helpful in properly interpreting this verse.

John 1:1-3
(1) In the beginning was the Word [the wisdom, plan or purpose of God], and the Word was with God, and
the Word was divine.
(2) The same was in the beginning with God.
(3) All things were made by it [the Word]; and without it was not anything made that was made.

2. The pronoun in verse 3 can legitimately be translated as “it.” It does not have to be translated as “him,” and it does not have to refer to a “person” in any way. A primary reason why people get the idea that “the Word” is a person is that the pronoun “he” is used with it. The Greek text does, of course, have the masculine pronoun, because like many languages, including Spanish, French, German, Latin, Hebrew, etc., the Greek language assigns a gender to all nouns, and the gender of the pronoun must agree with the gender of the noun. In French, for example, a table is feminine, la table, while a desk is masculine, le bureau, and feminine and masculine pronouns are required to agree with the gender of the noun. In translating from French to English, however, we would never translate “the table, she,” or “the desk, he.” And we would never insist that a table or desk was somehow a person just because it had a masculine or feminine pronoun. We would use the English designation “it” for the table and the desk, in spite of the fact that in the original language the table and desk have a masculine or feminine gender.

This is true in the translation of any language that assigns a gender to nouns. In Spanish, a car is masculine, el carro, while a bicycle is feminine, la bicicleta. Again, no English translator would translate “the car, he,” or “the bicycle, she.” People translating Spanish into English use the word “it” when referring to a car or bicycle. For another example, a Greek feminine noun is “anchor” (agkura), and literally it would demand a feminine pronoun. Yet no English translator would write “I accidentally dropped the anchor, and she fell through the bottom of the boat.” We would write, “it” fell through the bottom of the boat. In Greek, “wind” (anemos) is masculine, but we would not translate it into English that way. We would say, “The wind was blowing so hard it blew the trash cans over,” not “the wind, he blew the trash cans over.” When translating from another language into English, we have to use the English language properly. Students who are studying Greek, Hebrew, Spanish, French, German, etc., quickly discover that one of the difficult things about learning the language is memorizing the gender of each noun—something we do not have in the English language.

Greek is a language that assigns gender to nouns. For example, in Greek, “word” is masculine while “spirit” is neuter. All languages that assign gender to nouns demand that pronouns referring to the noun have the same gender as the noun. Once we clearly understand that the gender of a pronoun is determined by the gender of the noun, we can see why one cannot build a doctrine on the gender of a noun and its agreeing pronoun. No student of the Bible should take the position that “the Word” is somehow a masculine person based on its pronoun any more than he would take the position that a book was a feminine person or a desk was a masculine person because that is the gender assigned to those nouns in French. Indeed, if one tried to build a theology based on the gender of the noun in the language, great confusion would result.


Because the translators of the Bible have almost always been Trinitarians, and since “the Word” has almost always been erroneously identified with the person of Christ, the pronouns referring to the logos in verse 3 have almost always been translated as “him.” However, if in fact the logos is the plan, purpose, wisdom and reason of God, then the Greek pronoun should be translated into the English as “it.” To demand that “the Word” is a masculine person and therefore a third part of a three-part Godhead because the pronouns used when referring to it are masculine, is poor scholarship.

The opening of John reveals this simple truth in a beautiful way: “In the beginning there was one God, who had reason, purpose and a plan, which was, by its very nature and origin, divine. It was through and on account of this reason, plan and purpose that everything was made. Nothing was made outside its scope. Then, this plan became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ and tabernacled among us.” Understanding the opening of John this way fits with the whole of Scripture and is entirely acceptable from a translation standpoint.

http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=86

Case in point to my previous verse. Interpretation that attempts to say that what John 1:3 says is not really what John 1:3 says.

[DispensationalJim]

Case in point to my previous verse. Interpretation that attempts to say that what John 1:3 says is not really what John 1:3 says.

Thank you, drmilo, for those excellent responses. Please keep 'em coming.

[Warrior4God]

I have yet to see a scripture quoted that "contradicts" the Doctrine of the Trinity. I've see verses quoted that anti-trinitarians believe contradicts the doctrine. Namely, quotes that show Jesus to be a man, but I have yet to see one that actually does contradict.



Since a scripture that shows Jesus is a man is not contradictory to the doctrine of the trinty, the verses that are not in agreement are verses that show Jesus is God. You seem to claim that those verses are corrupted to show Jesus' deity. We say that any version of scripture that shows otherwise are the corrupted versions. WE ALL AGREE ON VERSES THAT SHOW CHRIST WAS A MAN. As I said, I've yet to see a scripture that disproves the trinity posted here.

The point is that scripture is clear that God is NOT a man nor the Son of man.
Jesus said God is Spirit.

Can't spin that.

Jesus was not a trinitarian.

[ralittlefield]

The point is that scripture is clear that God is NOT a man nor the Son of man.
Jesus said God is Spirit.

Can't spin that.

Jesus was not a trinitarian.


Considering how you treat clear verses like John 1:1 and John 20:28, perhaps you should be more careful of who you accuse of spinning scripture.

[Warrior4God]

Warrior4God posted what I would like to call a "perversion" of God's Word from a Unitarian web-site. Here it is:

"John 1:1-3
(1) In the beginning was the Word [the wisdom, plan or purpose of God], and the Word was with God, and the Word was divine. (2) The same was in the beginning with God. (3) All things were made by it [the Word]; and without it was not anything made that was made."

Here is the passage as recorded in God's Word, the King James Bible:
• John 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

=============================

For those who have not been following this lo-o-o-ong thread from the beginning, the above passage has been discussed several times. Some time back, John 1:1 was quoted from a large collection of Bible versions, and the ONLY ONE which seemed to disagree with the King James rendering was the Watchtower Bible (or "The New World Translation" or the Jehovah's Witness Bible).

So I am curious, folks. Can ANYONE show ANY reason or justification for adding the words "the wisdom, plan or purpose of God" in the place we see it in Warrior's version above?? If consistent, the new Bible version would therefore go like this:
• John 1 In the beginning was the wisdom, plan or purpose of God, and the wisdom, plan or purpose of God was with God, and the wisdom, plan or purpose of God was God. 2 The wisdom, plan or purpose of God was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by the wisdom, plan or purpose of God; and without the wisdom, plan or purpose of God was not any thing made that was made.

Does that work for anyone here besides Warrior?

Now, I am pretty sure that Warrior is a big fan of the Greek text, especially of the now well known Wescott and Hort Greek lexicon from which practically every new English Bible version of the New Testament has been translated since the King James. The New Testament of the King James was translated from what has become known as the Textus Receptus group of Greek manuscripts. And may I say that I strongly feel that the Wescott and Hort Greek text is corrupt. However, just to be fair, I checked with a 1958 translation known as "The Amplified New Testament" in which the Wescott and Hort Greek was "pursued with meticulous care" in completing the work (according to the Preface written by it's Editorial Committee). In other words, they relied mostly on the W & H Greek to justify the words they "added" to produce their version.

May I now show you how they translated the above passage?
John 1:1 "In the beginning [before all time] was the Word [Christ], and the Word was with God, and the Word was God Himself. (2) He was present originally with God. (3) All things were made and came into existence through Him, and without Him was not even one thing made that has come into being."

Did anyone see the phrase "the wisdom, plan or purpose of God" in there anywhere?? Nope... me neither.

I just wanted to make sure you all noticed that...

See you later.

So Gods Word is NOT the wisdom, plan or purpose of God to you?
It is all that to me.

Ever do a word study on logos? look at the definition.
Jesus Christ was truly Gods whole plan for mankind .

[ralittlefield]

So Gods Word is NOT the wisdom, plan or purpose of God to you?
It is all that to me.

Ever do a word study on logos? look at the definition.
Jesus Christ was truly Gods whole plan for mankind .

It is all about context Warrior. Logos can be translated as you say. But read the passage and understand the context.

Here is part of the context that you should look for:

Who became flesh and dwelt among us? Who is verse 15 talking about? Who did John the Baptist testify about?

[Warrior4God]

[QUOTE=DispensationalJim;17937621]Warrior4God posted what I would like to call a "perversion" of God's Word from a Unitarian web-site.



QUOTE]

So Gods Word is NOT the wisdom, plan or purpose of God to you?
It is all that to me.



1. It is imperative that the serious student of the Bible come to a basic understanding of logos, which is translated as “Word” in John 1:1. Most Trinitarians believe that the word logos refers directly to Jesus Christ, so in most versions of John logos is capitalized and translated “Word” (some versions even write “Jesus Christ” in John 1:1). However, a study of the Greek word logos shows that it occurs more than 300 times in the New Testament, and in both the NIV and the KJV it is capitalized only 7 times (and even those versions disagree on exactly when to capitalize it). When a word that occurs more than 300 times is capitalized fewer than 10 times, it is obvious that when to capitalize and when not to capitalize is a translators’ decision based on their particular understanding of Scripture.

As it is used throughout Scripture, logos has a very wide range of meanings along two basic lines of thought. One is the mind and products of the mind like “reason,” (thus “logic” is related to logos) and the other is the expression of that reason as a “word,” “saying,” “command” etc. The Bible itself demonstrates the wide range of meaning logos has, and some of the ways it is translated in Scripture are: account, appearance, book, command, conversation, eloquence, flattery, grievance, heard, instruction, matter, message, ministry, news, proposal, question, reason, reasonable, reply, report, rule, rumor, said, say, saying, sentence, speaker, speaking, speech, stories, story, talk, talking, teaching, testimony, thing, things, this, truths, what, why, word and words.

Any good Greek lexicon will also show this wide range of meaning

speaking; words you say (Rom. 15:18, “what I have said and done”).
a statement you make (Luke 20:20 - (NASB), “they might catch him in some statement).
a question (Matt. 21:24, “I will also ask you one question”).
preaching (1 Tim. 5:17, “especially those whose work is preaching and teaching).
command (Gal. 5:14, “the entire law is summed up in a single command”).
proverb; saying (John 4:37, “thus the saying, ‘One sows, and another reaps’”).
message; instruction; proclamation (Luke 4:32, “his message had authority”).
assertion; declaration; teaching (John 6:60, “this is a hard teaching”).
the subject under discussion; matter (Acts 8:21, “you have no part or share in this ministry.” Acts 15:6 (NASB), “And the apostles... came together to look into this matter”).
revelation from God (Matt. 15:6, “you nullify the Word of God ”).
God’s revelation spoken by His servants (Heb. 13:7, “leaders who spoke the Word of God”).
a reckoning, an account (Matt. 12:36, “men will have to give account” on the day of judgment).
an account or “matter” in a financial sense (Matt. 18:23, A king who wanted to settle “accounts” with his servants. Phil. 4:15, “the matter of giving and receiving”).
a reason; motive (Acts 10:29 - NASB), “I ask for what reason you have sent for me”).

The above list is not exhaustive, but it does show that logos has a very wide range of meaning. With all the definitions and ways logos can be translated, how can we decide which meaning of logos to choose for any one verse? How can it be determined what the logos in John 1:1 is? Any occurrence of logos has to be carefully studied in its context in order to get the proper meaning. We assert that the logos in John 1:1 cannot be Jesus. Please notice that “Jesus Christ” is not a lexical definition of logos. This verse does not say, “In the beginning was Jesus.” “The Word” is not synonymous with Jesus, or even “the Messiah.” The word logos in John 1:1 refers to God’s creative self-expression—His reason, purposes and plans, especially as they are brought into action. It refers to God’s self-expression, or communication, of Himself. This has come to pass through His creation (Rom. 1:19 and 20), and especially the heavens (Ps. 19). It has come through the spoken word of the prophets and through Scripture, the written Word. Most notably and finally, it has come into being through His Son (Heb. 1:1 and 2).

The renowned Trinitarian scholar, John Lightfoot, writes:

The word logos then, denoting both “reason” and “speech,” was a philosophical term adopted by Alexandrian Judaism before St. Paul wrote, to express the manifestation of the Unseen God in the creation and government of the World. It included all modes by which God makes Himself known to man. As His reason, it denoted His purpose or design; as His speech, it implied His revelation. Christian teachers, when they adopted this term, exalted and fixed its meaning by attaching to it two precise and definite ideas: (1) “The Word is a Divine Person,” (2) “The Word became incarnate in Jesus Christ.” It is obvious that these two propositions must have altered materially the significance of all the subordinate terms connected with the idea of the logos. [17]

It is important to note that it was “Christian teachers” who attached the idea of a “divine person” to the word logos. It is certainly true that when the word logos came to be understood as being Jesus Christ, the understanding of John 1:1 was altered substantially. Lightfoot correctly understands that the early meaning of logos concerned reason and speech, not “Jesus Christ.” Norton develops the concept of logos as “reason” and writes:

There is no word in English answering to the Greek word logos, as used here [in John 1:1]. It was employed to denote a mode of conception concerning the Deity, familiar at the time when St. John wrote and intimately blended with the philosophy of his age, but long since obsolete, and so foreign from our habits of thinking that it is not easy for us to conform our minds to its apprehension. The Greek word logos, in one of its primary senses, answered nearly to our word Reason. The logos of God was regarded, not in its strictest sense, as merely the Reason of God; but, under certain aspects, as the Wisdom, the Mind, the Intellect of God (p. 307).

Norton postulates that perhaps “the power of God” would be a good translation for logos (p. 323). Buzzard sets forth “plan,” “purpose” or “promise” as three acceptable translations. Broughton and Southgate say “thoughts, plan or purpose of God, particularly in action.” Many scholars identify logos with God’s wisdom and reason.

The logos is the expression of God, and is His communication of Himself, just as a “word” is an outward expression of a person’s thoughts. This outward expression of God has now occurred through His Son, and thus it is perfectly understandable why Jesus is called the “Word.” Jesus is an outward expression of God’s reason, wisdom, purpose and plan. For the same reason, we call revelation “a word from God” and the Bible “the Word of God.”

If we understand that the logos is God’s expression—His plan, purposes, reason and wisdom, it is clear that they were indeed with Him “in the beginning.” Scripture says that God’s wisdom was “from the beginning” (Prov. 8:23). It was very common in Hebrew writing to personify a concept such as wisdom. No ancient Jew reading Proverbs would think that God’s wisdom was a separate person, even though it is portrayed as one in verses like Proverbs 8:29 and 30: “…when He marked out the foundations of the earth, I [wisdom] was the craftsman at His side.”

2. Most Jewish readers of the Gospel of John would have been familiar with the concept of God’s “word” being with God as He worked to bring His creation into existence. There is an obvious working of God’s power in Genesis 1 as He brings His plan into concretion by speaking things into being. The Targums are well known for describing the wisdom and action of God as His “word.” This is especially important to note because the Targums are the Aramaic translations and paraphrases of the Old Testament, and Aramaic was the spoken language of many Jews at the time of Christ. Remembering that a Targum is usually a paraphrase of what the Hebrew text says, note how the following examples attribute action to the word:

And the word of the Lord was Joseph’s helper (Gen. 39:2).
And Moses brought the people to meet the word of the Lord (Ex. 19:17).
And the word of the Lord accepted the face of Job (Job 42:9).
And the word of the Lord shall laugh them to scorn (Ps. 2:4).
They believed in the name of His word (Ps. 106:12). [18]
The above examples demonstrate that the Jews were familiar with the idea of God’s Word referring to His wisdom and action. This is especially important to note because these Jews were fiercely monotheistic, and did not in any way believe in a “Triune God.” They were familiar with the idioms of their own language, and understood that the wisdom and power of God were being personified as “word.”

The Greek-speaking Jews were also familiar with God’s creative force being called “the word.” J. H. Bernard writes, “When we turn from Palestine to Alexandria [Egypt], from Hebrew sapiential [wisdom] literature to that which was written in Greek, we find this creative wisdom identified with the Divine logos, Hebraism and Hellenism thus coming into contact.” [19] One example of this is in the Apocryphal book known as the Wisdom of Solomon, which says, “O God of my fathers and Lord of mercy who hast made all things by thy word (logos), and by thy wisdom hast formed man…” (9:1). In this verse, the “word” and “wisdom” are seen as the creative force of God, but without being a “person.”

[Warrior4God]

3. The logos, that is, the plan, purpose and wisdom of God, “became flesh” (came into concretion or physical existence) in Jesus Christ. Jesus is the “image of the invisible God” (Col. 1:15) and His chief emissary, representative and agent. Because Jesus perfectly obeyed the Father, he represents everything that God could communicate about Himself in a human person. As such, Jesus could say, “If you have seen me, you have seen the Father” (John 14:9). The fact that the logos “became” flesh shows that it did not exist that way before. There is no pre-existence for Jesus in this verse other than his figurative “existence” as the plan, purpose or wisdom of God for the salvation of man. The same is true with the “word” in writing. It had no literal pre-existence as a “spirit-book” somewhere in eternity past, but it came into being as God gave the revelation to people and they wrote it down

[ralittlefield]

[QUOTE=DispensationalJim;17937621]Warrior4God posted what I would like to call a "perversion" of God's Word from a Unitarian web-site.



QUOTE]

So Gods Word is NOT the wisdom, plan or purpose of God to you?
It is all that to me.



1. It is imperative that the serious student of the Bible come to a basic understanding of logos, which is translated as “Word” in John 1:1. Most Trinitarians believe that the word logos refers directly to Jesus Christ, so in most versions of John logos is capitalized and translated “Word” (some versions even write “Jesus Christ” in John 1:1). However, a study of the Greek word logos shows that it occurs more than 300 times in the New Testament, and in both the NIV and the KJV it is capitalized only 7 times (and even those versions disagree on exactly when to capitalize it). When a word that occurs more than 300 times is capitalized fewer than 10 times, it is obvious that when to capitalize and when not to capitalize is a translators’ decision based on their particular understanding of Scripture.

As it is used throughout Scripture, logos has a very wide range of meanings along two basic lines of thought. One is the mind and products of the mind like “reason,” (thus “logic” is related to logos) and the other is the expression of that reason as a “word,” “saying,” “command” etc. The Bible itself demonstrates the wide range of meaning logos has, and some of the ways it is translated in Scripture are: account, appearance, book, command, conversation, eloquence, flattery, grievance, heard, instruction, matter, message, ministry, news, proposal, question, reason, reasonable, reply, report, rule, rumor, said, say, saying, sentence, speaker, speaking, speech, stories, story, talk, talking, teaching, testimony, thing, things, this, truths, what, why, word and words.

Any good Greek lexicon will also show this wide range of meaning

speaking; words you say (Rom. 15:18, “what I have said and done”).
a statement you make (Luke 20:20 - (NASB), “they might catch him in some statement).
a question (Matt. 21:24, “I will also ask you one question”).
preaching (1 Tim. 5:17, “especially those whose work is preaching and teaching).
command (Gal. 5:14, “the entire law is summed up in a single command”).
proverb; saying (John 4:37, “thus the saying, ‘One sows, and another reaps’”).
message; instruction; proclamation (Luke 4:32, “his message had authority”).
assertion; declaration; teaching (John 6:60, “this is a hard teaching”).
the subject under discussion; matter (Acts 8:21, “you have no part or share in this ministry.” Acts 15:6 (NASB), “And the apostles... came together to look into this matter”).
revelation from God (Matt. 15:6, “you nullify the Word of God ”).
God’s revelation spoken by His servants (Heb. 13:7, “leaders who spoke the Word of God”).
a reckoning, an account (Matt. 12:36, “men will have to give account” on the day of judgment).
an account or “matter” in a financial sense (Matt. 18:23, A king who wanted to settle “accounts” with his servants. Phil. 4:15, “the matter of giving and receiving”).
a reason; motive (Acts 10:29 - NASB), “I ask for what reason you have sent for me”).

The above list is not exhaustive, but it does show that logos has a very wide range of meaning. With all the definitions and ways logos can be translated, how can we decide which meaning of logos to choose for any one verse? How can it be determined what the logos in John 1:1 is? Any occurrence of logos has to be carefully studied in its context in order to get the proper meaning. We assert that the logos in John 1:1 cannot be Jesus. Please notice that “Jesus Christ” is not a lexical definition of logos. This verse does not say, “In the beginning was Jesus.” “The Word” is not synonymous with Jesus, or even “the Messiah.” The word logos in John 1:1 refers to God’s creative self-expression—His reason, purposes and plans, especially as they are brought into action. It refers to God’s self-expression, or communication, of Himself. This has come to pass through His creation (Rom. 1:19 and 20), and especially the heavens (Ps. 19). It has come through the spoken word of the prophets and through Scripture, the written Word. Most notably and finally, it has come into being through His Son (Heb. 1:1 and 2).

The renowned Trinitarian scholar, John Lightfoot, writes:

The word logos then, denoting both “reason” and “speech,” was a philosophical term adopted by Alexandrian Judaism before St. Paul wrote, to express the manifestation of the Unseen God in the creation and government of the World. It included all modes by which God makes Himself known to man. As His reason, it denoted His purpose or design; as His speech, it implied His revelation. Christian teachers, when they adopted this term, exalted and fixed its meaning by attaching to it two precise and definite ideas: (1) “The Word is a Divine Person,” (2) “The Word became incarnate in Jesus Christ.” It is obvious that these two propositions must have altered materially the significance of all the subordinate terms connected with the idea of the logos. [17]

It is important to note that it was “Christian teachers” who attached the idea of a “divine person” to the word logos. It is certainly true that when the word logos came to be understood as being Jesus Christ, the understanding of John 1:1 was altered substantially. Lightfoot correctly understands that the early meaning of logos concerned reason and speech, not “Jesus Christ.” Norton develops the concept of logos as “reason” and writes:

There is no word in English answering to the Greek word logos, as used here [in John 1:1]. It was employed to denote a mode of conception concerning the Deity, familiar at the time when St. John wrote and intimately blended with the philosophy of his age, but long since obsolete, and so foreign from our habits of thinking that it is not easy for us to conform our minds to its apprehension. The Greek word logos, in one of its primary senses, answered nearly to our word Reason. The logos of God was regarded, not in its strictest sense, as merely the Reason of God; but, under certain aspects, as the Wisdom, the Mind, the Intellect of God (p. 307).

Norton postulates that perhaps “the power of God” would be a good translation for logos (p. 323). Buzzard sets forth “plan,” “purpose” or “promise” as three acceptable translations. Broughton and Southgate say “thoughts, plan or purpose of God, particularly in action.” Many scholars identify logos with God’s wisdom and reason.

The logos is the expression of God, and is His communication of Himself, just as a “word” is an outward expression of a person’s thoughts. This outward expression of God has now occurred through His Son, and thus it is perfectly understandable why Jesus is called the “Word.” Jesus is an outward expression of God’s reason, wisdom, purpose and plan. For the same reason, we call revelation “a word from God” and the Bible “the Word of God.”

If we understand that the logos is God’s expression—His plan, purposes, reason and wisdom, it is clear that they were indeed with Him “in the beginning.” Scripture says that God’s wisdom was “from the beginning” (Prov. 8:23). It was very common in Hebrew writing to personify a concept such as wisdom. No ancient Jew reading Proverbs would think that God’s wisdom was a separate person, even though it is portrayed as one in verses like Proverbs 8:29 and 30: “…when He marked out the foundations of the earth, I [wisdom] was the craftsman at His side.”

2. Most Jewish readers of the Gospel of John would have been familiar with the concept of God’s “word” being with God as He worked to bring His creation into existence. There is an obvious working of God’s power in Genesis 1 as He brings His plan into concretion by speaking things into being. The Targums are well known for describing the wisdom and action of God as His “word.” This is especially important to note because the Targums are the Aramaic translations and paraphrases of the Old Testament, and Aramaic was the spoken language of many Jews at the time of Christ. Remembering that a Targum is usually a paraphrase of what the Hebrew text says, note how the following examples attribute action to the word:

And the word of the Lord was Joseph’s helper (Gen. 39:2).
And Moses brought the people to meet the word of the Lord (Ex. 19:17).
And the word of the Lord accepted the face of Job (Job 42:9).
And the word of the Lord shall laugh them to scorn (Ps. 2:4).
They believed in the name of His word (Ps. 106:12). [18]
The above examples demonstrate that the Jews were familiar with the idea of God’s Word referring to His wisdom and action. This is especially important to note because these Jews were fiercely monotheistic, and did not in any way believe in a “Triune God.” They were familiar with the idioms of their own language, and understood that the wisdom and power of God were being personified as “word.”

The Greek-speaking Jews were also familiar with God’s creative force being called “the word.” J. H. Bernard writes, “When we turn from Palestine to Alexandria [Egypt], from Hebrew sapiential [wisdom] literature to that which was written in Greek, we find this creative wisdom identified with the Divine logos, Hebraism and Hellenism thus coming into contact.” [19] One example of this is in the Apocryphal book known as the Wisdom of Solomon, which says, “O God of my fathers and Lord of mercy who hast made all things by thy word (logos), and by thy wisdom hast formed man…” (9:1). In this verse, the “word” and “wisdom” are seen as the creative force of God, but without being a “person.”

Warrior,

Do you really believe that when John used the word "Logos" in John 1 that he is not talking about Jesus?

[Warrior4God]

Below is A thorough study on John 1:1 that I am sure you could use if one would accept the indepth meaning of this verse.

http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=61

Taken out of context in light of the rest of John one could be so easily swayed in the meaning UNTIL you study the truth of the verse.

[ralittlefield]

Below is A thorough study on John 1:1 that I am sure you could use if one would accept the indepth meaning of this verse.

http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=61

Taken out of context in light of the rest of John one could be so easily swayed in the meaning UNTIL you study the truth of the verse.

What do you mean by "Taken out of context in light of the rest of John"?

The rest of John IS the context.

[Warrior4God]

What do you mean by "Taken out of context in light of the rest of John"?

The rest of John IS the context.

Yup The gospel shows more proof that JESUS IS NOT GOD then any other book as far as I see in Gods Word.

You are entitled to read into the gospel what you want to.
I prefer to see that logos means what it means.
I am sure you will disagree but that does not change what the meaning of logos is.

[ralittlefield]

Yup The gospel shows more proof that JESUS IS NOT GOD then any other book as far as I see in Gods Word.

You are entitled to read into the gospel what you want to.
I prefer to see that logos means what it means.
I am sure you will disagree but that does not change what the meaning of logos is.

If the "Word" in John 1 does not refer to preincarnate Jesus how do you explain this portion of the passage?

14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
15 John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”

Who did John the Baptist testify about?

Who became flesh and dwelt among us?

[Tucson Jim]

Well if thats not the pot calling the kettle black.:D

I'm sorry JIM but i agree with warrior that you seem to let your pride get in the way of truth.

Truth is Jesus told you exactly who and what he was and never said anything about being God Almighty. So what you bought in to is a theory thats just the plain truth of the matter.

And if Jesus was who you say he is why would he contradict his own words please try to be honest here and leave the spin and pride out of your answer?

God never dies and you said he did. God never has served anyone and you say he is a servant.

You say Jesus is all knowing but by Jesus own words he is not. And it goes on and on. This is not my opinion that is scripture saying this.

I don't need a whole new vocabulary to explain my God and what my God is , Gods word was enough.

I guess you DO need a whole new vocabulary since you accept Warrior's annotated version of scripture as truth.

I can only say to you that the incarnation explains much of what you have written but you refuse to accept that even though it is a plain teaching of scripture.

Up to you.

[Tucson Jim]

Jesus had a beginning when did God have a beginning ?

Jesus had no beginning - He is eternal

"In the beginning was the Word" John 1:1 So the Word, Jesus, already "was" in the beginning. He is uncreated

"Behold I am coming soon! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the end." (Revelations 22:12-13. Compare with Isaiah 44:6 and Rev 1:8 where the same phrase is used of Jehovah). Both Jesus and Jehovah are the First and the Last. Was Jehovah created too?

"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Though you are little among the thousands of Judah, Yet out of you shall come forth to Me The One to be Ruler in Israel, Whose goings forth are from of old, From everlasting." Micah 5:2 Compare this with Psalm 41:13: "Blessed be the LORD God of Israel. From everlasting to everlasting! Amen and Amen."

Your whole theory goes up in smoke with the words Jesus spoke about himself.

You are leaving out that Jesus was the only begotten and the first-born son.

What do you suppose "firstborn" means AA?

Then you shall say to Pharaoh, 'Thus says the LORD, " Israel is My son, My firstborn. Ex 4:22

Common sense and reasoning and along with scripture my friend thats how you get to the truth of the matter.

You left out THE crucial factor leading us to the truth: The Holy Spirit. "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: " John 16:13

[Tucson Jim]

Please, get yourself a King James bible...then start by reading the Gospel of John. It is hard to come to any other conclusion. It really is....especially after reading the Gospel of John...and then, the book of Revelation...I would start with those two.

Amen Traci! :clap:

[Tucson Jim]

I do not see a verse that the mystery is used to describe anything about God being a mystery.

All the mysteries have been revealed and none of them apply to God being a mystery to us.

Col 2:2?

[Tucson Jim]

All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made. (KJV)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1. Trinitarians use this verse to show that Christ made the world and its contents. However, that is not the case. What we have learned from the study of John 1:1 above will be helpful in properly interpreting this verse.

John 1:1-3
(1) In the beginning was the Word [the wisdom, plan or purpose of God], and the Word was with God, and
the Word was divine.
(2) The same was in the beginning with God.
(3) All things were made by it [the Word]; and without it was not anything made that was made.

2. The pronoun in verse 3 can legitimately be translated as “it.” It does not have to be translated as “him,” and it does not have to refer to a “person” in any way. A primary reason why people get the idea that “the Word” is a person is that the pronoun “he” is used with it. The Greek text does, of course, have the masculine pronoun, because like many languages, including Spanish, French, German, Latin, Hebrew, etc., the Greek language assigns a gender to all nouns, and the gender of the pronoun must agree with the gender of the noun. In French, for example, a table is feminine, la table, while a desk is masculine, le bureau, and feminine and masculine pronouns are required to agree with the gender of the noun. In translating from French to English, however, we would never translate “the table, she,” or “the desk, he.” And we would never insist that a table or desk was somehow a person just because it had a masculine or feminine pronoun. We would use the English designation “it” for the table and the desk, in spite of the fact that in the original language the table and desk have a masculine or feminine gender.

This is true in the translation of any language that assigns a gender to nouns. In Spanish, a car is masculine, el carro, while a bicycle is feminine, la bicicleta. Again, no English translator would translate “the car, he,” or “the bicycle, she.” People translating Spanish into English use the word “it” when referring to a car or bicycle. For another example, a Greek feminine noun is “anchor” (agkura), and literally it would demand a feminine pronoun. Yet no English translator would write “I accidentally dropped the anchor, and she fell through the bottom of the boat.” We would write, “it” fell through the bottom of the boat. In Greek, “wind” (anemos) is masculine, but we would not translate it into English that way. We would say, “The wind was blowing so hard it blew the trash cans over,” not “the wind, he blew the trash cans over.” When translating from another language into English, we have to use the English language properly. Students who are studying Greek, Hebrew, Spanish, French, German, etc., quickly discover that one of the difficult things about learning the language is memorizing the gender of each noun—something we do not have in the English language.

Greek is a language that assigns gender to nouns. For example, in Greek, “word” is masculine while “spirit” is neuter. All languages that assign gender to nouns demand that pronouns referring to the noun have the same gender as the noun. Once we clearly understand that the gender of a pronoun is determined by the gender of the noun, we can see why one cannot build a doctrine on the gender of a noun and its agreeing pronoun. No student of the Bible should take the position that “the Word” is somehow a masculine person based on its pronoun any more than he would take the position that a book was a feminine person or a desk was a masculine person because that is the gender assigned to those nouns in French. Indeed, if one tried to build a theology based on the gender of the noun in the language, great confusion would result.


Because the translators of the Bible have almost always been Trinitarians, and since “the Word” has almost always been erroneously identified with the person of Christ, the pronouns referring to the logos in verse 3 have almost always been translated as “him.” However, if in fact the logos is the plan, purpose, wisdom and reason of God, then the Greek pronoun should be translated into the English as “it.” To demand that “the Word” is a masculine person and therefore a third part of a three-part Godhead because the pronouns used when referring to it are masculine, is poor scholarship.

The opening of John reveals this simple truth in a beautiful way: “In the beginning there was one God, who had reason, purpose and a plan, which was, by its very nature and origin, divine. It was through and on account of this reason, plan and purpose that everything was made. Nothing was made outside its scope. Then, this plan became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ and tabernacled among us.” Understanding the opening of John this way fits with the whole of Scripture and is entirely acceptable from a translation standpoint.

http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=86

Thanks Warrior, but you have posted this Uni opinion many times - and every time you post it, it is still simply their opinion - and strikes me as rather desperate given the absolutely, unequivoacably, crystal clear verse.

By Him all things were made

Without Him nothing was made that has been made.

He truly made ALL things, no matter how desperate Unitarians are to preserve their opinions.

[Tucson Jim]

Congratulations on your excellent demeanor these past few days Warrior. I am really impressed. I mean that. I may be eating my own words shortly . . .

[DispensationalJim]

Below is A thorough study on John 1:1 that I am sure you could use if one would accept the indepth meaning of this verse.

http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=61

Taken out of context in light of the rest of John one could be so easily swayed in the meaning UNTIL you study the truth of the verse.

OK, Warrior. I read your Unitarian propoganda site and I found it to be totally biased and full of spin. This portion I thought was especially unacceptable:
===============================

"Once we understand that the logos is God’s self expression, His wisdom, plan and purposes, and that it can include His power and His actions, we are in a position to really understand the full meaning of the phrase, “In the beginning” in John 1:1.

It is often simply assumed that “the beginning” referred to here is the origin of creation, identical to the creation described in Genesis 1:1 and 2. However, that assumption is usually made because most Christians believe that in John 1:1, Jesus is the “word” and Jesus was “in the beginning.” We trust that by now the reader knows that Jesus did not pre-exist his birth and that he was not with God in Genesis 1:1. We also trust that the reader understands that the logos of John 1:1 is not identical to “Jesus.” What we will present in this section is that “the beginning” is actually a double entendre: it refers to the earliest time when God conceived of the plan of man’s salvation, but, like the rest of the Gospel of John, it has proleptic overtones, speaking of the future as if it were a reality. [15] Thus, “the beginning” referred to in John 1:1 also refers to the new creation of which Jesus Christ is the prototype."

======================================

As I have said before about such "long and biased" information... OPINIONS, OPINIONS...

We have shown many verses supporting the idea that Jesus was THE CREATOR OF EVERYTHING. In order to be THE CREATOR, Jesus must be God and obviously must have existed IN THE BEGINNING.

How simple is this famous verse?
• John 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Your Unitarian buddies change God's Word to read:
John 1:3 All things were made by [the wisdom, plan or purpose of God]; and without [the wisdom, plan or purpose of God] was not any thing made that was made.

That just does not work since a plan or purpose cannot "make" anything. It takes a person to make things, and it especally takes God to make things from "scratch."

All means all, doesn't it? Oh, I know your Greek experts spin the word "all" to mean "only the church, the Body of Christ" or whatever else they want it to mean, but my Greek Concordance says that the Greek word "pas" means "every one, the whole, any," so spin it any way you want, but in my book, ALL MEANS ALL.

But, Warrior, I will have to hand it to your Unitarian buddies. They are master spin-doctors.

[drmilo]

OK, Warrior. I read your Unitarian propoganda site and I found it to be totally biased and full of spin. This portion I thought was especially unacceptable:
===============================

"Once we understand that the logos is God’s self expression, His wisdom, plan and purposes, and that it can include His power and His actions, we are in a position to really understand the full meaning of the phrase, “In the beginning” in John 1:1.

It is often simply assumed that “the beginning” referred to here is the origin of creation, identical to the creation described in Genesis 1:1 and 2. However, that assumption is usually made because most Christians believe that in John 1:1, Jesus is the “word” and Jesus was “in the beginning.” We trust that by now the reader knows that Jesus did not pre-exist his birth and that he was not with God in Genesis 1:1. We also trust that the reader understands that the logos of John 1:1 is not identical to “Jesus.” What we will present in this section is that “the beginning” is actually a double entendre: it refers to the earliest time when God conceived of the plan of man’s salvation, but, like the rest of the Gospel of John, it has proleptic overtones, speaking of the future as if it were a reality. [15] Thus, “the beginning” referred to in John 1:1 also refers to the new creation of which Jesus Christ is the prototype."

======================================

As I have said before about such "long and biased" information... OPINIONS, OPINIONS...

We have shown many verses supporting the idea that Jesus was THE CREATOR OF EVERYTHING. In order to be THE CREATOR, Jesus must be God and obviously must have existed IN THE BEGINNING.

How simple is this famous verse?
• John 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Your Unitarian buddies change God's Word to read:
John 1:3 All things were made by [the wisdom, plan or purpose of God]; and without [the wisdom, plan or purpose of God] was not any thing made that was made.

That just does not work since a plan or purpose cannot "make" anything. It takes a person to make things, and it especally takes God to make things from "scratch."

All means all, doesn't it? Oh, I know your Greek experts spin the word "all" to mean "only the church, the Body of Christ" or whatever else they want it to mean, but my Greek Concordance says that the Greek word "pas" means "every one, the whole, any," so spin it any way you want, but in my book, ALL MEANS ALL.

But, Warrior, I will have to hand it to your Unitarian buddies. They are master spin-doctors.

These quotes that interpret the scripture, when I read them, I see an example of "we have the point of view that Jesus is not God. We have serious problems in scripture with that point of view, because there are verses that say Jesus is God. Since we believe that he is not God, we must find a way to interpret those verses so that they say the opposite of what they say." That is how all those explanations read.

Here's the problem I see with those explanations. In John 1:1 we see that it says "In the beginning was the word." If it stopped there, we might be able to interpret that as Warrior's Uni website does. If it stopped there, we might be able to say that the Word is God's plan. But it goes on: "and the Word was with God." Okay, if it stopped there, we can still get away with Warrior's uni interpretation of the word being the plan of God. But it goes on: "and the Word was God" (or, in the literal Greek: "and God was the Word." Now, the uni interpretation falls apart. How is the plan of God also God? Is my thought in actuality me? No. My thought is one of my possessions. It is not me. But John 1:1 says that the "word was God." How can God's plan (an inanimate expression) be God? No. Once it says that the "word was God" it means that the word must be a living person. And it doesn't stop there. It goes on: "the same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him and without him was not anything made that was made" The Word is the subject so far. So "him" refers to the subject "the Word." The Word made all things. A thought, expression, wisdom, etc..." cannot, as D-Jim posted "make" anything. How can the Word, if it iis only a plan, make anything? That's like saying the blueprints for a building made the building. The subject has not changed (otherwise, there would be a swich of suject by the use of the noun rather than the continued use of the pronoun) so we see that the Word is the creator of all things. There is no "encircling" in this verse. It clearly says that the Word made all things and nothing that was made was made without him. The word must be a "him" and not an "it" because the Word is showing the attributes of personhood by being a creator. The uni interpretation falls apart totally here, but just for good measure, John continues: "in him was life, and the life was the light of men, and the light shineth in the darkness and the darkness comprehended it not. There was a man sent by God whose name was John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the light that all men through him might believe." The Word is life, and the Word is the Light of men. John was sent by God to bear witness to the light. John was sent to bear witness to the Word. John did not bear witness to God's plan and wisdom. He came to bear witness to Jesus. For the Gospel of John continues down in verse 14 indentifiying who the Word is and in verse 15 who it was the John bore witness to: "And the word became flesh and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father) full of grace and truth. John bare witness of him and cried out: this is he of whom I spake. he that cometh after me was preferred before me, for he was before me."

It is clear that the Word is the person of Jesus Christ. The uni interpretation falls apart early on when we have the "expression, wisdom and plan" of God being God and acting as God and having the attributes of personhood. If the Word is merely the expression, wisdom, or plan of God, then the Word could not have made all things, as John says; God created all things; if the Word is what the unis say it is, then the Word is merely the blueprints. But blueprints are not creators. They are maps. Blueprints do not have their own life, as John says of the Word.

The Word in John 1:1, as John says throughout the chapter: a. is the creator of all things, b. possessed life. c. possessed not just life, but the life that it does possess is the light of all men. d. was in the world that he created and the world did not know him. e. lived among his own people, and they did not recieve him. f. became flesh and dwelt among humankind.

These are all attributes of personhood.

[Tucson Jim]

These quotes that interpret the scripture, when I read them, I see an example of "we have the point of view that Jesus is not God. We have serious problems in scripture with that point of view, because there are verses that say Jesus is God. Since we believe that he is not God, we must find a way to interpret those verses so that they say the opposite of what they say." That is how all those explanations read.

Here's the problem I see with those explanations. In John 1:1 we see that it says "In the beginning was the word." If it stopped there, we might be able to interpret that as Warrior's Uni website does. If it stopped there, we might be able to say that the Word is God's plan. But it goes on: "and the Word was with God." Okay, if it stopped there, we can still get away with Warrior's uni interpretation of the word being the plan of God. But it goes on: "and the Word was God" (or, in the literal Greek: "and God was the Word." Now, the uni interpretation falls apart. How is the plan of God also God? Is my thought in actuality me? No. My thought is one of my possessions. It is not me. But John 1:1 says that the "word was God." How can God's plan (an inanimate expression) be God? No. Once it says that the "word was God" it means that the word must be a living person. And it doesn't stop there. It goes on: "the same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him and without him was not anything made that was made" The Word is the subject so far. So "him" refers to the subject "the Word." The Word made all things. A thought, expression, wisdom, etc..." cannot, as D-Jim posted "make" anything. How can the Word, if it iis only a plan, make anything? That's like saying the blueprints for a building made the building. The subject has not changed (otherwise, there would be a swich of suject by the use of the noun rather than the continued use of the pronoun) so we see that the Word is the creator of all things. There is no "encircling" in this verse. It clearly says that the Word made all things and nothing that was made was made without him. The word must be a "him" and not an "it" because the Word is showing the attributes of personhood by being a creator. The uni interpretation falls apart totally here, but just for good measure, John continues: "in him was life, and the life was the light of men, and the light shineth in the darkness and the darkness comprehended it not. There was a man sent by God whose name was John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the light that all men through him might believe." The Word is life, and the Word is the Light of men. John was sent by God to bear witness to the light. John was sent to bear witness to the Word. John did not bear witness to God's plan and wisdom. He came to bear witness to Jesus. For the Gospel of John continues down in verse 14 indentifiying who the Word is and in verse 15 who it was the John bore witness to: "And the word became flesh and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father) full of grace and truth. John bare witness of him and cried out: this is he of whom I spake. he that cometh after me was preferred before me, for he was before me."

It is clear that the Word is the person of Jesus Christ. The uni interpretation falls apart early on when we have the "expression, wisdom and plan" of God being God and acting as God and having the attributes of personhood. If the Word is merely the expression, wisdom, or plan of God, then the Word could not have made all things, as John says; God created all things; if the Word is what the unis say it is, then the Word is merely the blueprints. But blueprints are not creators. They are maps. Blueprints do not have their own life, as John says of the Word.

The Word in John 1:1, as John says throughout the chapter: a. is the creator of all things, b. possessed life. c. possessed not just life, but the life that it does possess is the light of all men. d. was in the world that he created and the world did not know him. e. lived among his own people, and they did not recieve him. f. became flesh and dwelt among humankind.

These are all attributes of personhood.

Your explanation is logical and rooted firmly in scripture.

That was an excellent explanation drmilo. I really hope they take the time to read it, as it is well worth it!

I have saved this answer for future reference.

Thank you!

[Warrior4God]

These quotes that interpret the scripture, when I read them, I see an example of "we have the point of view that Jesus is not God. We have serious problems in scripture with that point of view, because there are verses that say Jesus is God. Since we believe that he is not God, we must find a way to interpret those verses so that they say the opposite of what they say." That is how all those explanations read.

Here's the problem I see with those explanations. In John 1:1 we see that it says "In the beginning was the word." If it stopped there, we might be able to interpret that as Warrior's Uni website does. If it stopped there, we might be able to say that the Word is God's plan. But it goes on: "and the Word was with God." Okay, if it stopped there, we can still get away with Warrior's uni interpretation of the word being the plan of God. But it goes on: "and the Word was God" (or, in the literal Greek: "and God was the Word." Now, the uni interpretation falls apart. How is the plan of God also God? Is my thought in actuality me? No. My thought is one of my possessions. It is not me. But John 1:1 says that the "word was God." How can God's plan (an inanimate expression) be God? No. Once it says that the "word was God" it means that the word must be a living person. And it doesn't stop there. It goes on: "the same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him and without him was not anything made that was made" The Word is the subject so far. So "him" refers to the subject "the Word." The Word made all things. A thought, expression, wisdom, etc..." cannot, as D-Jim posted "make" anything. How can the Word, if it iis only a plan, make anything? That's like saying the blueprints for a building made the building. The subject has not changed (otherwise, there would be a swich of suject by the use of the noun rather than the continued use of the pronoun) so we see that the Word is the creator of all things. There is no "encircling" in this verse. It clearly says that the Word made all things and nothing that was made was made without him. The word must be a "him" and not an "it" because the Word is showing the attributes of personhood by being a creator. The uni interpretation falls apart totally here, but just for good measure, John continues: "in him was life, and the life was the light of men, and the light shineth in the darkness and the darkness comprehended it not. There was a man sent by God whose name was John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the light that all men through him might believe." The Word is life, and the Word is the Light of men. John was sent by God to bear witness to the light. John was sent to bear witness to the Word. John did not bear witness to God's plan and wisdom. He came to bear witness to Jesus. For the Gospel of John continues down in verse 14 indentifiying who the Word is and in verse 15 who it was the John bore witness to: "And the word became flesh and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father) full of grace and truth. John bare witness of him and cried out: this is he of whom I spake. he that cometh after me was preferred before me, for he was before me."

It is clear that the Word is the person of Jesus Christ. The uni interpretation falls apart early on when we have the "expression, wisdom and plan" of God being God and acting as God and having the attributes of personhood. If the Word is merely the expression, wisdom, or plan of God, then the Word could not have made all things, as John says; God created all things; if the Word is what the unis say it is, then the Word is merely the blueprints. But blueprints are not creators. They are maps. Blueprints do not have their own life, as John says of the Word.

The Word in John 1:1, as John says throughout the chapter: a. is the creator of all things, b. possessed life. c. possessed not just life, but the life that it does possess is the light of all men. d. was in the world that he created and the world did not know him. e. lived among his own people, and they did not recieve him. f. became flesh and dwelt among humankind.

These are all attributes of personhood.

A long post on showing nothing

[ralittlefield]

If the "Word" in John 1 does not refer to preincarnate Jesus how do you explain this portion of the passage?

14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
15 John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”

Who did John the Baptist testify about?

Who became flesh and dwelt among us?

Bump for Warrior

[Warrior4God]

Your explanation is logical and rooted firmly in scripture.

That was an excellent explanation drmilo. I really hope they take the time to read it, as it is well worth it!

I have saved this answer for future reference.

Thank you!

It explained what you try to make Jesus but explains nothing about the rest of scripture proving that Jesus is not God when you fit ALL scripture together.
Think as you wish but you and all trinitarians know that your doctrine can NOT be shown in one verse that would show three being one except for corrupt scripture.

Jesus himself told you who he was and you refuse his words as truth.
You seem to be smarter then Jesus.

[Warrior4God]

There is not 1 single verse you guys use to try to prove a trinity that has Not been refuted or at least cause one to doubt what its meaning really is.
If one understands what logos is they can understand that the logos became flesh.

God is Spirit.

Always will be.
Jesus is a man and forever will be he is man right this second.
Anyone deny that he is a man right now ?
I can show that he is.

I can show you God is not man nor the Son of man,but rather Spirit.

Yet I am the one who spins because your doctrine is exposed as what it is.
Stick to your 3 gods.
I have my one God and the one he sent is my Saviour.

I will believe Jesus .

Joh 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

[Warrior4God]

3 beings or persons that are God make 3 Gods not 1.
I am laughing because I have been the one called a heretic.
Its too funny how the logic of men is.

[Warrior4God]

I think I need a break I can't keep up by my self against you guys it takes too much time.

Ya'll are ALMOST as heard headed as I am

Kinda feel like me agaisnt a million of you guys sometimes and hard to keep up.

[Tucson Jim]

It explained what you try to make Jesus but explains nothing about the rest of scripture proving that Jesus is not God when you fit ALL scripture together.

Well, I believe his point was to discuss the one scripture - you can't rationally discuss all scripture at once! And a fine job he did, rebutting your insertions into the text and explaining carefully how your interpetation of that verse is absolutely impossible.

I noticed you have no rebuttal for him, nor could you - the Word of God clearly refutes any attempt to explain away this verse. It is absolutely crystal clear!

Think as you wish but you and all trinitarians know that your doctrine can NOT be shown in one verse that would show three being one except for corrupt scripture.

That's a nice straw man Warrior, but it is unnecessary for any single scripture to show the Trinity - it is simply necessary for the Bible to teach the components of the doctrine. Components being: The Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God, but there is only one God.

Then, we can use our God-given brains and logic to arrive at the truth of the Trinity when these components have been understood.

Your other straw man - that Jesus must teach the Trinity or it isn't true - is easily defeated for the same reason.

There is no requirement - from scripture or reason - that mandates a doctrine must be found in one part of scripture, as you keep on insisting. Jesus doesn't have to teach it for it to be true -He didn't teach extensively on every doctrine believed by the church did He? How much teaching did Jesus do on the requirements of being an elder in the church, or on salvation by grace through faith, to name just a couple?

Jesus himself told you who he was and you refuse his words as truth.
You seem to be smarter then Jesus.

No one is smarter than Jesus.

[Tucson Jim]

There is not 1 single verse you guys use to try to prove a trinity that has Not been refuted or at least cause one to doubt what its meaning really is.
If one understands what logos is they can understand that the logos became flesh.

God is Spirit.

Always will be.
Jesus is a man and forever will be he is man right this second.
Anyone deny that he is a man right now ?
I can show that he is.

I can show you God is not man nor the Son of man,but rather Spirit.

Yet I am the one who spins because your doctrine is exposed as what it is.
Stick to your 3 gods.
I have my one God and the one he sent is my Saviour.

I will believe Jesus .

Joh 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

Still stuck on John 17:3? I explained that to you, remember?

[Tucson Jim]

3 beings or persons that are God make 3 Gods not 1.
I am laughing because I have been the one called a heretic.
Its too funny how the logic of men is.

Indeed it is, Warrior, indeed it is . . .

[Tucson Jim]

I think I need a break I can't keep up by my self against you guys it takes too much time.

Ya'll are ALMOST as heard headed as I am

Kinda feel like me agaisnt a million of you guys sometimes and hard to keep up.

Don't despair - if you just wait a while we will have another blitzkrieg from AA!

[tracifish]

What is 1x1x1?

[tracifish]

Amen Traci! :clap:

Thank you, Tucson Jim! :hug:

[Tucson Jim]

What is 1x1x1?

Oooh - I know the answer! It is ONE!

[Tucson Jim]

Thank you, Tucson Jim! :hug:

:hug:

[Warrior4God]

What is 1x1x1?

I know, I know.

[ralittlefield]

3. The logos, that is, the plan, purpose and wisdom of God, “became flesh” (came into concretion or physical existence) in Jesus Christ. Jesus is the “image of the invisible God” (Col. 1:15) and His chief emissary, representative and agent. Because Jesus perfectly obeyed the Father, he represents everything that God could communicate about Himself in a human person. As such, Jesus could say, “If you have seen me, you have seen the Father” (John 14:9). The fact that the logos “became” flesh shows that it did not exist that way before. There is no pre-existence for Jesus in this verse other than his figurative “existence” as the plan, purpose or wisdom of God for the salvation of man. The same is true with the “word” in writing. It had no literal pre-existence as a “spirit-book” somewhere in eternity past, but it came into being as God gave the revelation to people and they wrote it down

If there is no pre-existence for Jesus, then please explain John 17:4

And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.

[G-LOVE]

Wow, over 8600 posts and you still haven't figured it out yet.

Why make it more complicated than it is. Some people believe there is one God made up of three other ??? something. Trinity.

And the others believe there are Three separate beings that make up the God Head. Three beings, one purpose.

Since you know there are both belief systems...MOVE ON!!!!

You are not going to convert one another!

[Tucson Jim]

Wow, over 8600 posts and you still haven't figured it out yet.

Why make it more complicated than it is. Some people believe there is one God made up of three other ??? something. Trinity.

And the others believe there are Three separate beings that make up the God Head. Three beings, one purpose.

Since you know there are both belief systems...MOVE ON!!!!

You are not going to convert one another!

No one is trying to "convert" anyone else, as far as I know.

And no one is forcing you to look at this thread.

If you are tired of the thread, why don't you take your own advice?

[drmilo]

3 beings or persons that are God make 3 Gods not 1.
I am laughing because I have been the one called a heretic.
Its too funny how the logic of men is.

Just another post showing you do not understand what Trinity means.

Not three beings. One being; not three gods, one God -- God.

Three persons making up the One God. Just like "is", "am" and "are" are three words, but still only one verb. Each person of the trinity, just like each word of the verb, serve a separate function, but still only consist of the One God.

Why answer this again?

Because you misstate what the trinity is, and I will not let that stand.

[Angryamerican]

Yeah well I am the second person today you have called a "smart butt". Your remarks sound pretty hateful to me.



I'm just kind of sick of his insulting, sarcastic attitude, that's all. He referred to my "ignorance" and was sarcastic to me and others several other times today. I don't see you scolding him for that.

I actually felt my reactions were rather, I don't know . . . measured . . . in comparison to his.



Freud would have a field day with this, coming from someone who always makes it personal.

Look up the psychological defense mechanism of "projection" and I think you'll see what I mean . . .



That's really funny, you telling me to grow up - you who came to this thread with a big chip on your shoulder, insulting everyone, acting like you know it all.

You who practically started crying when I said you were acting like a baby - then we didn't hear from you for 4 days because you were pouting!

Yeah, I need to grow up! :))



I will if you will.

The difference is, I can - I don't believe you are even capable of civil discussion on this topic.

D'Jim tried to explain to you all the ways you insult people in your posts but it just went right over your head.

I dare you to post on the Trinity for one week without being insulting or demeaning to others.

One week.

I bet you can't do it!



Baloney! AA acts like a smart aleck. I don't think he has a "meek" bone in his body. If he does, it's a small bone - probably a metacarpal . . . and he isn't showing it off much!



Come on . . . you applaud him because he agrees with you about the Trinity!



You accuse me of exactly what you do! Take a good look in the mirror Warrior. Remember - "projection" . . . look it up



Projection . . . projection . . .

Look i'll tell you what i think, you time and time again take this tread off topic and it always seems to happen when you are hit with biblical facts you can't explain away just my opinion.

And that is ok when you get upset with me it only shows me you are frustrated with the facts.

[Angryamerican]

Thank you for a very thoughtful post. I agree with everything you said - in "real" life.

But here, I cannot sit by and let Warrior and AA trash my beliefs on a daily basis without at least attempting to show where they are in error.

Others are reading what they post and I don't want some newbie to come in here and think the stuff they are posting has any basis in scripture.

This is more like anti-defamation league work . . .

Sorry your belief does it on it's own.

[Angryamerican]

So that is the best you can do to respond to the info I posted??? Does that mean you concede that Jesus is God the Son?

You can say that all you like but it just adds to the blasphemy.

[Angryamerican]

Please, get yourself a King James bible...then start by reading the Gospel of John. It is hard to come to any other conclusion. It really is....especially after reading the Gospel of John...and then, the book of Revelation...I would start with those two.

Yes i already have one hehe and it stills says Jesus is the son of God not God the son please.

[Angryamerican]

Read the quote again:



Where does it say that angels can't perform miracles? What does that have to do with anything?

The Bible says that Jesus created ALL things, not SOME things, not MOST things, not ALL THINGS OTHER THAN HIMSELF. He created ALL things.

If Jesus was created, then he COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE CREATED ALL THINGS, since he could not have CREATED HIMSELF. But the bible says that Jesus CREATED ALL THINGS. Therefore, Jesus was not created. The only being that was not created and created all things was God. THEREFORE JESUS IS GOD.



Angels do not have the power to create by your view?

[Angryamerican]

Read the quote again:



Where does it say that angels can't perform miracles? What does that have to do with anything?

The Bible says that Jesus created ALL things, not SOME things, not MOST things, not ALL THINGS OTHER THAN HIMSELF. He created ALL things.

If Jesus was created, then he COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE CREATED ALL THINGS, since he could not have CREATED HIMSELF. But the bible says that Jesus CREATED ALL THINGS. Therefore, Jesus was not created. The only being that was not created and created all things was God. THEREFORE JESUS IS GOD.



Angels do not have the power to create by your view?

If they don't then please show me they had no part in the creation.

[drmilo]

Angels do not have the power to create by your view?

Are angels created?

Yes.

If an angel was created and then was given the power to create, and he then created the universe, did he create ALL things?

No.

Why?

HE DID NOT CREATE HIMSELF. HE HIMSELF IS A CREATION. THEREFORE, AS A CREATION, HE IS A PART OF ALL THE THINGS THAT WERE CREATED, AND THUS HE DID NOT CREATE ALL THINGS.

But Jesus created all things. Therefore, Jesus is not created.

[drmilo]

Angels do not have the power to create by your view?

If they don't then please show me they had no part in the creation.

Please show me where they did something other than observe the creation of the earth and of man.

You seem to be implying that Jesus is an angel.

Show me a single scripture to support this view.

Talk about something being unscriptural.

Are angels created?

If angels are created, doesn't that mean that an angel could not possibly create all things, since said angel did not create himself?

John 1:1-3 says that Jesus (the Word) created all things.

If angels are created, they can't create "all things" therefore someone that did create "all things" cannot be an angel, and further, cannot be created. There is only one being that was not created -- God. Since Jesus created all things, he was not created, and since only God was not created, then Jesus must be God.

Why do you insist on ignoring the fact that it says Jesus created ALL THINGS. The "all things" is the most important aspect of the context that we are debating. Some one who created all things cannot be a member of creation. Jesus created all things, therefore Jesus is not a member of creation. The only being not a member of creation is the author of creation -- God -- therefore Jesus is God.

[apostolicconservative]

I hope this is viewed as the sincere question that it is:

If Jesus existed in all eternity,
and God is a spirit,
then how could there not have been two spirits "gods"?

In other words, if Jesus and the Father are two separate persons, then how is it then that they are not two spirits and thus two gods?

[drmilo]

I hope this is viewed as the sincere question that it is:

If Jesus existed in all eternity,
and God is a spirit,
then how could there not have been two spirits "gods"?

In other words, if Jesus and the Father are two separate persons, then how is it then that they are not two spirits and thus two gods?

Your body exists in conjunction with your soul. Are you two separate beings or one being?

[Angryamerican]

Please show me where they did something other than observe the creation of the earth and of man.

You seem to be implying that Jesus is an angel.

Show me a single scripture to support this view.

Talk about something being unscriptural.

Are angels created?

If angels are created, doesn't that mean that an angel could not possibly create all things, since said angel did not create himself?

John 1:1-3 says that Jesus (the Word) created all things.

If angels are created, they can't create "all things" therefore someone that did create "all things" cannot be an angel, and further, cannot be created. There is only one being that was not created -- God. Since Jesus created all things, he was not created, and since only God was not created, then Jesus must be God.

Why do you insist on ignoring the fact that it says Jesus created ALL THINGS. The "all things" is the most important aspect of the context that we are debating. Some one who created all things cannot be a member of creation. Jesus created all things, therefore Jesus is not a member of creation. The only being not a member of creation is the author of creation -- God -- therefore Jesus is God.

You seem to think very little of the miracles and works the angels did. Can God create a being and allow that same being to create other things?

The one who created all things is God either on his own or through his son. Either way it was God to create all things.

[apostolicconservative]

Your body exists in conjunction with your soul. Are you two separate beings or one being?

One is body the other spirit.

The bible says Jesus was begotten by God. Is that his body or his spirit or ?

If the Son existed with the Father from eternity, what form was it?

I personally don't see how it can be that there is the Father as a spirit and the Son as a spirit existing together without saying these are not then two gods...

[Angryamerican]

Your body exists in conjunction with your soul. Are you two separate beings or one being?

If you believe a soul to be anything other then your blood.

[Tucson Jim]

Look i'll tell you what i think, you time and time again take this tread off topic and it always seems to happen when you are hit with biblical facts you can't explain away just my opinion.

And that is ok when you get upset with me it only shows me you are frustrated with the facts.

No, when I get upset with you it is because you are so sarcastic.

The "facts" are certainly not on your side . . .

[Tucson Jim]

Yes i already have one hehe and it stills says Jesus is the son of God not God the son please.

Really? Where does it say Jesus is NOT God the Son? Chapter and verse please.

[Tucson Jim]

Angels do not have the power to create by your view?

A moot point, doncha think, since there was nothing left for them to create after Jesus created ALL things!

[Tucson Jim]

Angels do not have the power to create by your view?

If they don't then please show me they had no part in the creation.

I just did . . .

[Tucson Jim]

You seem to think very little of the miracles and works the angels did. Can God create a being and allow that same being to create other things?

Whether He "could" or not is moot - He didn't. Jesus created all things, therefore He Himself could not be one of the created things.

"All things" completely exhausts the class of things!

The one who created all things is God either on his own or through his son. Either way it was God to create all things.

I agree with that.

[Angryamerican]

No, when I get upset with you it is because you are so sarcastic.

The "facts" are certainly not on your side . . .

It is very clear by Jesus own words who and what he was. You just to choose to believe in a man made doctrine going again'st the words that were spoken by our messiah. :naughty: :hand:

[Angryamerican]

Really? Where does it say Jesus is NOT God the Son? Chapter and verse please.

Show me a verse where it says God the son just the way you say it.

So who is adding to the words of God here?

[Angryamerican]

A moot point, doncha think, since there was nothing left for them to create after Jesus created ALL things!

Are you saying God was created than ?

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of all creation.
Col 1:16 For all things were created in Him, the things in the heavens, and the things on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers, all things were created through Him and for Him.

[Angryamerican]

I just did . . .

So what purpose do the angels serve ?


Who do the angels serve?


I mean really angels were created with zero power correct?

[Tucson Jim]

It is very clear by Jesus own words who and what he was. You just to choose to believe in a man made doctrine going again'st the words that were spoken by our messiah. :naughty: :hand:

The only problem with that is you think "Son of God" excludes Jesus from sharing the nature of God with the Father.

It doesn't.

Oh, and if you want the truth, you have to read more than just the words of Jesus. There are a few Bible books after the gospels that may help you . . .

[Tucson Jim]

Show me a verse where it says God the son just the way you say it.

So who is adding to the words of God here?

You just did - you said the Bible says Jesus is not God the Son.

It doesn't.

[Tucson Jim]

Are you saying God was created than ?

Of course not!

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of all creation.

You still have not answered my question to you: What does "firstborn" mean in light of Ex 4:22?

Col 1:16 For all things were created in Him, the things in the heavens, and the things on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers, all things were created through Him and for Him.

That's right! Jesus created all things. So He could not be a creation Himself. Good!

[Tucson Jim]

So what purpose do the angels serve ?

Lots of purposes - messengers, slaying the enemies of Israel, gathering the elect from the earth, etc.


Who do the angels serve?

Ultimately, God.


I mean really angels were created with zero power correct?

I don't believe that is accurate.

[Angryamerican]

The only problem with that is you think "Son of God" excludes Jesus from sharing the nature of God with the Father.

It doesn't.

Oh, and if you want the truth, you have to read more than just the words of Jesus. There are a few Bible books after the gospels that may help you . . .

Really Jesus words fall short of explaining himself ?

So the words of Jesus was meant to mislead ?

Please explain yourself JIM you are confusing me.

[Angryamerican]

You just did - you said the Bible says Jesus is not God the Son.

It doesn't.

Chapter and verse please .

[Angryamerican]

Of course not!



You still have not answered my question to you: What does "firstborn" mean in light of Ex 4:22?



That's right! Jesus created all things. So He could not be a creation Himself. Good!

Well Jesus was the first-born of all creation and was begotten by God .and Israel was the first-born of the human race begotten by man.

This is the meaning of the first-born taken from ex 4:22.

H1060
בּכור
bekôr
bek-ore'
From H1069; firstborn; hence chief: - eldest (son), first-born (-ling).


This is the first-born taken from col 1:15 that pertains to Jesus .Notice this one mentions Begotten and the one that pertains to Israel doesn't.

G4416
πρωτοτόκος
prōtotokos
pro-tot-ok'-os
From G4413 and the alternate of G5088; first born (usually as noun, literally or figuratively): - firstbegotten (-born).

Is not Jesus the first begotten and also the only begotten of God?

[DispensationalJim]

Show me a verse where it says God the son just the way you say it.

So who is adding to the words of God here?

This verse does it for me:
• Heb. 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever:...

[Angryamerican]

This verse does it for me:
• Heb. 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever:...


Punctuation shows two different beings being spoken about. Please read it more carefully you will see what i'm saying.

[Angryamerican]

This verse does it for me:
• Heb. 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever:...

Please notice in context now DJIM.

Heb 1:8 But1161 unto4314 the3588 Son5207 he saith, Thy4675 throne,2362 O God,2316 is forever and ever:1519, 165, 165 a scepter4464 of righteousness2118 is the3588 scepter4464 of thy4675 kingdom.932
Heb 1:9 Thou hast loved25 righteousness,1343 and2532 hated3404 iniquity;458 therefore1223, 5124 God,2316 even thy4675 God,2316 hath anointed5548 thee4571 with the oil1637 of gladness20 above3844 thy4675 fellows.3353

[ralittlefield]

Please notice in context now DJIM.

Heb 1:8 But1161 unto4314 the3588 Son5207 he saith, Thy4675 throne,2362 O God,2316 is forever and ever:1519, 165, 165 a scepter4464 of righteousness2118 is the3588 scepter4464 of thy4675 kingdom.932
Heb 1:9 Thou hast loved25 righteousness,1343 and2532 hated3404 iniquity;458 therefore1223, 5124 God,2316 even thy4675 God,2316 hath anointed5548 thee4571 with the oil1637 of gladness20 above3844 thy4675 fellows.3353


Are you saying that verse 9 somehow says that the Father did not call Jesus God in verse 8?

[Angryamerican]

Are you saying that verse 9 somehow says that the Father did not call Jesus God in verse 8?

Go back and read it again.

And are you to gonna ignore the very next verse ?

[Angryamerican]

Are you saying that verse 9 somehow says that the Father did not call Jesus God in verse 8?


Please for the love of God. If we believe what you want us to Gods word would surely contradict itself HELLO.


Heb 1:9

(ASV) Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; Therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee With the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

(ESV) You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions."


(KJV) Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

(KJV+) Thou hast loved25 righteousness,1343 and2532 hated3404 iniquity;458 therefore1223, 5124 God,2316 even thy4675 God,2316 hath anointed5548 thee4571 with the oil1637 of gladness20 above3844 thy4675 fellows.3353

(MKJV) You have loved righteousness and hated iniquity, therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness above Your fellows."

Does God need to be anointed ?

[Angryamerican]

Ok now hurry off my children and try to find scripture that contradicts what i just posted.

[ralittlefield]

Go back and read it again.

And are you to gonna ignore the very next verse ?

Why won't you give a straight answer?

I do not see a contadiction.

Verse 8 says :But about the Son he says,
“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever,
and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.


Verse 9 say: You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy.


In verse 8 The Father calls the Son God

In verse 9 He says nothing to contradict that.

These are very powerful verses for the Trinity. (Unless you are a polytheist.)

[Angryamerican]

You tell me who is calling who God here.

Heb 1:8 but of the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; And the sceptre of uprightness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

[Angryamerican]

Why won't you give a straight answer?

I do not see a contadiction.

Verse 8 says :But about the Son he says,
“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever,
and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.


Verse 9 say: You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy.


In verse 8 The Father calls the Son God

In verse 9 He says nothing to contradict that.

These are very powerful verses for the Trinity. (Unless you are a polytheist.)

Once again anther trinitarian bites the dust i just posted this verse you claim is God calling Jesus God look again.:naughty::hand:;)

[Tucson Jim]

Really Jesus words fall short of explaining himself ?

So the words of Jesus was meant to mislead ?

Please explain yourself JIM you are confusing me.

You are trying to say that if Jesus didn't explicitly teach the doctrine of the trinity, it can't be true.

This, of course, follows your earlier assertion ( weeks ago) that if the doctrine of the Trinity isn't taught in the OT, it can't be true.

It seems you are determined to prove the doctrine is false by showing us where it isn't taught in the Bible!!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Instead, why don't you look at where it is taught?

We have shown you numerous verses teaching the Deity of Christ. I posted dozens of verses throughout scripture showing the Father and Son are spoken of in nearly identical terms, called by identical titles, engage in identical activities (such as creating the universe) and your response is that "Jesus never said he's God"??

As we have told you before, explicit claims to Deity on Jesus' part are rare because it was not His mission to prove He is God - it was to become a man and die for our sins.

You should look for the truth of a doctrine where it is taught, not where it's not!

[ralittlefield]

Please for the love of God. If we believe what you want us to Gods word would surely contradict itself HELLO.


Heb 1:9

(ASV) Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; Therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee With the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

(ESV) You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions."


(KJV) Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

(KJV+) Thou hast loved25 righteousness,1343 and2532 hated3404 iniquity;458 therefore1223, 5124 God,2316 even thy4675 God,2316 hath anointed5548 thee4571 with the oil1637 of gladness20 above3844 thy4675 fellows.3353

(MKJV) You have loved righteousness and hated iniquity, therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness above Your fellows."

Does God need to be anointed ?


I do not believe that God needs anything. I also do not believe that this verse says that God needed to be anointed.

What does it mean to you when this verse says Jesus was anointed with the oil of gladness?

Do you believe that God literally dumped oil on Christ?

[Tucson Jim]

Chapter and verse please .

Okaaayyy . . . find a verse that doesn't say something . . .???

[Tucson Jim]

Well Jesus was the first-born of all creation and was begotten by God .and Israel was the first-born of the human race begotten by man.

This is the meaning of the first-born taken from ex 4:22.

H1060
בּכור
bekôr
bek-ore'
From H1069; firstborn; hence chief: - eldest (son), first-born (-ling).


This is the first-born taken from col 1:15 that pertains to Jesus .Notice this one mentions Begotten and the one that pertains to Israel doesn't.

G4416
πρωτοτόκος
prōtotokos
pro-tot-ok'-os
From G4413 and the alternate of G5088; first born (usually as noun, literally or figuratively): - firstbegotten (-born).

Is not Jesus the first begotten and also the only begotten of God?

So was Israel literally God's "firstborn son"? No. Why should we then try to make the meaning of "firstborn" literally when it is said of Jesus? Because it fits your doctrine?

[ralittlefield]

Once again anther trinitarian bites the dust i just posted this verse you claim is God calling Jesus God look again.:naughty::hand:;)


I will do as you ask, in fact, let's both look:

But about the Son he says,
“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever,
and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.

[Tucson Jim]

You tell me who is calling who God here.

Heb 1:8 but of the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; And the sceptre of uprightness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

God the Father is calling God the Son "God". Obviously.

[Tucson Jim]

Ok now hurry off my children and try to find scripture that contradicts what i just posted.

This is what I meant by your sarcasm and denigration of others.

So now we are "children" because we disagree with your opinions?

[Tucson Jim]

Once again anther trinitarian bites the dust

Only in your mind . . .

[Angryamerican]

I just love it when i win !!

All you have to do is give just enough scripture to a trinitarian to hang himself. LOL HEHE HOHO.

And i do apologize for my laughter.

[ralittlefield]

I just love it when i win !!

All you have to do is give just enough scripture to a trinitarian to hang himself. LOL HEHE HOHO.

And i do apologize for my laughter.

I really do not see how you have won anything.

In Heb 1:8 the Father says about Jesus "Your throne"....... (then He refers to Jesus as O God) will last forever............

I do not understand why you are having trouble seeing that.

[ralittlefield]

I just love it when i win !!

All you have to do is give just enough scripture to a trinitarian to hang himself. LOL HEHE HOHO.

And i do apologize for my laughter.

Laugh if you wish. Perhaps this is a joke for you, but I consider the nature of God a very serious subject.

[Angryamerican]

I really do not see how you have won anything.

In Heb 1:8 the Father says about Jesus "Your throne"....... (then He refers to Jesus as O God) will last forever............

I do not understand why you are having trouble seeing that.


Notice how the KJV shows their agenda.

Heb 1:8

(ASV) but of the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; And the sceptre of uprightness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

(ESV) But of the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.


(KJV) But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

(KJV+) But1161 unto4314 the3588 Son5207 he saith, Thy4675 throne,2362 O God,2316 is forever and ever:1519, 165, 165 a scepter4464 of righteousness2118 is the3588 scepter4464 of thy4675 kingdom.932

(MKJV) But to the Son He says, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever. A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.

[ralittlefield]

Notice how the KJV shows their agenda.

Heb 1:8

(ASV) but of the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; And the sceptre of uprightness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

(ESV) But of the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.


(KJV) But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

(KJV+) But1161 unto4314 the3588 Son5207 he saith, Thy4675 throne,2362 O God,2316 is forever and ever:1519, 165, 165 a scepter4464 of righteousness2118 is the3588 scepter4464 of thy4675 kingdom.932

(MKJV) But to the Son He says, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever. A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.

Sorry for being dense here, but the only difference that I see is "of the Son" vs "unto the Son".

What difference would that make? Either way the Son is referred to as "O God".

[Angryamerican]

Laugh if you wish. Perhaps this is a joke for you, but I consider the nature of God a very serious subject.

I guess just too much denial for me ,that is the only thing i can do is laugh it off.

If you guys can't see how verse 9 contradicts what you are trying to say verse 8 is saying it's hopeless.

Heb 1:9

(ASV) Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; Therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee With the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

(ESV) You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions."

(KJV) Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

(KJV+) Thou hast loved25 righteousness,1343 and2532 hated3404 iniquity;458 therefore1223, 5124 God,2316 even thy4675 God,2316 hath anointed5548 thee4571 with the oil1637 of gladness20 above3844 thy4675 fellows.3353

(MKJV) You have loved righteousness and hated iniquity, therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness above Your fellows."


Am i the dense one here please explain verse 9.

[ralittlefield]

I guess just too much denial for me ,that is the only thing i can do is laugh it off.

If you guys can't see how verse 9 contradicts what you are trying to say verse 8 is saying it's hopeless.

Heb 1:9

(ASV) Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; Therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee With the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

(ESV) You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions."

(KJV) Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

(KJV+) Thou hast loved25 righteousness,1343 and2532 hated3404 iniquity;458 therefore1223, 5124 God,2316 even thy4675 God,2316 hath anointed5548 thee4571 with the oil1637 of gladness20 above3844 thy4675 fellows.3353

(MKJV) You have loved righteousness and hated iniquity, therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness above Your fellows."

Are you saying that because Jesus was set apart for a special purpose for the Father (anointed), that somehow prevents Him from being God? It does not.

Phil 2 clearly teaches that Jesus willingly emptied Himself and became a servant. I do not see that you have a point here. It seems instead to me that you are ignoring clear scripture.

[ralittlefield]

I guess just too much denial for me ,that is the only thing i can do is laugh it off.

If you guys can't see how verse 9 contradicts what you are trying to say verse 8 is saying it's hopeless.

Heb 1:9

(ASV) Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; Therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee With the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

(ESV) You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions."

(KJV) Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

(KJV+) Thou hast loved25 righteousness,1343 and2532 hated3404 iniquity;458 therefore1223, 5124 God,2316 even thy4675 God,2316 hath anointed5548 thee4571 with the oil1637 of gladness20 above3844 thy4675 fellows.3353

(MKJV) You have loved righteousness and hated iniquity, therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness above Your fellows."


Am i the dense one here please explain verse 9.

Verse 9 says that Jesus is anointed (set apart for a special purpose for God). That is consistent with Phil 2.

[Angryamerican]

Verse 9 says that Jesus is anointed (set apart for a special purpose for God). That is consistent with Phil 2.


Good luck to you all and have a happy Christmas. This thread is officially over for me you have done nothing but convinced me even more that Jesus is the actual son of God and that he is not God and i thank you for that.


Sincerely Sonny

[ralittlefield]

Good luck to you all and have a happy Christmas. This thread is officially over for me you have done nothing but convinced me even more that Jesus is the actual son of God and that he is not God and i thank you for that.


Sincerely Sonny

Merry Christmas and good bye.

Before you go, I would very much appreciate it if you would elaborate on your last post. How/why have you been convinced?

[Tucson Jim]

Merry Christmas and good bye.

Before you go, I would very much appreciate it if you would elaborate on your last post. How/why have you been convinced?

I wouldn't hold my breath on that one . . . He knows he has no point, he is having fun pretending he has a point, calling us names, laughing at us, etc. but he knows if the conversation continues, he will eventually have to get serious and admit that there is nothing here.

Nothing at all for his side.

But everything for the Trinitarian side since God calls Jesus God.

Hence his rapid retreat.

I don't believe for one second that AA is serious about trying to understand the trinitarian viewpoint at all, as evidenced by this conversation, his taunting and superior attitude, and his unwillingness to acknowledge what is right in front of his face.

It's really sad that he wastes everyone's time like this . . .

[Tucson Jim]

I would like it noted for the record that I completely shut down AA's myopic view of scripture in Post 8655 below:

Really Jesus words fall short of explaining himself ?

So the words of Jesus was meant to mislead ?

Please explain yourself JIM you are confusing me.

"You are trying to say that if Jesus didn't explicitly teach the doctrine of the trinity, it can't be true.

This, of course, follows your earlier assertion ( weeks ago) that if the doctrine of the Trinity isn't taught in the OT, it can't be true.

It seems you are determined to prove the doctrine is false by showing us where it isn't taught in the Bible!!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Instead, why don't you look at where it is taught?

We have shown you numerous verses teaching the Deity of Christ. I posted dozens of verses throughout scripture showing the Father and Son are spoken of in nearly identical terms, called by identical titles, engage in identical activities (such as creating the universe) and your response is that "Jesus never said he's God"??

As we have told you before, explicit claims to Deity on Jesus' part are rare because it was not His mission to prove He is God - it was to become a man and die for our sins.

You should look for the truth of a doctrine where it is taught, not where it's not!"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As one might expect, AA never responded to this post, instead resorting to laughing, taunting, etc. - and then he suddenly had to leave the thread in a hurry, without responding to either ralittlefield or me.

Sad, sad . . .

[drmilo]

You seem to think very little of the miracles and works the angels did. Can God create a being and allow that same being to create other things?


Miracles and works of the angels are not relevant to the discussion unless you are trying to say that Jesus was an angel. If Jesus was an angel, then he was a created thing. If Jesus was a created thing then he did not create all things; even if he created everything other than himself, the fact that he did not create himself means he did not create all things. Yet the Bible says that Jesus created all things. Therefore, Jesus is not an angel, since NO angel could possibly have created all things since angels are parts of creation.

The one who created all things is God either on his own or through his son. Either way it was God to create all things.

This is exactly what I've been saying, AA.

God created all things.

Jesus, it says in the bible, created all things.

Therefore, Jesus must be God.

And thus, God created all things.

[drmilo]

You tell me who is calling who God here.

Heb 1:8 but of the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; And the sceptre of uprightness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

I was an English Major in college, AA. I am a writer now. The verse is clear. The narrator (writer of the verse) says, "but unto the Son he saith" The word "he" in this clause refers to God the Father (as is shown from the previous verses.) We are then taken to the words that God said, "Thy throne, O God....." God is now the speaker in the verse, and from the first clause we know to whom God is speaking -- the Son. Therefore this is an instance of God the Father calling The Son (Jesus) God.

Verse 9, that you seem to think contradicts this, is a continuation of God speaking. The speaker of verse 9 is God the Father. He is speaking to the Son. And again, in verse 9, he calls the Son God. "therefore God" (The father is speaking and referring to the Son "thy God has annointed thee..." (The father is speaking and referring to the God of the Son (himself).)

In both verses, the Father calls the Son "God." In verse 9, he also refers to himself as "God."

[Hannagirl]

[QUOTE=ROBERTENEAL;8468478]I believe that you have mentioned in another post that you attend a Pentecostal Church. So do I (an Assembly of God). So you have probably heard that the "Jesus only" teaching was something that used to be taught in some Pentecostal circles.

I have heard that William Branham was one of these teachers/preachers, and that they used the Gospel of John chapter 1 out of context a lot. 1)"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.2)Hec was in the Beginning with God. 3) All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.........14)And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father". So, to me, it seems that this text indicates a certain distinction between the Father and the Son. And at the same time, an inseparable unity.

And when Jesus told His disciples that He would be with them "even to the end of the age", He knew that He would be ascending to the Father. So how would He be with them? If the Holy Ghost is with them, Jesus is with them also. He promised that He would send the Spirit. Acts 2 is an account of the Day of Pentecost experience. Again, there is a distinction between the Son and the Spirit. And at the same time, an inseparable unity.

I have heard that the Trinity of God bears some similarities to the Trinity of Man. A man (or woman) has three parts; a body, a soul, and a spirit. In this comparison, the Father is compared to the soul because His will is sovereign. The Son is compared to the body, because he physically does the will of the Father. The remaining comparison (Spirit) is obvious.




To my interpretation and understanding of the Holy Trinity is: Father son and holy ghost,
God is God the Father, Jesus the son is God in the flesh, Holy Ghost is God's spirit which lives in us after we have accepted Jesus as our Lord and Savior. As to the reconcilation we have with God, if you have accepted Jesus as your Lord and Savior, then we are reconciled because of the blood cleansing power, when God looks at us , he sees his son, not our sin, because Jesus' blood has cleansed us of our sins which are to be remembered no more and have been cast into the bottom of the sea.
As I said, this is my understanding, I do not claim any denomination of church, I claim Jesus as my savior and God as my father, and the holy word of God...The bible.

[free2B]

[QUOTE=ROBERTENEAL;8468478]I believe that you have mentioned in another post that you attend a Pentecostal Church. So do I (an Assembly of God). So you have probably heard that the "Jesus only" teaching was something that used to be taught in some Pentecostal circles.

I have heard that William Branham was one of these teachers/preachers, and that they used the Gospel of John chapter 1 out of context a lot. 1)"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.2)Hec was in the Beginning with God. 3) All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.........14)And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father". So, to me, it seems that this text indicates a certain distinction between the Father and the Son. And at the same time, an inseparable unity.

And when Jesus told His disciples that He would be with them "even to the end of the age", He knew that He would be ascending to the Father. So how would He be with them? If the Holy Ghost is with them, Jesus is with them also. He promised that He would send the Spirit. Acts 2 is an account of the Day of Pentecost experience. Again, there is a distinction between the Son and the Spirit. And at the same time, an inseparable unity.

I have heard that the Trinity of God bears some similarities to the Trinity of Man. A man (or woman) has three parts; a body, a soul, and a spirit. In this comparison, the Father is compared to the soul because His will is sovereign. The Son is compared to the body, because he physically does the will of the Father. The remaining comparison (Spirit) is obvious.




To my interpretation and understanding of the Holy Trinity is: Father son and holy ghost,
God is God the Father, Jesus the son is God in the flesh, Holy Ghost is God's spirit which lives in us after we have accepted Jesus as our Lord and Savior. As to the reconcilation we have with God, if you have accepted Jesus as your Lord and Savior, then we are reconciled because of the blood cleansing power, when God looks at us , he sees his son, not our sin, because Jesus' blood has cleansed us of our sins which are to be remembered no more and have been cast into the bottom of the sea.
As I said, this is my understanding, I do not claim any denomination of church, I claim Jesus as my savior and God as my father, and the holy word of God...The bible.

hanna I do not usually comment on the Trinity. My belief is this, as you, I claim to be a nondemoninational Christian. I believe in Jesus Christ as my Saviour, and the Way to Life Everlasting.
My faith through reading the scriptures leads me to believe that the Holy Spirit of the Lord God Almighty dwelt here on Earth in the Body of of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Through His Precious Blood We who Believe can be cleansed of our sins and receive Redemption and Grace through Jesus Christ. Blessed be His Name now and forever, and especially at the Celebration of His Holy Birth in Bethlehem. Merry Christmas!

[Hannagirl]

Amen Free2B, we have no disagreement! God Bless you, your family and have a Merry Christmas and a Blessed New Year as well.

[free2B]

Amen Free2B, we have no disagreement! God Bless you, your family and have a Merry Christmas and a Blessed New Year as well.

Thank you hannah, and the same to you and yours.

[Angryamerican]

I would like it noted for the record that I completely shut down AA's myopic view of scripture in Post 8655 below:



"You are trying to say that if Jesus didn't explicitly teach the doctrine of the trinity, it can't be true.

This, of course, follows your earlier assertion ( weeks ago) that if the doctrine of the Trinity isn't taught in the OT, it can't be true.

It seems you are determined to prove the doctrine is false by showing us where it isn't taught in the Bible!!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Instead, why don't you look at where it is taught?

We have shown you numerous verses teaching the Deity of Christ. I posted dozens of verses throughout scripture showing the Father and Son are spoken of in nearly identical terms, called by identical titles, engage in identical activities (such as creating the universe) and your response is that "Jesus never said he's God"??

As we have told you before, explicit claims to Deity on Jesus' part are rare because it was not His mission to prove He is God - it was to become a man and die for our sins.

You should look for the truth of a doctrine where it is taught, not where it's not!"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As one might expect, AA never responded to this post, instead resorting to laughing, taunting, etc. - and then he suddenly had to leave the thread in a hurry, without responding to either ralittlefield or me.

Sad, sad . . .

Yes that is for sure. Jesus was called rabbi wasn't he ? do you care to explain what that means ?

Ok i'll do it for you it means teacher. What was Jesus doing while he was here yes again he was teaching.

What did Jesus teach ?no not the trinity.

Are you seeing a pattern?

[Tucson Jim]

Yeah, I see a pattern alright . . .

[Angryamerican]

Thank you and Goodnight.

[Tucson Jim]

Thank you and Goodnight.

Another in-depth discussion with AA . . . :))

[Angryamerican]

Yeah, I see a pattern alright . . .

If you were truly honest with yourself you would. :liar:

[Angryamerican]

Another in-depth discussion with AA . . . :))

It's ok you can explain it to Jesus when he arrives. ;)

[Tucson Jim]

It's ok you can explain it to Jesus when he arrives. ;)

I've explained it to Him right now.

And He agrees! :neutral:

[Angryamerican]

I've explained it to Him right now.

And He agrees! :neutral:

Oh i think even he would not understand your doctrine.

[Tucson Jim]

If you were truly honest with yourself you would. :liar:

This isn't about me.

[Tucson Jim]

If you were truly honest with yourself you would. :liar:

BTW, as everyone can see, you have already resorted, once again, to name-calling with your little "Liar" icon.

You call people names because you have no argument, no other recourse.

Again, I find that incredibly sad . . .

[Tucson Jim]

Oh i think even he would not understand your doctrine.

Why not?

He is the author.

[Angryamerican]

Why not?

He is the author.

Sure he is.

I guess we will see.

Look Jesus is not mit romney saying one thing and meaning another. :mrgreen::hand::naughty:

[Tucson Jim]

Sure he is.

I guess we will see.

Look Jesus is not mit romney saying one thing and meaning another. :mrgreen::hand::naughty:

You don't like Mitt? I thought he was one of the decent ones. What did I miss?

[Angryamerican]

You don't like Mitt? I thought he was one of the decent ones. What did I miss?


He claimed him and his father marched with martin luther king. and they didn't so he tried to spin and it really is going over bad.

[Tucson Jim]

He claimed him and his father marched with martin luther king. and they didn't so he tried to spin and it really is going over bad.

I guess it must not be hurting him too bad since he's leading in New Hampshire right now.

McCain is #2.

Given a choice, I'd take Mitt. McCain is an open borders amnesty RINO, IMO of course.

[Warrior4God]

I guess it must not be hurting him too bad since he's leading in New Hampshire right now.

McCain is #2.

Given a choice, I'd take Mitt. McCain is an open borders amnesty RINO, IMO of course.

Well the reason its not hurting Mitt is because you can even be an Adulterer and be reelected in this country.
The moral fiber is for the most part gone in most Americans.
I think this is due in part to secular based curriculum from Kindergarten through our Colleges and Univ.

Our young are being groomed and we sit by.

It will not change as the train has left the station and its got a head of steam.

[Tucson Jim]

Well the reason its not hurting Mitt is because you can even be an Adulterer and be reelected in this country.
The moral fiber is for the most part gone in most Americans.
I think this is due in part to secular based curriculum from Kindergarten through our Colleges and Univ.

Our young are being groomed and we sit by.

It will not change as the train has left the station and its got a head of steam.

I fear you are correct about the state of the nation, Warrior, and it breaks my heart.

My children are grown and are good people, but I fear for my grandchildren because of the rampant secular influences in this country.

I pray for them daily and try to be a positive influence, but there's only so much a grandpa can do before it's considered "meddling".

[Christian John]

Should You Believe in the Trinity?

If you believe it to be true, then I guess so.

[Tucson Jim]

Should You Believe in the Trinity?

If you believe it to be true, then I guess so.

I guess the implied question is "Should all Christians believe the Trinity."

Most do, a few don't.

[Warrior4God]

I fear you are correct about the state of the nation, Warrior, and it breaks my heart.

My children are grown and are good people, but I fear for my grandchildren because of the rampant secular influences in this country.

I pray for them daily and try to be a positive influence, but there's only so much a grandpa can do before it's considered "meddling".

We can still make a difference though Jim don't you think?
One by one we teach and share Gods Word and pray.
MUCH PRAYER.

We are so very close to seeing our Lord Jesus Christ face to face when you see the world turn away from God.

The hope of Christs return is our anchor and though we no not when we know it will happen.

I believe we even get a crown for loving his appearing.

2Ti 4:8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.

[Tucson Jim]

We can still make a difference though Jim don't you think?

Yes, I do, that's why I pray and try to have a positive influence on them. It's just that I only see them once in a while, the secular influences are near constant.

One by one we teach and share Gods Word and pray.
MUCH PRAYER.

Amen!

We are so very close to seeing our Lord Jesus Christ face to face when you see the world turn away from God.

The hope of Christs return is our anchor and though we no not when we know it will happen.

Amen again!

I believe we even get a crown for loving his appearing.

2Ti 4:8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.

A triple Amen in one post - that must be a record for us! :)

[Warrior4God]

Yes, I do, that's why I pray and try to have a positive influence on them. It's just that I only see them once in a while, the secular influences are near constant.



Amen!



Amen again!



A triple Amen in one post - that must be a record for us! :)

We have arrived at the triple Amen,this is truly a Christmas moment.

[Fire Watch]

We have arrived at the triple Amen,this is truly a Christmas moment.
A trinity of amens if you will:))

[Angryamerican]

A trinity of amens if you will:))

Reco i didn't think you believed in the trinity say it ain't so.

[Fire Watch]

I dont. No worries. Jesus however, remains God.

[Angryamerican]

I dont. No worries. Jesus however, remains God.

Merry Christmas Reco.

I don't want to open the flood gates with all my trinitarian friends ,so i will say i really can't prove Jesus isn't God. So i will continue with my beliefs, not really knowing 100% without doubt if i'm right or not. I'm sure the Almighty will correct me if i am wrong.


Sonny

[Tucson Jim]

Merry Christmas Reco.

I don't want to open the flood gates with all my trinitarian friends ,so i will say i really can't prove Jesus isn't God. So i will continue with my beliefs, not really knowing 100% without doubt if i'm right or not. I'm sure the Almighty will correct me if i am wrong.


Sonny

He is trying . . . ;)

Merry Christmas to you AA! We have had our moments this year. I resolve, with the help of the Almighty, to try to be more civil and understanding in the New Year.

As I have said frequently, it may not seem like it at times, but I bear ill will towards no one. I respect you for standing up for your position fervently. I am glad you care enough about the Lord to have a belief about His nature. And I pray we can all be a little more civil, and dare I say, even friendly to each other in the coming year.

Best wishes to you and yours,

Jim

[Tucson Jim]

A trinity of amens if you will:))

Good one!

[Tucson Jim]

We have arrived at the triple Amen,this is truly a Christmas moment.

It truly is . . . funny how that worked out.

Merry Christmas Warrior!

[Warrior4God]

It truly is . . . funny how that worked out.

Merry Christmas Warrior!

Thankyou very much and Merry Christmas Jim.

If you ever get the notion to ,you can call me Billy.

[Angryamerican]

He is trying . . . ;)

Merry Christmas to you AA! We have had our moments this year. I resolve, with the help of the Almighty, to try to be more civil and understanding in the New Year.

As I have said frequently, it may not seem like it at times, but I bear ill will towards no one. I respect you for standing up for your position fervently. I am glad you care enough about the Lord to have a belief about His nature. And I pray we can all be a little more civil, and dare I say, even friendly to each other in the coming year.

Best wishes to you and yours,

Jim

Back at ya my friend.

[Warrior4God]

There is no clear Trinitarian formula in the Bible.

Trinitarians differ greatly in their definitions of the Trinity. The Eastern Orthodox Church differs from the Western traditions regarding the relation of the Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son. Some television evangelists differ greatly from the Reformed Churches in their concept of Christ’s divinity while he was on earth. Oneness Pentecostals say the classic formula of the Trinity is completely wrong. Yet all these claim that Christ is God and that the Bible supports their position. Surely if the Trinity were a part of Bible doctrine, and especially if one had to believe it to be saved, it would be clearly defined in Scripture. Yet there is no Trinitarian formula in the Bible and Trinitarians themselves cannot agree on a definition. If one is to believe in the Trinity, how is he to know which definition is correct, since none appears in the Bible?

The Trinitarian contention that “the Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and together they make one God” is not in Scripture and is illogical. Trinitarians teach that Jesus is both 100 percent man and 100 percent God. I say that God can do the impossible, but He cannot perform that which is inherently contradictory. God is the inventor of logic and mathematics, disciplines He created to allow us to get to know Him and His world. It is the very reason why He said that He is “One God,” and why Jesus said that the witness of two was true and then said that he and His Father both were witnesses. God cannot make a round square, and He cannot make 100 percent +100 percent = 100 percent, without contradicting the laws of mathematics He designed.

[Tucson Jim]

There is no clear Trinitarian formula in the Bible.

The facts of the Trinity are clearly found in scripture:

1. The Father is God.
2. The Son is God.
3. The Holy Spirit is God.
4. There is only one God.

God gave us these facts and a brain, and we derived the Trinitarian formula from the facts.

Trinitarians differ greatly in their definitions of the Trinity. The Eastern Orthodox Church differs from the Western traditions regarding the relation of the Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son. Some television evangelists differ greatly from the Reformed Churches in their concept of Christ’s divinity while he was on earth. Oneness Pentecostals say the classic formula of the Trinity is completely wrong. Yet all these claim that Christ is God and that the Bible supports their position. Surely if the Trinity were a part of Bible doctrine, and especially if one had to believe it to be saved, it would be clearly defined in Scripture. Yet there is no Trinitarian formula in the Bible and Trinitarians themselves cannot agree on a definition. If one is to believe in the Trinity, how is he to know which definition is correct, since none appears in the Bible?

Although Trinitarians may differ in some aspects of the doctrine, the basic belief in God in three Persons remain the same.

It should be noted that the near-universal belief in the Trinity among Christian denominations all but guarantees there will be SOME differences in interpretation of minor points of the doctrine. Indeed, the fact that there is so LITTLE disagreement on any major points of the doctrine is practically miraculous!

Contrast this with the numerous, major disagreements in almost every area of theology among the varied groups who deny the Trinity, and a truer picture emerges of exactly who is divided over doctrine!

The Trinitarian contention that “the Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and together they make one God” is not in Scripture and is illogical.

On the contrary, Trinitarian belief is absolutely scriptural: each point in the doctrine is supported by a multitude of scriptures, the force of which is undeniable. It is scripturally based, was believed by the apostles and Church Fathers and, because of heresies that arose in the early church, was systematically formulated by the Church in 325 AD.

Trinitarians teach that Jesus is both 100 percent man and 100 percent God. I say that God can do the impossible, but He cannot perform that which is inherently contradictory. God is the inventor of logic and mathematics, disciplines He created to allow us to get to know Him and His world. It is the very reason why He said that He is “One God,” and why Jesus said that the witness of two was true and then said that he and His Father both were witnesses. God cannot make a round square, and He cannot make 100 percent +100 percent = 100 percent, without contradicting the laws of mathematics He designed.

It is not, and never has been, a matter of "logic" or mathematics: Rather, it is a question of whether we will believe the word of God or flee to the reasonings of man when confronted by something we don't understand.

Christians believe God is Eternal, that is, without beginning, yet this is totally incomprehensible to the human mind. Everything we have experienced has a beginning. How can God be eternal? It defies reason, yet we believe it because the Bible says it. The unbeliever rejects the Word of God partly for this very reason - that God must have had a beginning, therefore the Bible is "illogical".

It is not illogical - it is merely a fact that the nature of the Omnipotent, omniscient, Eternal, Triune God is outside of our collective experience, and therefore can be known ONLY through revelation, through the aspects of Himself that God has chosen to reveal to us.

One such aspect is that He is Triune. We can say it makes no sense to us, but the real question is: Will we believe what God has revealed about Himself.

I, for one, do.

[Angryamerican]

The facts of the Trinity are clearly found in scripture:

1. The Father is God.
2. The Son is God.
3. The Holy Spirit is God.
4. There is only one God.

God gave us these facts and a brain, and we derived the Trinitarian formula from the facts.



Although Trinitarians may differ in some aspects of the doctrine, the basic belief in God in three Persons remain the same.

It should be noted that the near-universal belief in the Trinity among Christian denominations all but guarantees there will be SOME differences in interpretation of minor points of the doctrine. Indeed, the fact that there is so LITTLE disagreement on any major points of the doctrine is practically miraculous!

Contrast this with the numerous, major disagreements in almost every area of theology among the varied groups who deny the Trinity, and a truer picture emerges of exactly who is divided over doctrine!



On the contrary, Trinitarian belief is absolutely scriptural: each point in the doctrine is supported by a multitude of scriptures, the force of which is undeniable. It is scripturally based, was believed by the apostles and Church Fathers and, because of heresies that arose in the early church, was systematically formulated by the Church in 325 AD.



It is not, and never has been, a matter of "logic" or mathematics: Rather, it is a question of whether we will believe the word of God or flee to the reasonings of man when confronted by something we don't understand.

Christians believe God is Eternal, that is, without beginning, yet this is totally incomprehensible to the human mind. Everything we have experienced has a beginning. How can God be eternal? It defies reason, yet we believe it because the Bible says it. The unbeliever rejects the Word of God partly for this very reason - that God must have had a beginning, therefore the Bible is "illogical".

It is not illogical - it is merely a fact that the nature of the Omnipotent, omniscient, Eternal, Triune God is outside of our collective experience, and therefore can be known ONLY through revelation, through the aspects of Himself that God has chosen to reveal to us.

One such aspect is that He is Triune. We can say it makes no sense to us, but the real question is: Will we believe what God has revealed about Himself.

I, for one, do.

It takes three members that make up God How are they all unique ?

What is each ones function ?

What is each ones purpose ?

If three beings make up God they should compliment each other correct?

How come the Father and son have different bodies but yet make up one God?

[DispensationalJim]

Nicely done, T-Jim! Amen!

[Angryamerican]

The facts of the Trinity are clearly found in scripture:

1. The Father is God.
2. The Son is God.
3. The Holy Spirit is God.
4. There is only one God.

God gave us these facts and a brain, and we derived the Trinitarian formula from the facts.



Although Trinitarians may differ in some aspects of the doctrine, the basic belief in God in three Persons remain the same.

It should be noted that the near-universal belief in the Trinity among Christian denominations all but guarantees there will be SOME differences in interpretation of minor points of the doctrine. Indeed, the fact that there is so LITTLE disagreement on any major points of the doctrine is practically miraculous!

Contrast this with the numerous, major disagreements in almost every area of theology among the varied groups who deny the Trinity, and a truer picture emerges of exactly who is divided over doctrine!



On the contrary, Trinitarian belief is absolutely scriptural: each point in the doctrine is supported by a multitude of scriptures, the force of which is undeniable. It is scripturally based, was believed by the apostles and Church Fathers and, because of heresies that arose in the early church, was systematically formulated by the Church in 325 AD.



It is not, and never has been, a matter of "logic" or mathematics: Rather, it is a question of whether we will believe the word of God or flee to the reasonings of man when confronted by something we don't understand.

Christians believe God is Eternal, that is, without beginning, yet this is totally incomprehensible to the human mind. Everything we have experienced has a beginning. How can God be eternal? It defies reason, yet we believe it because the Bible says it. The unbeliever rejects the Word of God partly for this very reason - that God must have had a beginning, therefore the Bible is "illogical".

It is not illogical - it is merely a fact that the nature of the Omnipotent, omniscient, Eternal, Triune God is outside of our collective experience, and therefore can be known ONLY through revelation, through the aspects of Himself that God has chosen to reveal to us.

One such aspect is that He is Triune. We can say it makes no sense to us, but the real question is: Will we believe what God has revealed about Himself.

I, for one, do.

What i really have a problem with is that Jesus is similar to his father Just like the angels are called godlike beings but yet that does not make them God. God is unique and far superior to any other being.

We can share in the divinity of Jesus but how can we share in the divinity of God?

2Pe 1:4 through which He has given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, so that by these you might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

And i ask you to explain why Jesus is not equal to his father and is always in subjection to his father if he was equal to his father? Can God be in subjection to anyone ?

[Tucson Jim]

It takes three members that make up God How are they all unique ?

What is each ones function ?

What is each ones purpose ?

If three beings make up God they should compliment each other correct?

How come the Father and son have different bodies but yet make up one God?

The questions you have raised are subsumed under the topic "The Economy of the Trinity". I found an online reference to Grudem's Systematic Theology, which discusses the roles of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit briefly here:

http://books.google.com/books?id=DA8xl4eagDcC&pg=PA248&lpg=PA248&dq=economy+of+the+trinity&source=web&ots=hAZGD3P6PU&sig=gxHNJmQ54yqSXVwUv0j8k5LVxc0#PPA248,M1

If this does not make sense, please let me know.

[Tucson Jim]

What i really have a problem with is that Jesus is similar to his father Just like the angels are called godlike beings but yet that does not make them God. God is unique and far superior to any other being.

But we have tried to show you that the "similarities" between the Father and Son are infinitely more than those between God and angels, who are mere creatures. Remember the list of titles of God and Jesus that Reconrick posted? Or the list of similarities between the Father and Jesus I posted? [I have both lists if you would like to review them again] These go far, far beyond any "similarities" between God and angels! In fact, the only one I can think of is God and angels are "Spirit".

We can share in the divinity of Jesus but how can we share in the divinity of God?

2Pe 1:4 through which He has given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, so that by these you might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

Becoming "partakers in the divine nature" may mean many things, but surely you can see it cannot mean that we will become God! We have not always existed, for starters. We cannot be omnipotent for another. And so on.

Jesus is not a "partaker of the divine nature" but is actually God, the second Person in the Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. He HAS always existed. He IS omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, etc.

The difference between being a partaker of the divine nature, and being God is infinite! It is the difference between being creator and creature.

And i ask you to explain why Jesus is not equal to his father and is always in subjection to his father if he was equal to his father? Can God be in subjection to anyone ?

Only within the context of a Triune God could God the Son be in subjection to God the Father - and that is exactly what we have in the Trinity.

Jesus is equal to His Father in nature but not in function. That is where the confusion lies I think.

If you read through the link I gave you in my previous post, it will be clearer that God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit have different roles or functions in their relationship with Humans and the world.

To be in voluntary subjection to another Person does not mean you are not "equal" to that person in nature - it just means you have a different "job", so to speak.

[Tucson Jim]

Nicely done, T-Jim! Amen!

Thank you D-Jim! Sometimes, it comes out just right and it is easy. Other times, I work at it a long time and it is just so-so. I don't know why that is . . . :confused:

[Ron Jon]

In another thread we were talking about sheep and goats. And it occurred to me that one of the clearest examples of Jesus claiming to be God is found in both the Old and New Testaments. Will you read Ezekiel chapter 34 and tell me who is the good shepherd in that chapter. Then cross reference this with what Jesus said in John chapter 10. What do you think Jesus was trying to say? I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure it out.

[Tucson Jim]

In another thread we were talking about sheep and goats. And it occurred to me that one of the clearest examples of Jesus claiming to be God is found in both the Old and New Testaments. Will you read Ezekiel chapter 34 and tell me who is the good shepherd in that chapter. Then cross reference this with what Jesus said in John chapter 10. What do you think Jesus was trying to say? I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure it out.

Excellent comparisons Ron Jon!

Reconrick posted some comparisons between God and Jesus, including other verses relating to "Shepherd", which I have listed below.

Jehovah

1 Almighty--Genesis 17:1
2 I AM--Exodus 3:14-16
3 Rock--Psalm 18:2; 28:1
4 Horn of Salvation--Psalm 18:2
5 Shepherd--Psalm 23:1; Isaiah 40:10-11
6 King of Glory--Psalm 24:7-10
7 Light-- Psalm 27:1; Isaiah 60:19
8 Salvation--Psalm 27:1; Isaiah 12:2
9 Lord of lords--Psalm 136:3
10 Holy One--Isaiah 12:6
11 Lawgiver--Isaiah 33:22
12 Judge--Isaiah 33:22
13 First and Last--Isaiah 41:4; 44:6; 48:12
14 Only Savior--Isaiah 43:11; 45:21; 60:16
15 Giver of Spiritual Water--Isaiah 44:3
16 King of Israel--Isaiah 44:6
17 Only Creator--Isaiah 44:24; 45:8; 48:13
18 Only Just God--Isaiah 45:21
19 Redeemer--Isaiah 54:5; 60:16

Jesus

1. Almighty--Revelation 1:82
2. I am--John 8:58
3. Rock--I Corinthians 10:4
4. Horn of Salvation--Luke 1:69
5. Good Shepherd, Great Shepherd, Chief Shepherd--Hebrews 13:20; I Peter 5:4
6. Lord of Glory--I Corinthians 2:8
7. Light--John 1:4-9; John 8:12; Revelation 21:23
8. Only Salvation--Acts 4:10-12
9. Lord of lords--Revelation 19:16
10. Holy One--Acts 2:27
11. Testator of the First Testament (the Law)--Hebrews 9:14-17
12. Judge--Micah 5:1; Acts 10:42
13. Alpha and Omega, Beginning and Ending, First and Last--Revelation 1:8; 22:13
14. Savior--Titus 2:13; 3:6
15. Giver of Living Water--John 4:10-14; 7:38-39
16. King of Israel, King of kings--John 1:49; Revelation 19:16
17. Creator of everything--John 1:3; Colossians 1:16
18. Just One--Acts 7:52
19. Redeemer--Galatians 3:13; Revelation 5:9

and more...

Name

1. Jehovah-jireh (provider)
2. Jehovah-rapha (healer)
3. Jehovah-nissi (banner, victory)
4. Jehovah-m'kaddesh (sanctifier)
5. Jehovah-shalom (peace)
6. Jehovah-sabaoth (Lord of hosts)
7. Jehovah-elyon (most high)
8. Jehovah-raah (shepherd)
9. Jehovah-hoseenu (maker)
10. Jehovah-tsidkenu (Righteousness)
11. Jehovah-shammah (present)

Compare to what was said of Jesus..

1. Provider--Hebrews 10:10-12
2. Healer--James 5:14-15
3. Victory--I Corinthians 15:57
4. Sanctifier--Ephesians 5:26
5. Peace--John 14:27
6. Lord of Hosts--James 5:4-7
7. Most High--Luke 1:32, 76, 78
8. Shepherd--John 10:11
9. Maker--John 1:3
10. Righteousness--I Corinthians 1:30
11. Ever Present One--Matthew 28:20

[Tucson Jim]

I guess to round this out, I should list the comparisons between God and Jesus again:

God: From everlasting to everlasting thou art God – Ps. 90:2
Jesus: Whose goings forth have been from old, from everlasting – Micah 5:2

God: Thy throne is established of old: thou art from everlasting – Ps 93:2
Jesus: Unto the Son He saith, Thy throne O God, is for ever and ever – Heb 1:8

God: I am the first, and I am the last and besides me there is no God – Isa 44:6
Jesus: I am the first and the last : I am he that liveth and was dead – Rev 1:17-18

God: Do I not fill heaven and earth? Saith the Lord - Jer 23:24
Jesus: He that descended is the same also that ascended up, far above all heavens, that he might fill all things. - Eph 4:10

God: I am Jehovah, I change not. - Malachi 3:6
Jesus: Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today and forever. - Heb 13:8

God: Canst thou by searching find out God? - Job 11:7
Jesus: No man knoweth the Son but the Father. Matt. 11:27

God: O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God, his ways past finding out. - Rom 11:33
Jesus: The unsearchable riches of Christ. - Eph 3:8

God: Thy footsteps are not known - Ps 77:19
Jesus: The love of Christ which passeth knowledge - Eph 3:19

God: I am Jehovah thy God, the Holy One of Israel - Isa 43:3
Jesus: Ye denied the Holy One and the Just - Acts 3:14

God: A God of truth and without iniquity - Deut 32:4
Jesus: I am the truth - John 14:6 Without sin - Heb 4:15

God: In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth - Gen 1:1
Jesus: In the beginning was the Word. All things were made by Him. - John 1:1, 3

God: I am Jehovah, that maketh all things; that stretched forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself - Isa 44:24.
Jesus: By him were all things created, that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities or powers - Col. 1:16

God: The Lord hath made all things for himself - Prov. 16:4
Jesus: All things were created by him and for him - Col 1:16

God: Thou preservest them all - Neh 9:6
Jesus: By him all things consist - Col 1:17

God: The King of Kings and Lord of lords - 1 Tim 6:15
Jesus: King of Kings and Lord of Lords.- Rev 19:16.

God: Thy Kingdom is an everlasting Kingdom, and thy dominion endureth thoughout all generations - Psalm 145:13
Jesus: His dominion is an everlasting dominion . . . And His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed - Dan. 7:14

God: Thou, even thou only, knowest the hearts of all the children of men - 1 Kings 8:39.
Jesus: All the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts. Rev 2:23

God: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? - Gen 18:25
Jesus: We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ. - 2 Cor 5:10

God: His Kingdom ruleth over all. - Psalm 103:19
Jesus: He is Lord of all. - Acts 10:36

God: Vengeance is Mine; I will repay, saith the Lord - Rom. 12:19
Jesus: Taking vengeance on them that know not God. - 2 Thess 1:7-8

God: To whom then will ye liken God? - Isaiah 40:18
Jesus:. . . . The image of the invisible God. - Col 1:15;
He who has seen Me has seen the Father . . . John 14:9

God: "This is what the LORD says— your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself,” – Isa 44:24
Jesus: For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 1 - Col 1:16

God: I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. - Isa 43:11
Jesus: And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. - Matt 1:21

God: I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. - Isa 43:11
Jesus: But we believe that through the grace of the LORD Jesus Christ we shall be saved, - Acts 15:11

God: I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. - Isa 43:11
Jesus: He became the Author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him – Heb 5:9

God: I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. - Isa 43:11
Jesus: He is able to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by Him – Heb 7:25
God: I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. - Isa 43:11
Jesus: Neither is there salvation in any other; for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved – Acts 4:12

God: With thee is the fountain of life: in thy light shall we see light – Psalm 36:9
Jesus: In Him was life: and the life was the light of men – John 1:4

God: He will swallow up death in victory – Isa. 25:8
Jesus: Our Savior Jesus Christ who has abolished death – 2 Tim 1:10

God: I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from the power of death: O death I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction –Hos 13:14
Jesus: That through death he (Jesus) might destroy him that had the power of death,
that is, the devil; and deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetimes subject to bondage – Heb 2:14-15

[free2B]

One more time in Truth, Jesus Christ the Saviour of the World for all those who believe, was indwelled with the Holy Spirit of the Living God. A Man born amongst men to show the Way to return to the Everliving God Almighty. God, Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ. Not 3 Gods. One Spirit, One God, One Son. Reconciled together to the Glory of God.

[Tucson Jim]

One more time in Truth, Jesus Christ the Saviour of the World for all those who believe, was indwelled with the Holy Spirit of the Living God. A Man born amongst men to show the Way to return to the Everliving God Almighty. God, Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ.

True.

Not 3 Gods.

No one here is saying there are 3 Gods.

One Spirit, One God, One Son. Reconciled together to the Glory of God.

The Father, Son and Spirit are the One God.

[Angryamerican]

True.



No one here is saying there are 3 Gods.



The Father, Son and Spirit are the One God.

I do agree with you there are a lot of similarities between Jesus and God.

But one is greater then the other and that can't be if they are the same being.

One is all knowing and the other isn't.
Mat 24:36 But of that day and hour no one knows, no, not the angels of Heaven, but only My Father.

Jesus is never called Jehovah God.

Jesus is never called Almighty God.

Jesus never say's he is God .

Always claimed he did his fathers will not his own.

Always in subjection to his father.

Jesus all that he is and knows came from his Father.

All things have been subjected to Jesus from his Father and God.

Jesus calls his Father God.

Jesus was mentioned no where in the OT.

When Jesus says that he and the Father are one there is no mention of the Holy Spirit in that comment.

Why do you not believe that angels are similar to God as well?

Gen 19:1 And there came two angels to Sodom at evening. And Lot sat in the gate of Sodom. And Lot rose up to meet them when he saw them. And he bowed himself with his face toward the ground,

Psa 91:11 For He shall give His angels charge over You, to keep You in all Your ways.

Psa 103:20 Bless Jehovah, O angels of His, who excel in strength, who do His command, listening to the voice of His Word.

Psa 104:4 He makes His angels spirits, His ministers a flaming fire.

Mat 4:11 Then the Devil left him. And behold, angels came and ministered to Him.

Mat 13:39 The enemy who sowed them is the Devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.

Jesus was made better then the angels. but wasn't Jesus just a man ? So he was made and created better then the angels before he was a man.

Heb 1:4 being made so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

Heb 2:7 You have made him a little lower than the angels. You crowned him with glory and honor and set him over the works of Your hands.

Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor, that He by the grace of God should taste death for all.

Another pretty interesting verse.

Heb 2:16 For truly He did not take the nature of angels, but He took hold of the seed of Abraham.

Angels take the form and nature of man?

Heb 13:2 Do not be forgetful of hospitality, for by this some have entertained angels without knowing it.

Were not angels already in subjection to Jesus if he was God ?

1Pe 3:22 who is at the right hand of God, having gone into Heaven, where the angels and authorities and powers are being subjected to Him

2Pe 2:11 Where angels, who are greater in power and might, do not bring a reproaching accusation against them before the Lord.

You see there is just as much evidence to show Jesus was not GOD as a man nor now that he is back in heaven.

[Ron Jon]

Just a little correction AA, Jesus never claimed to be the Father. But that does not mean He never claimed to be God. He just made His claims in terms the people He was speaking to could understand. I wouldn't expect you to understand since He (Jesus) was not addressing you.

[DispensationalJim]

Excellent posts, Ron Jon and T-Jim.

One of the claims made by AA, Warrior, and others is that Jesus never said He was God. But, the point has been made a few times (and seemingly ignored) that Jesus did not even want His disciples to tell people that he was the Christ!

• Matt. 8:4 And Jesus saith unto him, See thou tell no man...
• Matt. 16:20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.
• Mark 7:36 And he charged them that they should tell no man: but the more he charged them, so much the more a great deal they published it;
• Mark 8:30 And he charged them that they should tell no man of him.
• Mark 9:9 ... he charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen from the dead.
• Luke 5:14 And he charged him to tell no man:
• Luke 8:56 ... but he charged them that they should tell no man what was done.
• Luke 9:21 And he straitly charged them, and commanded them to tell no man that thing;

Jesus knew that if the Pharisees knew THE TRUTH ABOUT HIM, they would immediately have Him killed BEFORE HIS TIME...
• John 7:6 Then Jesus said unto them, My time is not yet come: ... 8 Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come.

[Tucson Jim]

I do agree with you there are a lot of similarities between Jesus and God.

But one is greater then the other and that can't be if they are the same being.

I would ask you to stop and think for a moment about what, exactly, you mean by "greater". If you read the link I gave you yesterday about the Economy of the Trinity you would see that the term "greater" applies to the role of the Father in the Trinity, but not to the nature of the Father. Both the Father and Son are "God" by nature. Their roles within the Trinity differ, that's all.

Please take a few minutes, read a few pages from the reference I gave you and I believe you will understand better what I am trying to say.

One is all knowing and the other isn't.
Mat 24:36 But of that day and hour no one knows, no, not the angels of Heaven, but only My Father.

Jesus is both God and man. As God, He is omniscient. During His Incarnation, he put aside His Deity and lived as a man. As man, He did not know the day or hour. But that certainly does not mean He is not God!

Jesus is never called Jehovah God.

Jesus is never called Almighty God.

He created the universe. It was created by Him and for Him. Creation of everything that exists demands omnipotence, whether He is called "Almighty" directly or not.

Jesus never say's he is God .

And Numbers doesn't talk about the crucifixion either! You can't disprove something by saying that it is NOT found in a certain part of the Bible. You have to look where it IS found. The New Testament repeatedly affirms the Deity of Christ.

Besides, in the Incarnation, it wasn't Jesus' mission to prove His Deity. It was to live His humanity and die on the cross for us.

Many Biblical witnesses attest to the fact that He is God.

Always claimed he did his fathers will not his own.

Always in subjection to his father.

Jesus all that he is and knows came from his Father.

All things have been subjected to Jesus from his Father and God.

Economy of the Trinity.

Jesus calls his Father God.

And rightly so, for He is God. The Father also calls Jesus "God" in Hebrews.

Jesus was mentioned no where in the OT.

Which means nothing really. God reveals truth to us in His way and in His timing.

When Jesus says that he and the Father are one there is no mention of the Holy Spirit in that comment.

Which means nothing really. God reveals truth to us in His way and in His timing.

Why do you not believe that angels are similar to God as well?

Gen 19:1 And there came two angels to Sodom at evening. And Lot sat in the gate of Sodom. And Lot rose up to meet them when he saw them. And he bowed himself with his face toward the ground,

Psa 91:11 For He shall give His angels charge over You, to keep You in all Your ways.

Psa 103:20 Bless Jehovah, O angels of His, who excel in strength, who do His command, listening to the voice of His Word.

Psa 104:4 He makes His angels spirits, His ministers a flaming fire.

Mat 4:11 Then the Devil left him. And behold, angels came and ministered to Him.

Mat 13:39 The enemy who sowed them is the Devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.

All I see in the above is that angels perform certain functions. But these functions are infinitely less than the dozens of titles and other similarities between God and Jesus I showed you in the posts yesterday.

They are infinitely less than actually being God, as Jesus is.

It is exactly as I said - the difference between Jesus and angels is infinite.

It is the difference between Creator and created.

Jesus was made better then the angels. but wasn't Jesus just a man ? So he was made and created better then the angels before he was a man.

Heb 1:4 being made so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

Heb 2:7 You have made him a little lower than the angels. You crowned him with glory and honor and set him over the works of Your hands.

Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor, that He by the grace of God should taste death for all.

He was a man, but certainly not just a man, as I think you know by now.

Another pretty interesting verse.

Heb 2:16 For truly He did not take the nature of angels, but He took hold of the seed of Abraham.

Angels take the form and nature of man?

I don't see where you get that interpretation from this passage. It is talking about God becoming incarnate and helping humans, not angels. Look at it with the 2 previous verses:

"Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

15And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

16For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. "

Heb 13:2 Do not be forgetful of hospitality, for by this some have entertained angels without knowing it.

Were not angels already in subjection to Jesus if he was God ?

1Pe 3:22 who is at the right hand of God, having gone into Heaven, where the angels and authorities and powers are being subjected to Him

Yes, angels were subject to Jesus as God, but not as man.

You have to keep the incarnation in mind and I think it will help you in interpreting many verses that trouble you.

2Pe 2:11 Where angels, who are greater in power and might, do not bring a reproaching accusation against them before the Lord.

2 Pet 2 is contrasting unjust people with angels, whom are greater in power than they, so I don't see how this fits your point

You see there is just as much evidence to show Jesus was not GOD as a man nor now that he is back in heaven.

No, there really isn't, as I have shown through point-by-point answers to your questions and comments.

As I said, I believe most of the difficulty you have with the Trinity seems to reside in your failure to either understand, and/or take into account, the Incarnation and the Economy of the Trinity.

If you look at the link, that explains well the Economy of the Trinity.

I will continue to try to address your question the best I can.

[Angryamerican]

Just a little correction AA, Jesus never claimed to be the Father. But that does not mean He never claimed to be God. He just made His claims in terms the people He was speaking to could understand. I wouldn't expect you to understand since He (Jesus) was not addressing you.

Show me where Jesus said he was God Almighty ?

[Angryamerican]

Excellent posts, Ron Jon and T-Jim.

One of the claims made by AA, Warrior, and others is that Jesus never said He was God. But, the point has been made a few times (and seemingly ignored) that Jesus did not even want His disciples to tell people that he was the Christ!

• Matt. 8:4 And Jesus saith unto him, See thou tell no man...
• Matt. 16:20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.
• Mark 7:36 And he charged them that they should tell no man: but the more he charged them, so much the more a great deal they published it;
• Mark 8:30 And he charged them that they should tell no man of him.
• Mark 9:9 ... he charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen from the dead.
• Luke 5:14 And he charged him to tell no man:
• Luke 8:56 ... but he charged them that they should tell no man what was done.
• Luke 9:21 And he straitly charged them, and commanded them to tell no man that thing;

Jesus knew that if the Pharisees knew THE TRUTH ABOUT HIM, they would immediately have Him killed BEFORE HIS TIME...
• John 7:6 Then Jesus said unto them, My time is not yet come: ... 8 Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come.

Sorry but he could have been telling the deciples not tell anyone that he is Christ the messiah and the son of God. This does not show that he was saying he was God.

[Angryamerican]

I would ask you to stop and think for a moment about what, exactly, you mean by "greater". If you read the link I gave you yesterday about the Economy of the Trinity you would see that the term "greater" applies to the role of the Father in the Trinity, but not to the nature of the Father. Both the Father and Son are "God" by nature. Their roles within the Trinity differ, that's all.


Well Jesus is in subjection to his father.

Jesus does not know the day nor hour of the end.


Is God in subjection to anyone?

Wouldn't God know the time of the end ?

[Angryamerican]

[QUOTE=Tucson Jim;18336701]



Jesus is both God and man. As God, He is omniscient. During His Incarnation, he put aside His Deity and lived as a man. As man, He did not know the day or hour. But that certainly does not mean He is not God!


Does Jesus now know the end time if so show me ?

Then Jesus when he was a man was not devine ?

Is Jesus now in subjection to God the Father ?

[Angryamerican]

He created the universe. It was created by Him and for Him. Creation of everything that exists demands omnipotence, whether He is called "Almighty" directly or not.




I do believe Jesus part in creating was limited. and it was God that created all things including Jesus as i have scripture that states that very thing.

[Angryamerican]

And Numbers doesn't talk about the crucifixion either! You can't disprove something by saying that it is NOT found in a certain part of the Bible. You have to look where it IS found. The New Testament repeatedly affirms the Deity of Christ.

Besides, in the Incarnation, it wasn't Jesus' mission to prove His Deity. It was to live His humanity and die on the cross for us.

Many Biblical witnesses attest to the fact that He is God.



.

So we are gonna have a part of that same nature that makes us GOD ?

2Pe 1:4 through which He has given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, so that by these you might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

Than if Jesus wasn't to reveal who and what he was than what was the need of the book revelation since it was his revelation that God gave to him.

The only thing that needs to be revealed, and it will be revealed, is who Jesus was before he became a man.

[Angryamerican]

And rightly so, for He is God. The Father also calls Jesus "God" in Hebrews.



Which means nothing really. God reveals truth to us in His way and in His timing.



Which means nothing really. God reveals truth to us in His way and in His timing.



.

That is a verse i do believe that was agenda driven . No where else do you see such a thing.

But we see in more than one place that Jesus calls his Father his God. The verse shows confusion which God is not a God of confusion but of order.

How can God have a God?

[Angryamerican]

All I see in the above is that angels perform certain functions. But these functions are infinitely less than the dozens of titles and other similarities between God and Jesus I showed you in the posts yesterday.

They are infinitely less than actually being God, as Jesus is.

It is exactly as I said - the difference between Jesus and angels is infinite.

It is the difference between Creator and created.





We agree on something. Except that Jesus was created making him infinitely less than God the father.

[Angryamerican]

He was a man, but certainly not just a man, as I think you know by now.


You say he was 100% man now you are saying he was more than a man ?

[Angryamerican]

Yes, angels were subject to Jesus as God, but not as man.

You have to keep the incarnation in mind and I think it will help you in interpreting many verses that trouble you.


.

You mean Angels were subject to God at all times and not subject to Jesus until he returned to heaven and was given all things from God.

Mat 4:6 And he said to Him, If you are the Son of God, cast yourself down. For it is written, "He shall give His angels charge concerning You, and in their hands they shall bear You up, lest at any time You dash Your foot against a stone."

And now Jesus.

Mat 26:53 Do you think that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He shall presently give Me more than twelve legions of angels?

1Co 15:28 But when all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subject to Him who has subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all things in all.

Heb 2:8 You subjected all things under his feet." For in subjecting all things to Him, He did not leave anything not subjected to Him. But now we do not see all things having been subjected to him.

This is my point right here.

1Pe 3:22 who is at the right hand of God, having gone into Heaven, where the angels and authorities and powers are being subjected to Him.

So if Jesus was not God who was God because he could pray to his father and get all the angels needed ?

[Angryamerican]

As I said, I believe most of the difficulty you have with the Trinity seems to reside in your failure to either understand, and/or take into account, the Incarnation and the Economy of the Trinity.

If you look at the link, that explains well the Economy of the Trinity.

I will continue to try to address your question the best I can.


What does the incarnation have to do with anything ?God is still God Jesus became a man after being a spirit person.

And God has always been a spirit.

Joh 4:24 God is a spirit, and they who worship Him must worship in spirit and in truth.

Job 27:3 As long as my breath is in me, and the spirit of God is in my nostrils,

Psa 143:10 Teach me to do Your will; for You are my God; Your Spirit is good; lead me into the land of uprightness.

[DispensationalJim]

I do believe Jesus part in creating was limited. and it was God that created all things including Jesus as i have scripture that states that very thing.

But, wait, AA...
You said you accepted John 1:3, that Jesus, The Word, created ALL THINGS.

As T-Jim and others have said, if Jesus created ALL THINGS THAT WERE MADE, then He cannot possibly be a "created being."

So, do you have some other explanation for these verses?
• John 1:1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

[DispensationalJim]

Sorry but he could have been telling the deciples not tell anyone that he is Christ the messiah and the son of God. This does not show that he was saying he was God.

Sorry, AA, but you must be missing the point. From those verses, I get the clear understanding that Jesus would NOT WANT ANYONE TO KNOW HE IS GOD BEFORE HIS TIME TO DIE HAD COME. IF THEY KNEW HE WAS GOD, THEY WOULD TRY TO KILL HIM BEFORE HIS TIME.

[Angryamerican]

But, wait, AA...
You said you accepted John 1:3, that Jesus, The Word, created ALL THINGS.

As T-Jim and others have said, if Jesus created ALL THINGS THAT WERE MADE, then He cannot possibly be a "created being."

So, do you have some other explanation for these verses?
• John 1:1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Yes he could have created all things other then himself .

But i do not know if this is another verse to support the trinity agenda or not sure seems like it.

Because if Jesus created all things then how come the Father is greater ?

How come he does not know the day nor hour if he created all things that is some sort of a contradiction.

Is Jesus God at all times ?

[Angryamerican]

Sorry, AA, but you must be missing the point. From those verses, I get the clear understanding that Jesus would NOT WANT ANYONE TO KNOW HE IS GOD BEFORE HIS TIME TO DIE HAD COME. IF THEY KNEW HE WAS GOD, THEY WOULD TRY TO KILL HIM BEFORE HIS TIME.

Did it really matter if he was God he could have stopped what his enemies was doing in a second.

No man has seen God at any time that is another contradiction of the word.

[G-LOVE]

Yes he could have created all things other then himself .

But i do not know if this is another verse to support the trinity agenda or not sure seems like it.

Because if Jesus created all things then how come the Father is greater ?

Jesus created all things (all things that we are aware of) under the direction of the Father.

How come he does not know the day nor hour if he created all things that is some sort of a contradiction.

He created all things, but again, under the direction of His Father. The Father knows the day and hour, but not the Son. That would come from the Father.

Is Jesus God at all times ?

[Tucson Jim]

Well Jesus is in subjection to his father.

Jesus does not know the day nor hour of the end.


Is God in subjection to anyone?

Wouldn't God know the time of the end ?

As I told you, it would profit you greatly to do some studying on the Incarnation and the Economy of the Trinity, what they consist of, what they mean. You have apparently still not bothered to look at the link I gave you.

I can only do so much - if you won't even try to understand, there's not much hope of explaining it to you . . .

[Angryamerican]

As I told you, it would profit you greatly to do some studying on the Incarnation and the Economy of the Trinity, what they consist of, what they mean. You have apparently still not bothered to look at the link I gave you.

I can only do so much - if you won't even try to understand, there's not much hope of explaining it to you . . .

But you see i do understand what you are saying i just don't believe it.

I would have to look the other way to a lot of scripture to believe such a doctrine.

[Angryamerican]

Jesus created all things (all things that we are aware of) under the direction of the Father.



He created all things, but again, under the direction of His Father. The Father knows the day and hour, but not the Son. That would come from the Father.

I agree that Jesus is not God.

[Tucson Jim]

[QUOTE=Tucson Jim;18336701]

Jesus is both God and man. As God, He is omniscient. During His Incarnation, he put aside His Deity and lived as a man. As man, He did not know the day or hour. But that certainly does not mean He is not God!


Does Jesus now know the end time if so show me ?

Heb. 2:9 says Jesus was ". . . made for a little while lower than the angels . . ." In Phil. 2:5-8, it also says that Jesus "emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men . . ." Col. 2:9 says, "For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form." These verses support what I have been trying to tell you: Jesus was both God and man at the same time.

As a man, Jesus laid aside His Divinity and cooperated with the limitations inherent in being a man. That's why verses like Luke 2:52 say "Jesus kept increasing in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men." Therefore, at this point in his ministry he could say He did not know the day nor hour of His return.

This in no way shows He is not God, but rather, it confirms His Human nature.

Then Jesus when he was a man was not devine ?

He still retained the nature of God, but allowed Himself to be subject to the limitations of man, as shown in the verses above.

Is Jesus now in subjection to God the Father ?

It is His role in the trinity.

Have you read anything I have said so far?

Follow the link on the Economy of the Trinity and it will answer many of these questions.

[Tucson Jim]

I do believe Jesus part in creating was limited. and it was God that created all things including Jesus as i have scripture that states that very thing.

No, actually you don't. You have tried that before and it is simply not true.

A "limited" role? You have GOT to be kidding!

"All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made." John 1:3

No "limited role" here!

It just doesn't get any clearer than that.

[Tucson Jim]

So we are gonna have a part of that same nature that makes us GOD ?

"Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is." 1 John 3:2

2Pe 1:4 through which He has given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, so that by these you might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

Than if Jesus wasn't to reveal who and what he was than what was the need of the book revelation since it was his revelation that God gave to him.

I was talking about His ministry on earth, since most of the quotes you and others use refer to His ministry on earth.

But in Revelation, which was given well after His ministry, and throughout the rest of the NT, it is crystal clear he is God.

The only thing that needs to be revealed, and it will be revealed, is who Jesus was before he became a man.

Not really - we already know He is, was, and will be, God.