Should You Believe In The Trinity?

[ralittlefield]

That would explain why, God created all things through Christ.

I think that would create a conflict with the bible passages that say God alone is the Creator, and that angels are created beings.

Isaiah 44
24 “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,


Col 1
16 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.

[ralittlefield]

Read this carefully PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Genesis 1:26
And God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” (KJV)

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




1. Elohim and Adonim, Hebrew words for God, occur in the plural. If this literally meant a plurality of persons, it would be translated “Gods.” But the Jews, being truly monotheistic and thoroughly familiar with the idioms of their own language, have never understood the use of the plural to indicate a plurality of persons within the one God. This use of the plural is for amplification, and is called a “plural of majesty” or a “plural of emphasis,” and is used for intensification (see note on Gen. 1:1). Many Hebrew scholars identify this use of “us” as the use of the plural of majesty or plural of emphasis, and we believe this also.

2. The plural of majesty is clearly attested to in writing from royalty through the ages. Hyndman writes:

The true explanation of this verse is to be found in the practice which has prevailed in all nations with which we are acquainted, of persons speaking of themselves in the plural number. “Given at our palace,” “It is our pleasure,” are common expressions of kings in their proclamations (p. 54).

Morgridge adds:

It is common in all languages with which we are acquainted, and it appears to have always been so, for an individual, especially if he be a person of great dignity and power, in speaking of himself only, to say we, our, us, instead of I, my, me. Thus, the king of France says, “We, Charles the tenth.” The king of Spain says, “We, Ferdinand the seventh.” The Emperor of Russia says “We, Alexander,” or “We, Nicholas” (p. 93).

The plural of majesty can be seen in Ezra 4:18. In Ezra 4:11, the men of the Trans-Euphrates wrote, “To King Artaxerxes, from your servants.” The book of Ezra continues, “The king sent this reply: Greetings. The letter you sent us has been read and translated….” Thus, although the people wrote to the king himself, the king used the word “us.” It is common in such correspondence that the plural is used when someone speaks of his intentions, and the use of the more literal singular is used when the person acts. Morgridge adds more insight when he says:

It is well known that Mohammed was a determined opposer of the doctrine of the Trinity: yet he often represents God as saying we, our, us, when speaking only of Himself. This shows that, in his opinion, the use of such terms was not indicative of a plurality of persons. If no one infers, from their frequent use in the Koran, that Mohammed was a Trinitarian, surely their occurrence in a few places in the Bible ought not to be made a proof of the doctrine of the Trinity (p. 94).

3. Some scholars believe that the reason for the “us” in Genesis 1:26 is that God could have been speaking with the angels when he created man in the beginning. Although that is possible, because there are many Scriptures that clearly attribute the creation of man to God alone, we believe that the plural of emphasis is the preferred explanation.

4. The name of God is not the only word that is pluralized for emphasis (although when the plural does not seem to be good grammar, the translators usually ignore the Hebrew plural and translate it as a singular, so it can be hard to spot in most English versions)

After Cain murdered Abel, God said to Cain, “the voice of your brother’s bloods cries to me from the ground” (Gen. 4:10). The plural emphasizes the horror of the act. In Genesis 19:11, the men of Sodom who wanted to hurt Lot were smitten with “blindness.” The Hebrew is in the plural, “blindnesses,” and indicates that the blindness was total so Lot would be protected. Leviticus tells people not to eat fruit from a tree for three years, and in the fourth year the fruit is “an offering of praise to the Lord” (Lev. 19:24). The Hebrew word for “praise” is plural, emphasizing that there was to be great praise. Psalm 45:15 tells of people who are brought into the presence of the Messiah. It says, “They are led in with joy and gladness.” The Hebrew actually reads “gladnesses,” emphasizing the great gladness of the occasion. In Ezekiel 25, God is speaking of what has happened to Israel and what He will do about it. Concerning the Philistines, He said, “the Philistines acted in vengeance…I will carry out great vengeance on them” (Ezek 25:15 and 17). In the Hebrew text, the second vengeance, the vengeance of God, is in the plural, indicating the complete vengeance that the Lord will inflict. Although many more examples exist in the Hebrew text, these demonstrate that it is not uncommon to use a plural to emphasize something in Scripture.

http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=57



People if you look at scripture from a strictly english language point of view like you do with the words theos ,kurios ,logos and others you will never properly rightly divide Gods Word or see what is so clear and void of contradiction.

The trinity can not be true if you build upon the foundation which is Jesus Christ and what he spoke............period.


It is true that we some time refer to ourselves as "we". I agree with that. But God is not us. Because we do that, does not mean that God does that.


Show me any other passage of of the Bible where God refers to Himself using plural pronouns. Us, We, Our. I do not believe that You can. I do not believe that there is ANY other passage where God does that.

[Warrior4God]

I always find this thread interesting until a blanket statement like this is thrown in.

Jesus Christ is the foundation and his words are foundational.

His words are what the whole foundation of Christianity is built upon and he himself says God is his God just like God is our God.


You may not like the blanket statement but its Jesus himself who said God is his God.


Joh 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

[terri910]

Jesus Christ is the foundation and his words are foundational.

His words are what the whole foundation of Christianity is built upon and he himself says God is his God just like God is our God.


You may not like the blanket statement but its Jesus himself who said God is his God.


Joh 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.
Jesus can make blanket statements. To paraphrase a former Vice presidential candidate, you, sir, are no Jesus Christ.

If you can show me where Jesus uses THESE words:
The trinity can not be true if you build upon the foundation which is Jesus Christ and what he spoke............period.
Then they are your words, your understanding, and your belief.


Period.

[gpd®]

Pop quiz, what does this mean ?

Joh 17:22 And I have given them the glory which You have given Me, that they may be one, even as We are one,

So can we be one ?

Jesus is teaching the church to be unified and not divided just as He and God are unified and not divided.

[ralittlefield]

Jesus can make blanket statements. To paraphrase a former Vice presidential candidate, you, sir, are no Jesus Christ.

If you can show me where Jesus uses THESE words:

Then they are your words, your understanding, and your belief.


Period.

:clap: Amen Terri

[ralittlefield]

Jesus Christ is the foundation and his words are foundational.

His words are what the whole foundation of Christianity is built upon and he himself says God is his God just like God is our God.


You may not like the blanket statement but its Jesus himself who said God is his God.


Joh 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.


Christianity is built on Christ Himself, and what He did.

Who Christ is, and what He did is recorded for us in the bible. What Christ said is part of that. Part of what Christ said is recorded by men. Most of what Christ said is not recorded.

We need all of the Bible to have a correct understanding of who Christ is.

[DRS]

I think that would create a conflict with the bible passages that say God alone is the Creator, and that angels are created beings.

Isaiah 44
24 “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,


Col 1
16 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.

You seems you took Isaiah out of context where Jehovah is speaking of Himself vs. the idols

6*“This is what Jehovah has said, the King of Israel and the Repurchaser of him, Jehovah of armies, ‘I am the first and I am the last, and besides me there is no God. 7*And who is there like me? Let him call out, that he may tell it and present it to me. From when I appointed the people of long ago, both the things coming and the things that will enter in let them tell on their part. 8*Do not be in dread, YOU people, and do not become stupefied. Have I not from that time on caused you individually to hear and told [it] out? And YOU are my witnesses. Does there exist a God besides me? No, there is no Rock. I have recognized none.’”

9*The formers of the carved image are all of them an unreality, and their darlings themselves will be of no benefit; and as their witnesses they see nothing and know nothing, in order that they may be ashamed. 10*Who has formed a god or cast a mere molten image? Of no benefit at all has it been. 11*Look! All his partners themselves will be ashamed, and the craftsmen are from earthling men. They will all of them collect themselves together. They will stand still. They will be in dread. They will be ashamed at the same time

See if you take it that was no one else present at creation but Jehovah then you have a conflict in the bible as we see the angels present

But when you take it in the context then it makes perfect sense

Now as you have been shown so many times all does not mean all the majority of the times

[DRS]

Can God sin?

[DRS]

Use the OT to explain Jesus, this what the apostles had to do and Jesus did also

[Angryamerican]

Because Jesus, as a man, took our sin, and God can not tolerate sin.

I do not think so.

Once.

No.

Yes.

You see this is the perfect example of what God is my rock was saying.

You hold on so tightly, to a man made doctrine, that you can't see the truth.

It's a shame ,your views on the words of God, are nothing more then your imagination.

[Angryamerican]

I think that would create a conflict with the bible passages that say God alone is the Creator, and that angels are created beings.

Isaiah 44
24 “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,


Col 1
16 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.

The us word did that.

[Angryamerican]

It is true that we some time refer to ourselves as "we". I agree with that. But God is not us. Because we do that, does not mean that God does that.


Show me any other passage of of the Bible where God refers to Himself using plural pronouns. Us, We, Our. I do not believe that You can. I do not believe that there is ANY other passage where God does that.

The us word implies ,more then one. And you have read where it says things happened through Christ, deny if you must.

[Angryamerican]

Jesus can make blanket statements. To paraphrase a former Vice presidential candidate, you, sir, are no Jesus Christ.

If you can show me where Jesus uses THESE words:

Then they are your words, your understanding, and your belief.


Period.

No Jesus has made plenty of statements, that set him apart from God, you just do not accept what he said.

[Angryamerican]

Jesus is teaching the church to be unified and not divided just as He and God are unified and not divided.

Oh come on :rolleyes: He showed he was in unity with his Father, and he would like us to be also.

Why did you quote the scripture, trying to convince us it meant Jesus was God ?

[Angryamerican]

Christianity is built on Christ Himself, and what He did.

Who Christ is, and what He did is recorded for us in the bible. What Christ said is part of that. Part of what Christ said is recorded by men. Most of what Christ said is not recorded.

We need all of the Bible to have a correct understanding of who Christ is.

Christ is the son of God have you not heard ?

[DRS]

Oh come on :rolleyes:

Well in a sense the poster is right we are suppose to be united in purpose just Jesus is unted with Jehovah in purpose

[Angryamerican]

Well in a sense the poster is right we are suppose to be united in purpose just Jesus is unted with Jehovah in purpose

Yes i edited it.

But the point the poster was trying to make came from this.

Joh 10:30 I and the Father are one!

The poster was using the verse, to try and show Jesus was God.

[lawandorder]

:clap::clap::clap:



Does this verse fit absolutely perfectly with all of scripture? What was Jesus pointing out that was of importance to HIm? That Thomas BELIEVED in Him. Jesus, the Christ, the Son of God. A few verses down and the scripture. again, refers to Jesus as the Son of God, not God. You must read the entire content of the chapter.

[lawandorder]

plus, "and the word was God"........clearly stated. It does not say the "word" was the Son of God. the Word was God, and God only. His logos, his blueprint, if you will.

[terri910]

No Jesus has made plenty of statements, that set him apart from God, you just do not accept what he said.
Excuse me, Angryamerican, but I take umbrage to that statement. I would ask you to change it or apologize to me.

What I do not accept is your interpretation of Jesus' words.

It is exactly that type of attitude that spoils what is otherwise a very interesting and informative thread.

[Angryamerican]

plus, "and the word was God"........clearly stated. It does not say the "word" was the Son of God. the Word was God, and God only. His logos, his blueprint, if you will.

Not sure what you are trying to say ?

But the words spoken by Jesus,clearly prevent the thought that he was God.

[Angryamerican]

Excuse me, Angryamerican, but I take umbrage to that statement. I would ask you to change it or apologize to me.

What I do not accept is your interpretation of Jesus' words.

It is exactly that type of attitude that spoils what is otherwise a very interesting and informative thread.

I am sorry if i offended you,but to spin Gods word , to fit a preconceived idea thought up by man, is just as offensive to me.

What were we talking about ?

[terri910]

Not sure what you are trying to say ?

But the words spoken by Jesus,clearly prevent the thought that he was God.
You believe they "clearly prevent" that thought. Others, throughout this very long thread, have given their reasons for believing otherwise.

Perhaps what he was "trying to say" was that there is evidence in sacred Scripture to question your interpretation of Jesus' words.

Many people understand "The Word" to be Jesus. If The Word was with God and the Word WAS God....then, some believe this "clearly" indicates no separation.

[terri910]

I am sorry if i offended you,but to spin Gods word , to fit a preconceived idea thought up by man, is just as offensive to me.

And, for you to say that my belief is "spinning" God's word to fit a preconceived idea thought up by man, is offensive to me. You'll notice that even though I may think it, I have not said the same to you about your beliefs.

With threads such as this I learn, and understand why non-trinitarians believe as they do. I do not agree, but I learn and understand. Can you not simply be happy to try and learn and understand the viewpoint of Trinitarians, must you attack their faith, their very motivation? Must you tell them they do not accept their Lord and Savior's words because they sincerely believe they do not mean what YOU believe they mean?
What were we talking about ?
When, exactly? Do you mean before you insulted me?

[Angryamerican]

You believe they "clearly prevent" that thought. Others, throughout this very long thread, have given their reasons for believing otherwise.

Perhaps what he was "trying to say" was that there is evidence in sacred Scripture to question your interpretation of Jesus' words.

Many people understand "The Word" to be Jesus. If The Word was with God and the Word WAS God....then, some believe this "clearly" indicates no separation.

As i have also stated why there is a problem with that particular scripture.It defies other scripture, and none of the other writers, said anything like it.

For example,how can he be God and say this ?

Mat 27:46 And about the ninth hour, Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? That is, My God, My God, why have You forsaken me?

Please give me a rational explanation to this.

[Angryamerican]

And, for you to say that my belief is "spinning" God's word to fit a preconceived idea thought up by man, is offensive to me. You'll notice that even though I may think it, I have not said the same to you about your beliefs.

With threads such as this I learn, and understand why non-trinitarians believe as they do. I do not agree, but I learn and understand. Can you not simply be happy to try and learn and understand the viewpoint of Trinitarians, must you attack their faith, their very motivation? Must you tell them they do not accept their Lord and Savior's words because they sincerely believe they do not mean what YOU believe they mean?

When, exactly? Do you mean before you insulted me?

Yes, and i am truly sorry.

It is better if we can do this and learn and not insult each other.

[lawandorder]

Whom do you think that God was speaking to when He said let US make man in OUR inage?

First, I would like to know who heard God speak that from heaven. And, did He? Read Genesis 1:27......... He doesn't use the same language. He states He will make man in HIS image, not ours.

My friend, please understand that I study the Greek and Hebrew. Have you given that a try? I mean, seriously. The use of the "we" could also be that God was using the royal "we", which was common at that time.

And, something else to consider: "God" and "lord" are titles, not names. The scriptures fail to use the proper name of Almight God. God told Moses His only name.........

YHWH warned to not even speak the name of other gods. And yet, the Bible, itself, uses the word "amen". It is the last word printed in the Bible. Do you know where that word originated and what it means? And christians end their prayers with this word.

[lawandorder]

I may have posted to wrong person,....I think I was supporting what that person said......sorry if it wasn't you!!

[Angryamerican]

There was two things that happened, while Jesus was on the cross,to show that he was not God.

He said he would speak to God in our behalf, He did that while on the cross.

He said forgive them Father, for they know not what they do.

He also asked his Father why has thou forsaken me. Notice what he called his Father.

How can anyone witnessing ,what happened on the cross, and then come away thinking he was God ?

[lawandorder]

what don't I understand?

[Angryamerican]

what don't I understand?

Who are you talking to ?

[ralittlefield]

You seems you took Isaiah out of context where Jehovah is speaking of Himself vs. the idols

6*“This is what Jehovah has said, the King of Israel and the Repurchaser of him, Jehovah of armies, ‘I am the first and I am the last, and besides me there is no God. 7*And who is there like me? Let him call out, that he may tell it and present it to me. From when I appointed the people of long ago, both the things coming and the things that will enter in let them tell on their part. 8*Do not be in dread, YOU people, and do not become stupefied. Have I not from that time on caused you individually to hear and told [it] out? And YOU are my witnesses. Does there exist a God besides me? No, there is no Rock. I have recognized none.’”

9*The formers of the carved image are all of them an unreality, and their darlings themselves will be of no benefit; and as their witnesses they see nothing and know nothing, in order that they may be ashamed. 10*Who has formed a god or cast a mere molten image? Of no benefit at all has it been. 11*Look! All his partners themselves will be ashamed, and the craftsmen are from earthling men. They will all of them collect themselves together. They will stand still. They will be in dread. They will be ashamed at the same time

See if you take it that was no one else present at creation but Jehovah then you have a conflict in the bible as we see the angels present

But when you take it in the context then it makes perfect sense

Now as you have been shown so many times all does not mean all the majority of the times


I did not take the passage out of context.

In verse 21 the prophet addresses Israel and instructs them to remember specific things. Among them are the facts that Israel was formed by God, and is God's servant. In verse 24 (which I quoted in my previous post) God reminds Israel that He BY HIMSELF stretched out the heavens, and He ALONE spread out the earth. Whether or not the angels were present makes no difference. Even if they were present, this passage tells us that they did not participate in the creation.

[DRS]

plus, "and the word was God"........clearly stated. It does not say the "word" was the Son of God. the Word was God, and God only. His logos, his blueprint, if you will.

It does not say the word was the God in the oldest greek manuscripts it says the word was toward the God and the word was God

By using the definite article it diffreniates between the two instances of God

[DRS]

I did not take the passage out of context.

In verse 21 the prophet addresses Israel and instructs them to remember specific things. Among them are the facts that Israel was formed by God, and is God's servant. In verse 24 (which I quoted in my previous post) God reminds Israel that He BY HIMSELF stretched out the heavens, and He ALONE spread out the earth. Whether or not the angels were present makes no difference. Even if they were present, this passage tells us that they did not participate in the creation.

By Himself in the sense there was not the gods they were worshipping present what it shows is those gods did not have any hand in their creation

why not quote the entire thing for all to see

[ralittlefield]

It does not say the word was the God in the oldest greek manuscripts it says the word was toward the God and the word was God

By using the definite article it diffreniates between the two instances of God

What point are you making by emphasising the word toward rather than with? What difference does that make?

[ralittlefield]

By Himself in the sense there was not the gods they were worshipping present what it shows is those gods did not have any hand in their creation

why not quote the entire thing for all to see

The passage says that God acted alone in the creation. Not only does that exclude false gods, it means that he acted alone.

[Angryamerican]

The passage says that God acted alone in the creation. Not only does that exclude false gods, it means that he acted alone.

Could it mean that creation came about because God alone.It don't say no else participated in the creation.

Gen 1:26 And God said, Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the heavens, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the creepers creeping on the earth.


Gen 11:7 Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, so that they cannot understand one another's speech.

[Angryamerican]

The passage says that God acted alone in the creation. Not only does that exclude false gods, it means that he acted alone.

I don't see the word alone.

Isa 42:5 So says Jehovah God, He who created the heavens and stretched them out, spreading out the earth and its offspring; He who gives breath to the people on it and spirit to those who walk in it.

[DRS]

The passage says that God acted alone in the creation. Not only does that exclude false gods, it means that he acted alone.

God adresses that one subject we know he was not alone at creation

[ralittlefield]

Could it mean that creation came about because God alone.It don't say no else participated in the creation.

Gen 1:26 And God said, Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the heavens, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the creepers creeping on the earth.


Gen 11:7 Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, so that they cannot understand one another's speech.

Very Good Angryamerican. :clap:

Keep reading and you will soon be in the pro-Trinity camp!

I agree with you. All of the Trinity participated in the creation.

[DRS]

What point are you making by emphasising the word toward rather than with? What difference does that make?

That and the instance of the or both in the oldest greek manuscripts

[Angryamerican]

The passage says that God acted alone in the creation. Not only does that exclude false gods, it means that he acted alone.

You must look at punctuation.

Isa 37:16 O Jehovah of Hosts, God of Israel, who dwells between the cherubs, You are He, God, You alone to all the kingdoms of the earth. You have made the heavens and the earth.

[ralittlefield]

God adresses that one subject we know he was not alone at creation

Right! Father, Word, and Holy Spirit were all there!

[Angryamerican]

Very Good Angryamerican. :clap:

Keep reading and you will soon be in the pro-Trinity camp!

I agree with you. All of the Trinity participated in the creation.

Sorry to disappoint you.that will not happen until God tells me the trinity is not just a man made doctrine.

[DRS]

Very Good Angryamerican. :clap:

Keep reading and you will soon be in the pro-Trinity camp!

I agree with you. All of the Trinity participated in the creation.

God and Jesus and the Holy spirit were there in creation

The Holy Spirit-2*Now the earth proved to be formless and waste and there was darkness upon the surface of [the] watery deep; and God’s active force was moving to and fro over the surface of the waters

Jesus-(Proverbs 8:22-31) “Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago. 23*From time indefinite I was installed, from the start, from times earlier than the earth. 24*When there were no watery deeps I was brought forth as with labor pains, when there were no springs heavily charged with water. 25*Before the mountains themselves had been settled down, ahead of the hills, I was brought forth as with labor pains, 26*when as yet he had not made the earth and the open spaces and the first part of the dust masses of the productive land. 27*When he prepared the heavens I was there; when he decreed a circle upon the face of the watery deep, 28*when he made firm the cloud masses above, when he caused the fountains of the watery deep to be strong, 29*when he set for the sea his decree that the waters themselves should not pass beyond his order, when he decreed the foundations of the earth, 30*then I came to be beside him as a master worker, and I came to be the one he was specially fond of day by day, I being glad before him all the time, 31*being glad at the productive land of his earth, and the things I was fond of were with the sons of men.

Of course God using His Holy Spirit gave Jesus the power to create

[ralittlefield]

You must look at punctuation.

Isa 37:16 O Jehovah of Hosts, God of Israel, who dwells between the cherubs, You are He, God, You alone to all the kingdoms of the earth. You have made the heavens and the earth.

Great verse! I, as a believer in the Trinity, have no problem with that verse.

[ralittlefield]

Sorry to disappoint you.that will not happen until God tells me the trinity is not just a man made doctrine.

I believe He is trying to do just that.

[Angryamerican]

Right! Father, Word, and Holy Spirit were all there!

How about the angels ?

[ralittlefield]

God and Jesus and the Holy spirit were there in creation

The Holy Spirit-2*Now the earth proved to be formless and waste and there was darkness upon the surface of [the] watery deep; and God’s active force was moving to and fro over the surface of the waters

Jesus-(Proverbs 8:22-31) “Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago. 23*From time indefinite I was installed, from the start, from times earlier than the earth. 24*When there were no watery deeps I was brought forth as with labor pains, when there were no springs heavily charged with water. 25*Before the mountains themselves had been settled down, ahead of the hills, I was brought forth as with labor pains, 26*when as yet he had not made the earth and the open spaces and the first part of the dust masses of the productive land. 27*When he prepared the heavens I was there; when he decreed a circle upon the face of the watery deep, 28*when he made firm the cloud masses above, when he caused the fountains of the watery deep to be strong, 29*when he set for the sea his decree that the waters themselves should not pass beyond his order, when he decreed the foundations of the earth, 30*then I came to be beside him as a master worker, and I came to be the one he was specially fond of day by day, I being glad before him all the time, 31*being glad at the productive land of his earth, and the things I was fond of were with the sons of men.

Of course God using His Holy Spirit gave Jesus the power to create


You are getting close. I have not given up on you!

[Angryamerican]

Great verse! I, as a believer in the Trinity, have no problem with that verse.

But it don't say what you said it said.

[DRS]

Right! Father, Word, and Holy Spirit were all there!

The Holy Spirit is God's spirit so it is where ever He wants it and there was angels too

38 And Jehovah proceeded to answer Job out of the windstorm and say:

*2*“Who is this that is obscuring counsel
By words without knowledge?

*3*Gird up your loins, please, like an able-bodied man,
And let me question you, and you inform me.

*4*Where did you happen to be when I founded the earth?
Tell [me], if you do know understanding.

*5*Who set its measurements, in case you know,
Or who stretched out upon it the measuring line?

*6*Into what have its socket pedestals been sunk down,
Or who laid its cornerstone,
*7*When the morning stars joyfully cried out together,
And all the sons of God began shouting in applause?

Who know who is a morning star an angel

16*“‘I, Jesus, sent my angel to bear witness to YOU people of these things for the congregations. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright morning star

[ralittlefield]

How about the angels ?

They are part of God's creation.

[DRS]

You are getting close. I have not given up on you!

Proverbs again shows Jesus as the beginning of creation

[Angryamerican]

I believe He is trying to do just that.

Or maybe he is trying to tell you.

Deu 6:4 Hear, O, Israel. Jehovah our God is one Jehovah.

[Angryamerican]

They are part of God's creation.

They applauded at the creation.

[ralittlefield]

The Holy Spirit is God's spirit so it is where ever He wants it and there was angels too

38 And Jehovah proceeded to answer Job out of the windstorm and say:

*2*“Who is this that is obscuring counsel
By words without knowledge?

*3*Gird up your loins, please, like an able-bodied man,
And let me question you, and you inform me.

*4*Where did you happen to be when I founded the earth?
Tell [me], if you do know understanding.

*5*Who set its measurements, in case you know,
Or who stretched out upon it the measuring line?

*6*Into what have its socket pedestals been sunk down,
Or who laid its cornerstone,
*7*When the morning stars joyfully cried out together,
And all the sons of God began shouting in applause?

Who know who is a morning star an angel

16*“‘I, Jesus, sent my angel to bear witness to YOU people of these things for the congregations. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright morning star


So?

Are you saying that angels are able to create out of nothing, just like God?

[ralittlefield]

They applauded at the creation.

But they did not create!

[Angryamerican]

So?

Are you saying that angels are able to create out of nothing, just like God?

No anything they do is at the direction of God.

Kinda like Christ.:D

[ralittlefield]

Or maybe he is trying to tell you.

Deu 6:4 Hear, O, Israel. Jehovah our God is one Jehovah.

Amen! I already got that one!

[Angryamerican]

But they did not create!

And you know this how ?

[ralittlefield]

No anything they do is at the direction of God.

Kinda like Christ.:D

Nope. According to Col 1, Christ created the angels.

[ralittlefield]

And you know this how ?

Because God said that He alone did.

[Angryamerican]

Amen! I already got that one!

So you don't believe in three different persons of God ?

[DRS]

So?

Are you saying that angels are able to create out of nothing, just like God?

If one is given the power to create by God they can do anything

Have you not read of men doing extraordinary things while having the spirit?

[Angryamerican]

Nope. According to Col 1, Christ created the angels.

At the direction of who ?

[ralittlefield]

Proverbs again shows Jesus as the beginning of creation

Yes it does. All creation began with Him!

[DRS]

Because God said that He alone did.

I thought He created through Jesus?

[Angryamerican]

Because God said that He alone did.

I just showed you he did not say he did it alone.

[DRS]

Yes it does. All creation began with Him!

Proverbs show he was produced as the beginning of Jehovah's ways

[DRS]

Amen! I already got that one!

how many persons are Jehovah?

[ralittlefield]

At the direction of who ?


In cooperation with the Father and Holy Spirit.

[ralittlefield]

I just showed you he did not say he did it alone.


I think you are wrong. Sorry!

[Angryamerican]

Yes it does. All creation began with Him!

What does this mean ?

Joh 1:3 All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being.

Joh 1:7 This one came as a witness, to bear witness concerning the Light, so that all might believe through him.

Joh 1:10 He was in the world, and the world came into being through Him, and the world did not know Him.

Joh 3:17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but so that the world might be saved through Him.

Here is the kicker.


Act 2:22 Men, Israelites, hear these words. Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by powerful works, and wonders and miracles, which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know,

[Angryamerican]

I think you are wrong. Sorry!

God created all things through Christ.

[ralittlefield]

What does this mean ?

Joh 1:3 All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being.

Joh 1:7 This one came as a witness, to bear witness concerning the Light, so that all might believe through him.

Joh 1:10 He was in the world, and the world came into being through Him, and the world did not know Him.

Joh 3:17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but so that the world might be saved through Him.

Here is the kicker.


Act 2:22 Men, Israelites, hear these words. Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by powerful works, and wonders and miracles, which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know,


Shows the cooperation of the Trinity

[DRS]

Shows the cooperation of the Trinity

What trinity the God of the Jews was not triune

the idea of a triune Christian God did not come until hundreds of years after the death of Jesus

[Angryamerican]

Shows the cooperation of the Trinity

It shows that God did not create alone.

[Angryamerican]

Shows the cooperation of the Trinity

Run but you can't hide. :D

[Angryamerican]

There was two things that happened, while Jesus was on the cross,to show that he was not God.

He said he would speak to God in our behalf, He did that while on the cross.

He said forgive them Father, for they know not what they do.

He also asked his Father why has thou forsaken me. Notice what he called his Father.

How can anyone witnessing ,what happened on the cross, and then come away thinking he was God ?

Bump For our trinitarian friends

[ralittlefield]

There was two things that happened, while Jesus was on the cross,to show that he was not God.

He said he would speak to God in our behalf, He did that while on the cross.

He said forgive them Father, for they know not what they do.

He also asked his Father why has thou forsaken me. Notice what he called his Father.

How can anyone witnessing ,what happened on the cross, and then come away thinking he was God ?

The fact that you ask this question make me wonder if you really understand the Trinity.

Why would you think any of this is a problem? How does this contadict the doctrine of the Trinity?

[ralittlefield]

It's self explanatory :rolleyes:

Humor me.

[Angryamerican]

The fact that you ask this question make me wonder if you really understand the Trinity.

Why would you think any of this is a problem? How does this contadict the doctrine of the Trinity?

Then explain, how the ones that witness this ,come away with the feeling Christ was God ?

Does God have a God ?

Does God Talk to himself ?

Would God Have to ask someone else to forgive them ?

So how does this show the trinity at work ?

[Angryamerican]

Humor me.

Sorry i deleted that post.

[Angryamerican]

Humor me.

One more thing why would Jesus think he was forsaken ?

[ralittlefield]

Then explain, how the ones that witness this ,come away with the feeling Christ was God ?

Does God have a God ?

Does God Talk to himself ?

Would God Have to ask someone else to forgive them ?

So how does this show the trinity at work ?

According to Phil 2 Jesus, who was God, did not hold on to equality with God, but humbled Himself and took the form of a servant and the likeness of a man. He further humbled Himself and allowed Himself to be put to death.

The Father is His God, He and the Father talk to one another.

He had a right to equality with God, but did not grasp it, rather, He emptied Himself of it and died for us. That is why Paul used Him as our example of humility.

Since He emptied Himself of equality with God, He made statement about the Father being greater than Him, asked the father to forgive them etc.

That is "the trinity at work".

[ralittlefield]

One more thing why would Jesus think he was forsaken ?

He was forsaken. God had to forsake Him when He became sin for our benefit.

2 Cor 5
21 God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

[Angryamerican]

According to Phil 2 Jesus, who was God, did not hold on to equality with God, but humbled Himself and took the form of a servant and the likeness of a man. He further humbled Himself and allowed Himself to be put to death.

The Father is His God, He and the Father talk to one another.

He had a right to equality with God, but did not grasp it, rather, He emptied Himself of it and died for us. That is why Paul used Him as our example of humility.

Since He emptied Himself of equality with God, He made statement about the Father being greater than Him, asked the father to forgive them etc.

That is "the trinity at work".

You and i are talking are we the same person?

You are saying nothing that is logical.

Do you think God would do something agains't this.

Deu 4:6 And you shall keep and do them, for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.

Pro 1:7 The fear of Jehovah is the beginning of knowledge; but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

[Angryamerican]

He was forsaken. God had to forsake Him when He became sin for our benefit.

2 Cor 5
21 God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

Where does it say that God had to forsake him ?

[Koushi Shinigami]

I thought this would be at seventeen thousand by now.

[terri910]

I thought this would be at seventeen thousand by now.
Soon....very soon.

[ralittlefield]

You and i are talking are we the same person?

No, we are not the same person. Honestly, do you think that is a strong argument against the Trinity? It seems to me, that when you make an argument like that, what you are saying is that you do not believe God is able to exist in a form different than humans. It seems to be something you have difficulty visualizing, so you refuse to accept it.


You are saying nothing that is logical.

Some of what I posted is directly from Philippians 2. If that is not logical, well....

Do you think God would do something agains't this.

Deu 4:6 And you shall keep and do them, for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.

Pro 1:7 The fear of Jehovah is the beginning of knowledge; but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

Not entirely sure what you are asking here, but if you are asking if God would do something against His law, I would answer no.

[ralittlefield]

What part of creation would you exclude from this statement?

John 1
3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

Would you limit Jesus creation to the "world"?

Then you have a problem with this verse:

Col 1
16 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.


Bump for DRS

I really would like to know what created things you believe are not included in the verses above. These verses indicate to me that Jesus created everything that was created. Do you see them differently?

[Angryamerican]

No, we are not the same person. Honestly, do you think that is a strong argument against the Trinity? It seems to me, that when you make an argument like that, what you are saying is that you do not believe God is able to exist in a form different than humans. It seems to be something you have difficulty visualizing, so you refuse to accept it.



Some of what I posted is directly from Philippians 2. If that is not logical, well....



Not entirely sure what you are asking here, but if you are asking if God would do something against His law, I would answer no.

Do you think Gods word contains wisdom ?

Do you think God gives us wisdom ?

With that wisdom are we able to reason out things to make a wise decision in belief?

How come Jesus words can be so clear, but yet they are taken to mean something else ?

Why would God choose a way to save man that would confuse many ?

1Co 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

[Angryamerican]

Bump for DRS

I really would like to know what created things you believe are not included in the verses above. These verses indicate to me that Jesus created everything that was created. Do you see them differently?

I'm sure Drs meant, That Christ did not create himself, that God created him.

Rev 3:14 And to the angel of the church of the Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Head of the creation of God, says these things:

Who is the faithful and true witness ?

The faithful and true witness was the first thing created by God.

Now it don't get much clearer then this, that Jesus was the first being created.

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation;

There is that ALL CREATION again.

[DRS]

Bump for DRS

I really would like to know what created things you believe are not included in the verses above. These verses indicate to me that Jesus created everything that was created. Do you see them differently?

Verse ten gives us the setting

(John 1:10) He was in the world, and the world came into existence through him, but the world did not know him

If he created all things invisible then he created God since it says all things

[DRS]

According to Phil 2 Jesus, who was God, did not hold on to equality with God, but humbled Himself and took the form of a servant and the likeness of a man. He further humbled Himself and allowed Himself to be put to death.

The Father is His God, He and the Father talk to one another.

He had a right to equality with God, but did not grasp it, rather, He emptied Himself of it and died for us. That is why Paul used Him as our example of humility.

Since He emptied Himself of equality with God, He made statement about the Father being greater than Him, asked the father to forgive them etc.

That is "the trinity at work".


Existing in God's form now since the angels are called godlike in the Ot this presents no problem

Now the one thing you or anyone else can never do is defend the mistranslation of the greek word here which is used to mean take something that does not belong to you

[ralittlefield]

Verse ten gives us the setting

(John 1:10) He was in the world, and the world came into existence through him, but the world did not know him

If he created all things invisible then he created God since it says all things


3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.


It is qualified as all things that were created. That obviously excludes God. So I ask again, what things that were created can be excluded from these verses?

[ralittlefield]

Existing in God's form now since the angels are called godlike in the Ot this presents no problem

Now the one thing you or anyone else can never do is defend the mistranslation of the greek word here which is used to mean take something that does not belong to you


It is not a matter of translation as much as it is interpretation.


You do realize that the context of this passage is humility, right?

Do you really see not stealing as a sign of humility?

[DRS]

3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.


It is qualified as all things that were created. That obviously excludes God. So I ask again, what things that were created can be excluded from these verses?

You said all things and ignore the rest of the scriptures that call him the beginning of creation or Proverbs where it describes his creation

Seems to me that if his creation is described then it all things after him

Unless of course you need a double standard in an effort to try and prove something

[DRS]

It is not a matter of translation as much as it is interpretation.


You do realize that the context of this passage is humility, right?

Do you really see not stealing as a sign of humility?

It is transaltion because the translation of the word gives us the setting

It is a sign of humility to think more of yourself then you ought to and rather take a lower position

[DRS]

This example by Jesus was shown to us again by Moses

A prince in the household of Pharoah did not hold onto this but rather suffered as a slave

[Angryamerican]

I'm sure Drs meant, That Christ did not create himself, that God created him.

Rev 3:14 And to the angel of the church of the Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Head of the creation of God, says these things:

Who is the faithful and true witness ?

The faithful and true witness was the first thing created by God.

Now it don't get much clearer then this, that Jesus was the first being created.

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation;

There is that ALL CREATION again.

Bump for rattlefield.

[ralittlefield]

It is transaltion because the translation of the word gives us the setting

It is a sign of humility to think more of yourself then you ought to and rather take a lower position

It is NOT a sign of humility to think more of yourself than you ought to! Just the opposite. That is a sign of pride.

That is the point of this passage. Jesus possessed equality with God, but gave it up. He rightly could think of Himself equal with God.

[ralittlefield]

This example by Jesus was shown to us again by Moses

A prince in the household of Pharoah did not hold onto this but rather suffered as a slave

Yes, Moses was given that position, it was not something that he tried to steal. It was something that he had a right to, but gave up. Likewise Jesus had a right to equality with God.

[ralittlefield]

Bump for rattlefield.


Do you have a reference for your statement that the faithful and true witness was the first thing created by God?

[ralittlefield]

You said all things and ignore the rest of the scriptures that call him the beginning of creation or Proverbs where it describes his creation

Seems to me that if his creation is described then it all things after him

Unless of course you need a double standard in an effort to try and prove something


In light of this passage the "beginning of creation" can be understood to mean that Jesus is the source of creation, not part of it. John clearly says that Jesus created everything that was created. Therefore John specifically excludes Jesus as a created being.

[Angryamerican]

In light of this passage the "beginning of creation" can be understood to mean that Jesus is the source of creation, not part of it. John clearly says that Jesus created everything that was created. Therefore John specifically excludes Jesus as a created being.

I'm sure Drs meant, That Christ did not create himself, that God created him.

Rev 3:14 And to the angel of the church of the Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Head of the creation of God, says these things:

Who is the faithful and true witness ?

The faithful and true witness was the first thing created by God.

Now it don't get much clearer then this, that Jesus was the first being created.

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation;

There is that ALL CREATION again.

[ralittlefield]

I'm sure Drs meant, That Christ did not create himself, that God created him.

Rev 3:14 And to the angel of the church of the Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Head of the creation of God, says these things:

Who is the faithful and true witness ?

The faithful and true witness was the first thing created by God.

Now it don't get much clearer then this, that Jesus was the first being created.

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation;

There is that ALL CREATION again.

See post # 16857

[DRS]

In light of this passage the "beginning of creation" can be understood to mean that Jesus is the source of creation, not part of it. John clearly says that Jesus created everything that was created. Therefore John specifically excludes Jesus as a created being.

No then he would be the creator

The same as he is called the firstborn from the dead as he is the first raised from the dead to heavenly life

The bible descibes his creation and then uses other terms for him to show he is not the Almighty like son which comes from a father, begotten which means fathered or sired, morning star which is used for angels

And the whole statement is the beginning of the creation by God,

Meaning he was created by God

[Angryamerican]

See post # 16857

Can you show how Jesus was excluded from creation,since it said he was the image of the invisible God,firstborn of all creation?

[ralittlefield]

No then he would be the creator

The same as he is called the firstborn from the dead as he is the first raised from the dead to heavenly life

The bible descibes his creation and then uses other terms for him to show he is not the Almighty like son which comes from a father, begotten which means fathered or sired, morning star which is used for angels

And the whole statement is the beginning of the creation by God,

Meaning he was created by God

Emphasis mine.

Exactly! He is the creator!

[ralittlefield]

Can you show how Jesus was excluded from creation,since it said he was the image of the invisible God,firstborn of all creation?

So you have no reference?

Jesus is excluded from creation because John says that Jesus created EVERYTHING THAT WAS CREATED. Jesus obviously did not create Himself, so He is not part of creation. He is the source of creation.

[Angryamerican]

So you have no reference?

Jesus is excluded from creation because John says that Jesus created EVERYTHING THAT WAS CREATED. Jesus obviously did not create Himself, so He is not part of creation. He is the source of creation.

This verse suggest he was created.

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of all creation.

[ralittlefield]

This verse suggest he was created.

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of all creation.

To me, that verse indicates that He has the attributes of God, and is the source of creation.

[Angryamerican]

So you have no reference?

Jesus is excluded from creation because John says that Jesus created EVERYTHING THAT WAS CREATED. Jesus obviously did not create Himself, so He is not part of creation. He is the source of creation.

All things that came into existence after Christ,was created by God through Christ.

But the verse i posted, suggest that Jesus was the first born of all creation, in other words he was the very first thing that came into existence,so he was created by God, because God has no beginning.

[Angryamerican]

To me, that verse indicates that He has the attributes of God, and is the source of creation.

Yes ,Jesus has the attributes of God, but that does not mean he is God.

But how do you explain him being the firstborn of all creation , If you think he had no beginning ?

[ralittlefield]

All things that came into existence after Christ,was created by God through Christ.

But the verse i posted, suggest that Jesus was the first born of all creation, in other words he was the very first thing that came into existence,so he was created by God, because God has no beginning.


Where does it say "after Christ"? The verse in John says everything that was created. The only thing that excludes is things that were not created.

[ralittlefield]

Yes ,Jesus has the attributes of God, but that does not mean he is God.

But how do you explain him being the firstborn of all creation , If you think he had no beginning ?

The "Firstborn of Creation" is a title given to Him to indicate that He is the source of creation.

[Angryamerican]

To me, that verse indicates that He has the attributes of God, and is the source of creation.

He is the first born from all creation. Means he was the first thing created.

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of all creation.

He is the first born from the dead , meaning he was resurrected from the dead,also meaning he existed before.

Col 1:18 And He is the Head of the body, the church, who is the Beginning, the First-born from the dead, that He may be pre-eminent in all things.

[Angryamerican]

The "Firstborn of Creation" is a title given to Him to indicate that He is the source of creation.

Wow that makes no sense at all, First born is self explanatory.

Of creation suggest he was created, and that is not a title.

[Angryamerican]

Where does it say "after Christ"? The verse in John says everything that was created. The only thing that excludes is things that were not created.

Trough simple reasoning.

[Angryamerican]

The "Firstborn of Creation" is a title given to Him to indicate that He is the source of creation.

Does God have a beginning ?

Does Jesus have a beginning ?

If the answer is no, then why would they have that title ?

[ralittlefield]

Trough simple reasoning.

What does "all that was created mean"? Does that allow for the exclusion of any created thing?

[Angryamerican]

What does "all that was created mean"? Does that allow for the exclusion of any created thing?

Jesus said he created all things, it stands to reason, that the writer knew that Jesus did not create himself.

So who created him ?

[Angryamerican]

What does "all that was created mean"? Does that allow for the exclusion of any created thing?

Where do you get all that was created from verse please ?

[Angryamerican]

What does "all that was created mean"? Does that allow for the exclusion of any created thing?

What does this mean ?

Col 1:23 if indeed you continue in the faith grounded and settled, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which you have heard and which was proclaimed in all the creation under Heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister,

[ralittlefield]

Where do you get all that was created from verse please ?


John 1:3

3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

[Angryamerican]

John 1:3

3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

It is a simple lesson in grammar, the verse does not cover his beginning, it covers the beginning of everything other then him.

This verse covers his beginning.

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of all creation.

[ralittlefield]

It is a simple lesson in grammar, the verse does not cover his beginning, it covers the beginning of everything other then him.

This verse covers his beginning.

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of all creation.


I think that perhaps the New World Translation has put it pretty well


DRS should appreciate this!

John 1:3 NWT
All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.


Not even one thing came into existence apart from Jesus.

Only God never came into existence. He always existed. Everything but God came into existence at one point or another in time. According to the NWT everything, without exception, that came into existence did so through Jesus.

This should help DRS with his question about what "all" means with respect to what Jesus created. Here he has it from a source that he trusts.

[DRS]

I think that perhaps the New World Translation has put it pretty well


DRS should appreciate this!

John 1:3 NWT
All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.


Not even one thing came into existence apart from Jesus.

Only God never came into existence. He always existed. Everything but God came into existence at one point or another in time. According to the NWT everything, without exception, that came into existence did so through Jesus.

This should help DRS with his question about what "all" means with respect to what Jesus created. Here he has it from a source that he trusts.

Why not quote the whole thing down to verse 10?

[DRS]

John 1:3

3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

The bible also says God submits all things to Jesus but we know God is not subject to Jesus

Yet Jesus is subject to God, how can Jesus be the Almighty if he is subjected to Him

The lord of Jesus is Jehovah the lord of man is Jesus the lord of woman is man

[ralittlefield]

Why not quote the whole thing down to verse 10?


1 In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. 2 This one was in [the] beginning with God. 3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.

What has come into existence 4 by means of him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light is shining in the darkness, but the darkness has not overpowered it.

6 There arose a man that was sent forth as a representative of God: his name was John. 7 This [man] came for a witness, in order to bear witness about the light, that people of all sorts might believe through him. 8 He was not that light, but he was meant to bear witness about that light.

9 The true light that gives light to every sort of man was about to come into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world came into existence through him, but the world did not know him.

Emphasis mine.

Why not?

Verse 10 says that the world was included in His creation. That does not change verse 3.

[ralittlefield]

The bible also says God submits all things to Jesus but we know God is not subject to Jesus

Yet Jesus is subject to God, how can Jesus be the Almighty if he is subjected to Him

The lord of Jesus is Jehovah the lord of man is Jesus the lord of woman is man

When the NWT says "and apart from him not even one thing came into existence" does it not mean what it says?

Doesn't "not even one thing" mean the same as nothing, not anything, nadda, zilch, one less than one thing?

[DRS]

When the NWT says "and apart from him not even one thing came into existence" does it not mean what it says?

Doesn't "not even one thing" mean the same as nothing, not anything, nadda, zilch, one less than one thing?

See when you put all f verse ten in there you see what is being spoken and it puts verse 3 into context

[Angryamerican]

When the NWT says "and apart from him not even one thing came into existence" does it not mean what it says?

Doesn't "not even one thing" mean the same as nothing, not anything, nadda, zilch, one less than one thing?

It just said what i have been saying, APART FROM HIM. it was talking about all other things except him.

[DRS]

It just said what i have been saying, APART FROM HIM. it was talking about all other things except him.
You know what end of the day I believe Jesus himself could come here and post and he would be told he is wrong and most likely be told I do not care what you say this what the KJV said you said

[Angryamerican]

You know what end of the day I believe Jesus himself could come here and post and he would be told he is wrong and most likely be told I do not care what you say this what the KJV said you said

I am beginning to believe the same thing Drs. They can't even admit that they could be wrong , even though Jesus words is the biggest problem for their belief.

I will not assume Jesus is God, until he says so, without a doubt.

[ralittlefield]

It just said what i have been saying, APART FROM HIM. it was talking about all other things except him.

Apart from Him does not mean except Him, it means He is the one that did the creating.

Another way of saying it is with His doing it, nothing was done.

[ralittlefield]

You know what end of the day I believe Jesus himself could come here and post and he would be told he is wrong and most likely be told I do not care what you say this what the KJV said you said

Protest as you wish. The verse says what the verse says!

[ralittlefield]

I am beginning to believe the same thing Drs. They can't even admit that they could be wrong , even though Jesus words is the biggest problem for their belief.

I will not assume Jesus is God, until he says so, without a doubt.


I am not sure you would believe even then. I believe that John 1:3 is from God's inspired word. I believe it speaks plainly and simply. Yet, you do not believe the plain, simple language in it.

[ralittlefield]

See when you put all f verse ten in there you see what is being spoken and it puts verse 3 into context


It does not change what verse 3 says. Not one thing was created without Jesus doing the creating. Verse 10 includes the world.

We know from Col 1 that much more than that is included. How can you say that verse 10 of John 1 limits Jesus' creation to the world. Limiting His creation to the world is plainly contrary to Col 1.

Col 1
16 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.

[Angryamerican]

Apart from Him does not mean except Him, it means He is the one that did the creating.

Another way of saying it is with His doing it, nothing was done.

Was the verse excluding him from what he was talking about ?

[Angryamerican]

Protest as you wish. The verse says what the verse says!

But you have still not given a rational explanation about him being, the firstborn of all creation ?

Does one of the verses cancel out the other ?

[Angryamerican]

It does not change what verse 3 says. Not one thing was created without Jesus doing the creating. Verse 10 includes the world.

We know from Col 1 that much more than that is included. How can you say that verse 10 of John 1 limits Jesus' creation to the world. Limiting His creation to the world is plainly contrary to Col 1.

Col 1
16 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.

If Jesus had a beginning ,would he have included himself in things he created ?

I showed you where it says Jesus had a beginning.

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of all creation.

Rev 3:14 And to the angel of the church of the Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Head of the creation of God, says these things:

[Angryamerican]

It does not change what verse 3 says. Not one thing was created without Jesus doing the creating. Verse 10 includes the world.

We know from Col 1 that much more than that is included. How can you say that verse 10 of John 1 limits Jesus' creation to the world. Limiting His creation to the world is plainly contrary to Col 1.

Col 1
16 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.

Please explain to me what ," firstborn of all creation " means ?

[leechstomper]

I was mildly chastized for not reading the thread from the beginning - so I am. whew. I have only made it about halfway so far. I have seen some reference to various 4th century writers etc. Other than that, the same biblical references repeated again and again with no movement on either side. What I haven't seen so far is any mention of the couple of dozen Gospels that the church decided not to include in the NT back in the 2nd century or so. I wonder if any research into their content would shed any light on the subject. If they have been discussed, just slap me down and I will slink back into my corner again.

[ralittlefield]

Please explain to me what ," firstborn of all creation " means ?

It seems to me that there are two possible answers to that.

It could mean that He was created before anything else was created.

That is a position that came from Arius, a Bishop whose views were condemned by the council of Nicea.

That view, IMO, is in direct contradiction to the verse we have been discussing most of today. John 1:3.

I believe that John 1:3 states clearly, and with concise language, that everything that was created, was created by Jesus. If Jesus is a created being, either John 1:3 is wrong when it says that Jesus created everything, or Jesus created Himself.

I do not believe that John 1:3 is wrong, nor do I believe that Jesus created Himself.

Therefore, I do not believe Jesus is a created being.


What then does "firstborn of creation", or "firstborn over creation" as the NIV translates it, mean?

Firstborn is a statement of position. The firstborn has rights and authority that others do not have. That is what I believe that it means in Col 1. Jesus is the source of, and therefore has authority over creation.

A similar title is "only begotten". It also shows position.

We know that Abraham had two sons, Isaac and Ishmael. Isaac, the son promised by God, was born of his wife Sarai. Ishmael, was born first. He was born before Isaac, but not according to God's plan. He was a product of a plot conceive by Sarai because of her lack of faith in God.

However in Heb 11:17 Isaac is call Abraham's "only begotten son. It shows Isaac's position over Ishmael, even though Ishmael was born first.

[ralittlefield]

I was mildly chastized for not reading the thread from the beginning - so I am. whew. I have only made it about halfway so far. I have seen some reference to various 4th century writers etc. Other than that, the same biblical references repeated again and again with no movement on either side. What I haven't seen so far is any mention of the couple of dozen Gospels that the church decided not to include in the NT back in the 2nd century or so. I wonder if any research into their content would shed any light on the subject. If they have been discussed, just slap me down and I will slink back into my corner again.

The gnostic gospels? I do not believe that they have been discussed in this thread. You may not find many that give them creditability as inspired scripture, but you are welcome to bring anything to the discussion that you chose.

[DispensationalJim]

Please explain to me what ," firstborn of all creation " means ?

Sorry to fall behind. I just caught up.

IMO, the "firstborn" part explains itself in this passage:
• Col. 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: 15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For 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: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. 19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell; 20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

How much clearer can it be? The "firstborn of every creature" in verse 15 is simply the "firstborn from the dead" in verse 17, since He was the first person resurrected from the dead to a "heavenly body."

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

If all things were created by Him, then He cannot be created. I think we all agree that God was not created, and thus, we say Jesus Christ is God, just as verse 15 indicates along with the many other verses we keep quoting (John 1:1; 20:28; Phil. 2:6; etc., etc.). Here is more "evidence"
• Rev. 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
• Rev. 2:8 ... These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive;
• Rev. 22:6 And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done. ... 12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. 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 in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

Jesus is clearly the "first and the last" the "beginning and the end" and the "Alpha and Omega." Jesus is also the One who is "coming back."

Now, please pay careful attention to Rev. 22:6 above and compare with 22:16.
Would you not agree that the "I Jesus" of verse 16 must also be the "Lord God" of verse 6???

Or do you think that God the Father and the Lord Jesus both sent the same angel?

[Angryamerican]

Sorry to fall behind. I just caught up.

IMO, the "firstborn" part explains itself in this passage:
• Col. 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: 15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For 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: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. 19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell; 20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

How much clearer can it be? The "firstborn of every creature" in verse 15 is simply the "firstborn from the dead" in verse 17, since He was the first person resurrected from the dead to a "heavenly body."

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

If all things were created by Him, then He cannot be created. I think we all agree that God was not created, and thus, we say Jesus Christ is God, just as verse 15 indicates along with the many other verses we keep quoting (John 1:1; 20:28; Phil. 2:6; etc., etc.). Here is more "evidence"
• Rev. 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
• Rev. 2:8 ... These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive;
• Rev. 22:6 And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done. ... 12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. 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 in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

Jesus is clearly the "first and the last" the "beginning and the end" and the "Alpha and Omega." Jesus is also the One who is "coming back."

Now, please pay careful attention to Rev. 22:6 above and compare with 22:16.
Would you not agree that the "I Jesus" of verse 16 must also be the "Lord God" of verse 6???

Or do you think that God the Father and the Lord Jesus both sent the same angel?

It can't be first born from the dead, that would lean towards resurrection = pre existence Creation= no prior existence.

[leechstomper]

The gnostic gospels? I do not believe that they have been discussed in this thread. You may not find many that give them creditability as inspired scripture, but you are welcome to bring anything to the discussion that you chose.
I was just wondering. I am only vaguely familiar with the contents of a couple of them. I thought that a few of the more learned scholars amongst you could shed some light on them. All I know is that a few guys in a "smoke filled room" considered them and discarded some of them for being redundant, some for being contradictory, some for featuring women and of course there was the one that made out Judas to be a good guy for actually doing as Jesus asked by turning him in.

[DispensationalJim]

It can't be first born from the dead, that would lean towards resurrection = pre existence Creation= no prior existence.

Please forgive me, AA, but I just don't follow your reasoning. Can you spell it out a little more clearly for this old man, please? :)

[DispensationalJim]

Just to make sure everyone catches this thought:

• Rev. 22:6 And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done. ... 12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. 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 in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

Isn't verse 6 saying basically the same thing as verse 16, thus making "the Lord God" the same person as "I Jesus" as He is sending His angel to shew (or testify) unto His servants (or the churches)?

[ralittlefield]

Just to make sure everyone catches this thought:

• Rev. 22:6 And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done. ... 12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. 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 in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

Isn't verse 6 saying basically the same thing as verse 16, thus making "the Lord God" the same person as "I Jesus" as He is sending His angel to shew (or testify) unto His servants (or the churches)?

Yes, indeed He is!

[Angryamerican]

Please forgive me, AA, but I just don't follow your reasoning. Can you spell it out a little more clearly for this old man, please? :)

The verse we were talking about is this.

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of all creation.

Its speaking of creation, Creation is something new coming into existence, No prior existence.

Firstborn from the dead, would mean a prior existence,to come back from a prior existence , would mean you were resurrected,

Jesus was both ,the firstborn from all creation, would mean he was the first to come into existence.

Jesus was the first born from the dead, meaning, he was the first to be resurrected, from the grave, to eternal life.

[Angryamerican]

Just to make sure everyone catches this thought:

• Rev. 22:6 And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done. ... 12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. 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 in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

Isn't verse 6 saying basically the same thing as verse 16, thus making "the Lord God" the same person as "I Jesus" as He is sending His angel to shew (or testify) unto His servants (or the churches)?

It's a working relationship between God and Jesus, Jesus is working in unity with God. God wills it, and Christ does it. If God were to come to the earth we couldn't survive it.

If we follow closely what Jesus said, it seems very clear, they can't be the same person. The book of revelation has four different persons talking, and its easy to get who is talking wrong.

You have, Jehovah,the Angel of the Lord,Jesus,and John. Not to mention, the book is full prophecy and metaphors, Not the best book to prove the identity of Jesus and Jehovah.

I feel the four gosples are the words of Jesus, and who better can explain who God is ?

This about sums it up.

Joh 17:22 And I have given them the glory which You have given Me, that they may be one, even as We are one,
Joh 17:23 I in them, and You in Me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that You have sent Me and have loved them as You have loved Me.
Joh 17:24 Father, I desire that those whom You have given Me, that they may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me, for You have loved Me before the foundation of the world.
Joh 17:25 O righteous Father, indeed the world has not known You; but I have known You, and these have known that You have sent me.
Joh 17:26 And I made known to them Your name, and will make it known, so that the love with which You have loved Me may be in them, and I in them.

It is unity, that make them one.

[DispensationalJim]

The verse we were talking about is this.

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of all creation.

Its speaking of creation, Creation is something new coming into existence, No prior existence.

Firstborn from the dead, would mean a prior existence,to come back from a prior existence , would mean you were resurrected,

Jesus was both ,the firstborn from all creation, would mean he was the first to come into existence.

Jesus was the first born from the dead, meaning, he was the first to be resurrected, from the grave, to eternal life.

Thank you for clarifying what you were saying. I disagree completely with your conclusions, but I'm glad you explained it a little more fully.

As I see it, verses 16-17 (plus John 1:1-3; etc.) make it clear that Jesus created everything, thus He could not be a created one.

• Col. 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For 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: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

IMO, verses 16 and 17 describe attributes which only God could have. Since noone I know of denies that those verses are about Jesus Christ, that would make Him God. I see no way of God giving a man those attributes, including the attribute of creating everything from nothing. I don't believe even an angel could ever do that.

[Koushi Shinigami]

only 90 more posts and this thread clicks off another thousand.

[DispensationalJim]

It's a working relationship between God and Jesus, Jesus is working in unity with God. God wills it, and Christ does it. If God were to come to the earth we couldn't survive it.

If we follow closely what Jesus said, it seems very clear, they can't be the same person. The book of revelation has four different persons talking, and its easy to get who is talking wrong.

You have, Jehovah,the Angel of the Lord,Jesus,and John. Not to mention, the book is full prophecy and metaphors, Not the best book to prove the identity of Jesus and Jehovah.

I feel the four gosples are the words of Jesus, and who better can explain who God is ?

This about sums it up.

Joh 17:22 And I have given them the glory which You have given Me, that they may be one, even as We are one,
Joh 17:23 I in them, and You in Me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that You have sent Me and have loved them as You have loved Me.
Joh 17:24 Father, I desire that those whom You have given Me, that they may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me, for You have loved Me before the foundation of the world.
Joh 17:25 O righteous Father, indeed the world has not known You; but I have known You, and these have known that You have sent me.
Joh 17:26 And I made known to them Your name, and will make it known, so that the love with which You have loved Me may be in them, and I in them.

It is unity, that make them one.

That all IMO explains why God the Son had to MAKE HIMSELF INTO A MAN, and the "four gospels" just describe the events which took place as a result of that loving act. As a true human, Jesus had to be totally dependant upon His "Holy Father" (yes, His God). As those four gospels show, Jesus had to grow from a baby to an adult in wisdom and stature, etc. so He could eventually die for our sins.

[Angryamerican]

That all IMO explains why God the Son had to MAKE HIMSELF INTO A MAN, and the "four gospels" just describe the events which took place as a result of that loving act. As a true human, Jesus had to be totally dependant upon His "Holy Father" (yes, His God). As those four gospels show, Jesus had to grow from a baby to an adult in wisdom and stature, etc. so He could eventually die for our sins.

You see that is your opinion that Jesus is God, and that is fine. But once again you use a biased phrase that suggests Jesus is God,but that phrase don't appear in the scriptures.

I wonder, why the Jews, who knew God,never believed that God was triune ?

I wonder why there was triune gods worshiped, before the Christian God was made triune ?

You just read, that God and Jesus are one ,through unity,the same thing he wants for his followers.

[DRS]

Apart from Him does not mean except Him, it means He is the one that did the creating.

Another way of saying it is with His doing it, nothing was done.

You know what you arguements could be taken more to heart if like I do you could provide another example from the bible to show that the usuage of a word or expression does not automatically mean what one thinks it does

I have does this with the term God, saviour and other expressions using the Ot examples to show how God does not change and how He continually uses His servents to His glory

[DRS]

That all IMO explains why God the Son had to MAKE HIMSELF INTO A MAN, and the "four gospels" just describe the events which took place as a result of that loving act. As a true human, Jesus had to be totally dependant upon His "Holy Father" (yes, His God). As those four gospels show, Jesus had to grow from a baby to an adult in wisdom and stature, etc. so He could eventually die for our sins.

He did not make himself into a man that was not what the prophecy said would happen

This Psalm said that Jehovah made into man

5*You also proceeded to make him a little less than godlike ones,
And with glory and splendor you then crowned him.

[Angryamerican]

Thank you for clarifying what you were saying. I disagree completely with your conclusions, but I'm glad you explained it a little more fully.

As I see it, verses 16-17 (plus John 1:1-3; etc.) make it clear that Jesus created everything, thus He could not be a created one.

• Col. 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For 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: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

IMO, verses 16 and 17 describe attributes which only God could have. Since noone I know of denies that those verses are about Jesus Christ, that would make Him God. I see no way of God giving a man those attributes, including the attribute of creating everything from nothing. I don't believe even an angel could ever do that.

If you had a home built, but someone else did the building, could you and the builder say you built the home ?

Just for Jesus to say he created all things that were created, would automatically eliminate him, because we would know he did not create himself.

But the verse we are talking about, is so clear, that Jesus had a beginning through creation.

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of all creation.

He is the firstborn of every creature.

Col 1:15 WhoG3739 isG2076 the imageG1504 of theG3588 invisibleG517 God,G2316 the firstbornG4416 of everyG3956 creature:G2937

What does," firstborn of every creature " mean ?

Jesus had a beginning.

[Angryamerican]

He did not make himself into a man that was not what the prophecy said would happen

This Psalm said that Jehovah made into man

5*You also proceeded to make him a little less than godlike ones,
And with glory and splendor you then crowned him.

What book and chapter is that Drs ?

[DRS]

What book and chapter is that Drs ?

Psalms 8:5 and then quoted by Paul in Hebrews 2:7 along with part of 6

[Angryamerican]

Psalms 8:5 and then quoted by Paul in Hebrews 2:7 along with part of 6

That about does it,great one Drs.

Psa 8:5

(ASV) For thou hast made him but little lower than God, And crownest him with glory and honor.


(JPS) (8:6) Yet Thou hast made him but little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.

(KJV+) For thou hast made him a little lowerH2637 H4592 than the angels,H4480 H430 and hast crownedH5849 him with gloryH3519 and honour.H1926

(MKJV) For You have made him lack a little from God, and have crowned him with glory and honor.

(RV) For thou hast made him but little lower than God, and crownest him with glory and honour.


Yes and it was quoted by paul.

Heb 2:7

(ASV) Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; Thou crownedst him with glory and honor, And didst set him over the works of thy hands:



(KJV+) Thou madestG1642 himG846 a little lowerG5100 G1024 thanG3844 the angels;G32 thou crownedstG4737 himG846 with gloryG1391 andG2532 honour,G5092 andG2532 didst setG2525 himG846 overG1909 theG3588 worksG2041 of thyG4675 hands:G5495

(MKJV) 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.

(RV) Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; Thou crownedst him with glory and honour, And didst set him over the works of thy hands:

[leechstomper]

I laid awake last night mulling over this thread and it dawned on me that it is a bit like WW1. It started out with a few open field battles but now has switched to trench warfare. Everyone is in their trenches lobbing rounds at the other side and no-one wants to stick their heads up to see what the other side is doing.
Other than that, I need a couple of points clarified for me. If I am not mistaken, the "pro trinity" side believes that Jesus is still part of the trinity when he is in "man form". May I have a yea or nay on that please.

[Angryamerican]

God made him at the beginning of creation , and God made him when he came to the earth as the son of man.

[Angryamerican]

I laid awake last night mulling over this thread and it dawned on me that it is a bit like WW1. It started out with a few open field battles but now has switched to trench warfare. Everyone is in their trenches lobbing rounds at the other side and no-one wants to stick their heads up to see what the other side is doing.
Other than that, I need a couple of points clarified for me. If I am not mistaken, the "pro trinity" side believes that Jesus is still part of the trinity when he is in "man form". May I have a yea or nay on that please.

You will probably get several ideas on that to. :D

[Angryamerican]

Funny how translations can be so different. The word godlike don't appear in some translations or they translate it differently.

Zec 12:8

(ASV) In that day shall Jehovah defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem: and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of Jehovah before them.


(JPS) In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that stumbleth among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as a godlike being, as the angel of the LORD before them.

(KJV+) In thatH1931 dayH3117 shall the LORDH3068 defendH1598 H1157 the inhabitantsH3427 of Jerusalem;H3389 and he that is feebleH3782 among them at thatH1931 dayH3117 shall beH1961 as David;H1732 and the houseH1004 of DavidH1732 shall be as God,H430 as the angelH4397 of the LORDH3068 beforeH6440 them.

(MKJV) In that day Jehovah shall defend around the people of Jerusalem. And it will be, he who is feeble among them at that day shall be like David; and the house of David shall be like God, like the Angel of Jehovah before them.

(RV) In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.

[DRS]

I think by remove the name Jehovah it helps to create confusion, think about how often has Djim quoted OT scripture with LORD when it should be Jehovah and then quote something with lord in it from the NT speaking of Jesus to ke it seem like the same person?

Psalm 110:1 is one that always made me laugh with the two lords

[leechstomper]

I know which side that you are on, Angry. I was hoping to follow a train of thought and I needed someone from the other side of the issue to bounce it off of. Actually, you might find it interesting if I could get someone to confirm it.

[DRS]

I know which side that you are on, Angry. I was hoping to follow a train of thought and I needed someone from the other side of the issue to bounce it off of. Actually, you might find it interesting if I could get someone to confirm it.

I think what he is saying is you will get those who say he was and others will say he was not

There are those that believe he ceased to be god and others who feel one can not cease to be so

[Angryamerican]

I think by remove the name Jehovah it helps to create confusion, think about how often has Djim quoted OT scripture with LORD when it should be Jehovah and then quote something with lord in it from the NT speaking of Jesus to ke it seem like the same person?

Psalm 110:1 is one that always made me laugh with the two lords

This is how the chabad.org jewish bible translates the verse to show they also agree with the nwt.

8. On that day the Lord shall protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the weakest of them shall be, on that day, like David. And the house of David shall be like angels, like the angel of the Lord before them.

[Angryamerican]

I think by remove the name Jehovah it helps to create confusion, think about how often has Djim quoted OT scripture with LORD when it should be Jehovah and then quote something with lord in it from the NT speaking of Jesus to ke it seem like the same person?

Psalm 110:1 is one that always made me laugh with the two lords

Yes i agree, if where the name Jehovah appears , was put in it's place , it would eliminate the confusion.

[leechstomper]

I think what he is saying is you will get those who say he was and others will say he was not

There are those that believe he ceased to be god and others who feel one can not cease to be so
Actually, no, I was trying to get a trinitarian to say that he was. Then I was going to follow my train of thought out to it's logical conclusion with them.

[DRS]

This is how the chabad.org jewish bible translates the verse to show they also agree with the nwt.

8. On that day the Lord shall protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the weakest of them shall be, on that day, like David. And the house of David shall be like angels, like the angel of the Lord before them.

i could never get why they do not put the name of God in their translation it may help clear up the some things, I know they have their superstitions but if there is one place the name of God belongs in, it is the book about Him

[Angryamerican]

i could never get why they do not put the name of God in their translation it may help clear up the some things, I know they have their superstitions but if there is one place the name of God belongs in, it is the book about Him

Yes i agree.

[Koushi Shinigami]

I laid awake last night mulling over this thread and it dawned on me that it is a bit like WW1. It started out with a few open field battles but now has switched to trench warfare. Everyone is in their trenches lobbing rounds at the other side and no-one wants to stick their heads up to see what the other side is doing.

That is a lovely analogy. :clap:

[Angryamerican]

Actually, no, I was trying to get a trinitarian to say that he was. Then I was going to follow my train of thought out to it's logical conclusion with them.

There is nothing logical about the trinity, that is why you may not get a response.

If there was something logical about it, i sure wish they would share. Sorry my trinitarian friends i could not resist,i am sorry if i offended anyone.

But they might respond now just to spite me lol.

[leechstomper]

There is nothing logical about the trinity, that is why you may not get a response.

If there was something logical about it, i sure wish they would share.
Okay, I was hoping to get a Trinitarian to bite, but I guess you'll have to do.(no offence)
Let's specify, just for arguements sake, that Christ is part of God even when he was in a man's form. And that when Jesus was praying to God, he was really talking to himself outloud for our sake. Is that their basic premise, yes?

[Angryamerican]

Okay, I was hoping to get a Trinitarian to bite, but I guess you'll have to do.(no offence)
Let's specify, just for arguements sake, that Christ is part of God even when he was in a man's form. And that when Jesus was praying to God, he was really talking to himself outloud for our sake. Is that their basic premise, yes?

They would respond by saying, you are taking a cheap shot ,at the trinity, or think you were being rude.

But really, it stands to reason, anytime Jesus is praying to his God and Father, If indeed ,he is part of God, he is talking to himself.

I have put the question to them, when does God stop being God.

To me, it would be like, Jesus was putting on a show, and he is talking to himself when he prays.

But really, i am realistic and thats how i would see it.

[Angryamerican]

Okay, I was hoping to get a Trinitarian to bite, but I guess you'll have to do.(no offence)
Let's specify, just for arguements sake, that Christ is part of God even when he was in a man's form. And that when Jesus was praying to God, he was really talking to himself outloud for our sake. Is that their basic premise, yes?

Now i have a question for you.

Is God all knowing ?

[leechstomper]

Of course not. No one is saying that.



The overwhelming majority of Christians - Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant - believe that God is a "Triune" Being. That is, within the nature of the One God are 3 Persons: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The 3 Persons are the One God.

Viewed in this light, Jesus was not "talking to himself" when He prayed to the Father. God the Son was talking to God the Father.

Regarding your comment about "an omnipotent being putting himself to death" the Bible tells us that Jesus, though existing as God, humbled Himself and became a man, in order to die for our sins. Thus, Jesus is both God and man. Jesus the man died on the cross.
Okay, not wanting to offend anyone, I'll use their words. I am not good at patching things together yet, so it will take a couple of postings.

[leechstomper]

Now i have a question for you.

Is God all knowing ?
Hang on, I'll get to that. I have one more quote to post.

[Angryamerican]

Okay, not wanting to offend anyone, I'll use their words. I am not good at patching things together yet, so it will take a couple of postings.

Good idea this is fun.

[leechstomper]

The Divinity of Jesus had to leave Him for a few Earth seconds so that He could take on all the sins of the world. Simple answer no?

Didn't Jesus say, the Father and I are one?
I found it. So this states that Jesus was always part of the trinity other than for the few moments that he had the whole worlds sins on his shoulders. Correct?

[Angryamerican]

I found it. So this states that Jesus was always part of the trinity other than for the few moments that he had the whole worlds sins on his shoulders. Correct?

Correct.

[leechstomper]

Okay, now let's switch gears.
Who knows the most about God? ( other than Jesus because he is supposed to be God) Who would that be?

[Angryamerican]

Okay, now let's switch gears.
Who knows the most about God? ( other than Jesus because he is supposed to be God) Who would that be?

Angels, because they are before God day and night. but you have my attention.

[leechstomper]

Okay, so you agree that no human knows anything about God other than what they attempt to glean from the Bible. This leaves Angellic beings that know really anything about him at all, right?

[Angryamerican]

Okay, so you agree that no human knows anything about God other than what they attempt to glean from the Bible. This leaves Angellic beings that know really anything about him at all, right?

Correct. Is your computer freezing ?

[leechstomper]

So, therefore, I wouldn't be too far off in saying that Satan is possibly the universe's premiere Authority on God. I mean, for a while, he was one of the main "dudes" in heaven. Wasn't he? Didn't he think that he knew God well enough to challange Him? I mean, after Satan got kicked out of heaven, weren't He and God still on a first name basis? I mean, they did get together long enough to mess with Job, didn't they? As arch-crimminals are prone to do, they make it their business to know their adversaries as well as possible.
So, following this line of thought, that pretty much makes Satan the closest thing to an expert thatwe could consult, yes? ( follow along, I'm not advocating witchcraft or anything)

[Angryamerican]

So, therefore, I wouldn't be too far off in saying that Satan is possibly the universe's premiere Authority on God. I mean, for a while, he was one of the main "dudes" in heaven. Wasn't he? Didn't he think that he knew God well enough to challange Him? I mean, after Satan got kicked out of heaven, weren't He and God still on a first name basis? I mean, they did get together long enough to mess with Job, didn't they? As arch-crimminals are prone to do, they make it their business to know their adversaries as well as possible.
So, following this line of thought, that pretty much makes Satan the closest thing to an expert thatwe could consult, yes? ( follow along, I'm not advocating witchcraft or anything)

Yes, i think,i know where you are going with this,i have brought this up, i believe earlier, in this thread.

[God is My Rock]

Just to be sure, I just checked every translation I could find quickly on the internet, including the New World Translation (The Jehovah's Witness Bible), and EVERY ONE OF THEM translate that quote from Thomas exactly the same as the King James!!

• "My Lord and my God."

No comma there!

IMO, that should settle that "controversy" beyond a reasonable doubt. :)

Sorry to burst your grammatical bubble, but when using conjunctions such as the word "and" , a comma is not necessary and rarely if ever used.

Besides, if the trinitarian Bibles did put a comma in there, wouldn't they be taking away one of their favorite tada verses?????

So your point?

[leechstomper]

Good, then if Satan Knows more about God, than say God himself, he would know what he could and couldn't do to mess with God. Right?

[Angryamerican]

Good, then if Satan Knows more about God, than say God himself, he would know what he could and couldn't do to mess with God. Right?

I think he had a short leash.

[leechstomper]

Correct, but he does know what he can do. Right?

[Angryamerican]

Correct, but he does know what he can do. Right?

I don't think ,he could do anything ,to derail Gods plan.

But i do agree he knows God very well.

[God is My Rock]

Your assumption is that the use of a title for one Person rules it out its application to another.

As shown above, this is not necessarily true.

But my dear friend, I agree 100%!!!!!

I just disagree that the title means the same thing, for each entity that it is applied to.

Angels have had the title of "god" applied to them.

Men have had the title of "god" applied to them.

GOD has had the title of "lord" applied to him.

Jesus has had the title of "lord" applied to him.

Men have had the title of "lord" applied to them.


So yes you are correct.

Our difference comes in the trinitarian selective choosen of when theos and kurios imply godhood onto Jesus.

Thanks for proving my point.

[leechstomper]

I don't think ,he could do anything ,to derail Gods plan.

But i do agree he knows God very well.
Precisely. So therefore, when Satan was trying to tempt Jesus in the wilderness to forsake God, he believed that he could seperate Jesus from God. Satan believed that God and Jesus were not the same and that he could get between them. I mean, Satan has been there since virtually the beginning. He HAD to know what the deal was. If Jesus was part of the trinity when he was here on earth except for those few moments toward the end when he was being crucified, he couldn't have been seperated. SATAN HIMSELF BELIEVES THAT GOD AND JESUS ARE NOT THE SAME. Who knows God better, us or Satan?

[God is My Rock]

I object to the above vigorously!

This is, again, a mischaracterization of the Trinitarian view, with a thinly veiled mocking tone.

When you say: "So in other words, he did not tell the whole truth. ( no hiding aspect implied)" you imply an argument on our part that we are not making.

And excuse me, but a hiding aspect IS implied when you say - "he did not tell the whole truth".

The obvious comparison here is to a court of law, where if one does not tell the whole truth, one is, in effect, lying. Ridiculous! :naughty:

Moreover, there were many things Jesus did not talk about in detail during His ministry, not just His Deity.

A weak, weak argument, my friend. And quite disappointing, as you did not even respond to the points in my post.

Another fundamental flaw in the above is that some people will argue about practically EVERY verse in the Bible, as you can see very day in the RF!

So, no . . . debate would not have been avoided if certain verses were "clearer". It's a matter of sinful human nature, not a matter of biblical text.



So do I.

And one thing He didn't talk much about was His Divinity, since His mission required Him to humble Himself.



That makes you the ones who inappropriately pit scripture against scripture, using Jesus' lack of discussion of His Divinity to trump other scripture that is talking about His Divinity.

IMHO, of course. :angel:

All right, scripture time.

two things first though,

The reason I said (no hiding aspect implied) is because the last couple of times that I just said that "Jesus didn't tell the whole truth" I got jumped on, with some saying that Jesus wasn't a liar. I was trying to avoid that whole scenario. It seems that I can't.

I am just trying to lay the foundation that trinitarians do not think that Jesus' words in the Bible are a sufficient revelation, so by default, it is not the whole picture.

second, I am 23 pages behind in this thread, so I am going to try to catch up quick first.

[God is My Rock]

Well of course!



Eh?



Eh again?

Ya lost me . . .

Sorry, it's DJ that is the foreign language phobe :redface:

[God is My Rock]

So, perhaps if I use large fonts and bright colors, I will be more convincing? ;)

Here is the deal from my point of view. The words of Jesus are part of scripture, but not all we need. We do not have all of Jesus words recorded for us. If the recorded words of Jesus were all we needed, God, IMO, would not have inspired anything other than the Gospels. You can not discount the rest of the NT just because it does not support your understanding of the words of Jesus.

Perhaps, if correctly understood, what we have recorded from Jesus is sufficient for a right relationship with God. To help us correctly understand, we were given the rest of the NT.

For instance Jesus said:
John 8
58 “I tell you the truth,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”

What did Jesus mean by that? Simply that He existed before Abraham? That is significant, but is it all that He meant?

The next verse sheds some light on it:

59 At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.


Why the violent reaction? I believe it was because they understood that Jesus was claiming to be God. Other passages state this straight out. On other occasions, it is stated that they tried to kill Him because they understood Him to be claiming to be God.


Was Jesus claiming to be God? If we look at other NT passages that attribute God's attributes (creation for instance) to Jesus, we can rightly understand that He was indeed claiming to be God.


Do we need to understand the nature of God to have a right relationship with Him? I will leave that to God, but the truth is always worth seeking. Truth about God, even more so.


Do not minimize the importance of what we believe.


Eph 2
17 So I tell you this, and insist on it in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking. 18 They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts.



It seems that ignorance can separate us from the life of God.

First about the fonts, and colors, they can be fun!!!!!

second, I trying to catch up with the posts, but I am going to do a serious what Jesus said theme, for a few posts.

[Angryamerican]

Precisely. So therefore, when Satan was trying to tempt Jesus in the wilderness to forsake God, he believed that he could seperate Jesus from God. Satan believed that God and Jesus were not the same and that he could get between them. I mean, Satan has been there since virtually the beginning. He HAD to know what the deal was. If Jesus was part of the trinity when he was here on earth except for those few moments toward the end when he was being crucified, he couldn't have been seperated. SATAN HIMSELF BELIEVES THAT GOD AND JESUS ARE NOT THE SAME. Who knows God better, us or Satan?

Yes, this is a very good point. i'm just curious about what the trinitarians will say :D

[leechstomper]

Yes, this is a very good point. i'm just curious about what the trinitarians will say :D
Yes, well, I have to go out and actually do something to support myself now. So I'll visit with you later.

[Angryamerican]

Yes, well, I have to go out and actually do something to support myself now. So I'll visit with you later.

Ok have a good day.

[God is My Rock]

The fact that you ask this question make me wonder if you really understand the Trinity.

Why would you think any of this is a problem? How does this contadict the doctrine of the Trinity?

Does anyone truly?

I thought that was supposed to be part of the whole "mystery" thing.

:wall:

[God is My Rock]

According to Phil 2 Jesus, who was God, did not hold on to equality with God, but humbled Himself and took the form of a servant and the likeness of a man. He further humbled Himself and allowed Himself to be put to death.

The Father is His God, He and the Father talk to one another.

He had a right to equality with God, but did not grasp it, rather, He emptied Himself of it and died for us. That is why Paul used Him as our example of humility.

Since He emptied Himself of equality with God, He made statement about the Father being greater than Him, asked the father to forgive them etc.

That is "the trinity at work".

Or perhaps he did not think it (equality with God) was something that would be grasped by trinitarians :) :razz: Just messin'

[hillplus]

does anyone truly?

.....

+1

[God is My Rock]

It seems to me that there are two possible answers to that.

It could mean that He was created before anything else was created.

That is a position that came from Arius, a Bishop whose views were condemned by the council of Nicea.

That view, IMO, is in direct contradiction to the verse we have been discussing most of today. John 1:3.

I believe that John 1:3 states clearly, and with concise language, that everything that was created, was created by Jesus. If Jesus is a created being, either John 1:3 is wrong when it says that Jesus created everything, or Jesus created Himself.

I do not believe that John 1:3 is wrong, nor do I believe that Jesus created Himself.

Therefore, I do not believe Jesus is a created being.


What then does "firstborn of creation", or "firstborn over creation" as the NIV translates it, mean?

Firstborn is a statement of position. The firstborn has rights and authority that others do not have. That is what I believe that it means in Col 1. Jesus is the source of, and therefore has authority over creation.

A similar title is "only begotten". It also shows position.

We know that Abraham had two sons, Isaac and Ishmael. Isaac, the son promised by God, was born of his wife Sarai. Ishmael, was born first. He was born before Isaac, but not according to God's plan. He was a product of a plot conceive by Sarai because of her lack of faith in God.

However in Heb 11:17 Isaac is call Abraham's "only begotten son. It shows Isaac's position over Ishmael, even though Ishmael was born first.

Why would God (since Jesus is God) need such a lowly title as firstborn of all creation?

Not buying.....

[God is My Rock]

It's a working relationship between God and Jesus, Jesus is working in unity with God. God wills it, and Christ does it. If God were to come to the earth we couldn't survive it.

If we follow closely what Jesus said, it seems very clear, they can't be the same person. The book of revelation has four different persons talking, and its easy to get who is talking wrong.

You have, Jehovah,the Angel of the Lord,Jesus,and John. Not to mention, the book is full prophecy and metaphors, Not the best book to prove the identity of Jesus and Jehovah.

I feel the four gosples are the words of Jesus, and who better can explain who God is ?

This about sums it up.

Joh 17:22 And I have given them the glory which You have given Me, that they may be one, even as We are one,
Joh 17:23 I in them, and You in Me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that You have sent Me and have loved them as You have loved Me.
Joh 17:24 Father, I desire that those whom You have given Me, that they may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me, for You have loved Me before the foundation of the world.
Joh 17:25 O righteous Father, indeed the world has not known You; but I have known You, and these have known that You have sent me.
Joh 17:26 And I made known to them Your name, and will make it known, so that the love with which You have loved Me may be in them, and I in them.

It is unity, that make them one.

Great points all!!!!

[God is My Rock]

They would respond by saying, you are taking a cheap shot ,at the trinity, or think you were being rude.


So true, so true..........

[DispensationalJim]

He did not make himself into a man that was not what the prophecy said would happen

This Psalm said that Jehovah made into man

5*You also proceeded to make him a little less than godlike ones,
And with glory and splendor you then crowned him.

DRS, don't you believe your own New World Translation?
Phil. 2: 5 Keep this mental attitude in YOU that was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God. 7 No, but he emptied himself and took a slave’s form and came to be in the likeness of men. 8 More than that, when he found himself in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient as far as death, yes, death on a torture stake.

The question, of course, is: What did Jesus empty Himself OF?

IMO, the King James makes it so much clearer:
• 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.

Since God cannot die, Jesus, the one and only Son of God, after creating everything that was made (including Mary) MADE HIMSELF INTO A MAN (well, technically, first into a little baby in Mary's womb) so He could die for our sins, but maybe you don't believe He died for our sins?

[Angryamerican]

DRS, don't you believe your own New World Translation?
Phil. 2: 5 Keep this mental attitude in YOU that was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God. 7 No, but he emptied himself and took a slave’s form and came to be in the likeness of men. 8 More than that, when he found himself in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient as far as death, yes, death on a torture stake.

The question, of course, is: What did Jesus empty Himself OF?

IMO, the King James makes it so much clearer:
• 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.

Since God cannot die, Jesus, the one and only Son of God, after creating everything that was made (including Mary) MADE HIMSELF INTO A MAN (well, technically, first into a little baby in Mary's womb) so He could die for our sins, but maybe you don't believe He died for our sins?

What is your point?

Php 2:6

(ASV) who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped,

(KJV+) Who,G3739 beingG5225 inG1722 the formG3444 of God,G2316 thoughtG2233 it notG3756 robberyG725 to beG1511 equalG2470 with God:G2316

(MKJV) who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God,

(RV) who, being in the form of God, counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God,

Why did Jesus think equality with God should not be grasped ?

Notice it's only the kjv's that confuse the translation.

[DispensationalJim]

If you had a home built, but someone else did the building, could you and the builder say you built the home ?

Just for Jesus to say he created all things that were created, would automatically eliminate him, because we would know he did not create himself.

But the verse we are talking about, is so clear, that Jesus had a beginning through creation.

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of all creation.

He is the firstborn of every creature.

Col 1:15 WhoG3739 isG2076 the imageG1504 of theG3588 invisibleG517 God,G2316 the firstbornG4416 of everyG3956 creature:G2937

What does," firstborn of every creature " mean ?

Jesus had a beginning.

AA, I think you are becoming a "died-in-the-wool" Jehovah's Witness -like DRS- or maybe a Unitarian like Warrior. :)

Anyway, I thought the verses I quoted about Jesus being THE creator made it very clear, so IMO your conclusions must be influenced by man's reasoning (as you guys so often accuse of us Trinitarians).

Then you don't have to see Jesus as God our Savior like Paul does in these next verses:
• Titus 1:3 But hath in due times manifested his word through preaching, which is committed unto me according to the commandment of God our Saviour;
• Titus 2:10 Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things. 11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, 12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; 13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; 14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
• Titus 3:4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

Now, AA, you have said this world could not withstand the actual appearance of God the Father, right?

So, verse 13 says the glorious appearing of "THE GREAT GOD AND OUR SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST."

I must then ask, AA, is God the Father appearing or is it "the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ"? I believe Paul knew who Jesus was because look what He said a few verses later:
• Titus 3:6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

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

For emphasis, let's put verses 4 and 6 together:
• Titus 3:4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
• Titus 3:6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

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

I recently quoted a bunch of verses from The Book of The Revelation showing that Jesus is the "beginning and the end" etc., and also that He is the Lord God who sent His angel, etc. and who is "coming quickly."

[God is My Rock]

A detailed look at some of Jesus' words.

John 10

22Then came the Feast of Dedication[b] at Jerusalem. It was winter, 23and Jesus was in the temple area walking in Solomon's Colonnade. 24The Jews gathered around him, saying, "How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ,[c] tell us plainly."

So here we have the Jews asking Jesus to tell them who he is.


25Jesus answered, "I did tell you, but you do not believe.
The miracles I do in my Father's name speak for me, 26but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. 29My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all[d]; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand.

30I and the Father are one."


And here we have the trinitarians favorite verse, minus Jesus' upcoming clarification.


31Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, 32but Jesus said to them, "I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?"

33"We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."

And here we have the Jews apparently drawing the same conclusion as our trinitarian friends.


So what does Jesus say? We have gone over this before, some have said that it was not Jesus' purpose to tell who he was.

But here is a serious religious charge. For the Jews regarded a man to be claiming to be God as a blasphemy, and one that would warrant immediate execution.



So what does Jesus say? Who does he claim to be? does he use clear language, or obscure?




34Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are gods'[e]? 35If he called them 'gods,' to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken—



36what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own



The Father set apart Jesus as his very own? If Jesus is God, How can the Father set him apart as his very own?



and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, 'I am God's Son'?


In the above statement notice.....

1.) Jesus does not say "That is not a blasphemy"

2.) Jesus does ask them why they accuse him of blasphemy.

3.) He actually in essence says "Why do you accuse me of something I have not said."

4.) Although not his "purpose" Jesus does flat out say (remember the Jews had asked him to speak plainly)

I am God's Son.


If Jesus were God, the above scenario does not fit at all.

1.) where is the rebuttal? i.e. whenever people had a wrong conception of God, Jesus corrected them. No correction here.

Meaning - Jesus - (It may be blashpemy for you to claim to be God, but it is not for me, because I am God)

Now I know there are some who will say "who are you to decide what God should have said, or written when he did.....yadayada"

But this response all stands or falls upon the assumption that there is more to Jesus' identity than what he is saying.

For if we read the text as is, it is very clear that Jesus has just said who he claimed to be, and that, that identity was not a blasphemy, (in other words, I am not God, I have not blasphemed, I am God's Son)

Now if there are still objections, we can turn to chapter 11, where sometime rather soon after this incident, that Jesus' disciples call him Rabbi. If people were willing to stone Jesus for claiming to be God, and yet his disciples still did not get it, or perhaps they did, either way the term Rabbi is highly suspicious.

If they thought he had blasphemed, why are they calling him Rabbi?

If they thought he was God, why are they calling him Rabbi?

[HardHammer]

AA, I think you are becoming a "died-in-the-wool" Jehovah's Witness -like DRS- or maybe a Unitarian like Warrior. :)

Anyway, I thought the verses I quoted about Jesus being THE creator made it very clear, so IMO your conclusions must be influenced by man's reasoning (as you guys so often accuse of us Trinitarians).

Then you don't have to see Jesus as God our Savior like Paul does in these next verses:
• Titus 1:3 But hath in due times manifested his word through preaching, which is committed unto me according to the commandment of God our Saviour;
• Titus 2:10 Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things. 11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, 12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; 13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; 14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
• Titus 3:4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

Now, AA, you have said this world could not withstand the actual appearance of God the Father, right?

So, verse 13 says the glorious appearing of "THE GREAT GOD AND OUR SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST."

I must then ask, AA, is God the Father appearing or is it "the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ"? I believe Paul knew who Jesus was because look what He said a few verses later:
• Titus 3:6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

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

For emphasis, let's put verses 4 and 6 together:
• Titus 3:4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
• Titus 3:6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

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

I recently quoted a bunch of verses from The Book of The Revelation showing that Jesus is the "beginning and the end" etc., and also that He is the Lord God who sent His angel, etc. and who is "coming quickly."

Amen Jim, Amen

[Angryamerican]

A detailed look at some of Jesus' words.

John 10

22Then came the Feast of Dedication[b] at Jerusalem. It was winter, 23and Jesus was in the temple area walking in Solomon's Colonnade. 24The Jews gathered around him, saying, "How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ,[c] tell us plainly."

So here we have the Jews asking Jesus to tell them who he is.


25Jesus answered, "I did tell you, but you do not believe.
The miracles I do in my Father's name speak for me, 26but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. 29My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all[d]; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand.

30I and the Father are one."


And here we have the trinitarians favorite verse, minus Jesus' upcoming clarification.


31Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, 32but Jesus said to them, "I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?"

33"We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."

And here we have the Jews apparently drawing the same conclusion as our trinitarian friends.


So what does Jesus say? We have gone over this before, some have said that it was not Jesus' purpose to tell who he was.

But here is a serious religious charge. For the Jews regarded a man to be claiming to be God as a blasphemy, and one that would warrant immediate execution.



So what does Jesus say? Who does he claim to be? does he use clear language, or obscure?




34Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are gods'[e]? 35If he called them 'gods,' to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken—



36what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own



The Father set apart Jesus as his very own? If Jesus is God, How can the Father set him apart as his very own?



and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, 'I am God's Son'?


In the above statement notice.....

1.) Jesus does not say "That is not a blasphemy"

2.) Jesus does ask them why they accuse him of blasphemy.

3.) He actually in essence says "Why do you accuse me of something I have not said."

4.) Although not his "purpose" Jesus does flat out say (remember the Jews had asked him to speak plainly)

I am God's Son.


If Jesus were God, the above scenario does not fit at all.

1.) where is the rebuttal? i.e. whenever people had a wrong conception of God, Jesus corrected them. No correction here.

Meaning - Jesus - (It may be blashpemy for you to claim to be God, but it is not for me, because I am God)

Now I know there are some who will say "who are you to decide what God should have said, or written when he did.....yadayada"

But this response all stands or falls upon the assumption that there is more to Jesus' identity than what he is saying.

For if we read the text as is, it is very clear that Jesus has just said who he claimed to be, and that, that identity was not a blasphemy, (in other words, I am not God, I have not blasphemed, I am God's Son)

Now if there are still objections, we can turn to chapter 11, where sometime rather soon after this incident, that Jesus' disciples call him Rabbi. If people were willing to stone Jesus for claiming to be God, and yet his disciples still did not get it, or perhaps they did, either way the term Rabbi is highly suspicious.

If they thought he had blasphemed, why are they calling him Rabbi?

If they thought he was God, why are they calling him Rabbi?

Wow very good post.:clap:

[Angryamerican]

AA, I think you are becoming a "died-in-the-wool" Jehovah's Witness -like DRS- or maybe a Unitarian like Warrior. :)

Anyway, I thought the verses I quoted about Jesus being THE creator made it very clear, so IMO your conclusions must be influenced by man's reasoning (as you guys so often accuse of us Trinitarians).

Then you don't have to see Jesus as God our Savior like Paul does in these next verses:
• Titus 1:3 But hath in due times manifested his word through preaching, which is committed unto me according to the commandment of God our Saviour;
• Titus 2:10 Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things. 11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, 12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; 13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; 14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
• Titus 3:4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

Now, AA, you have said this world could not withstand the actual appearance of God the Father, right?

So, verse 13 says the glorious appearing of "THE GREAT GOD AND OUR SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST."

I must then ask, AA, is God the Father appearing or is it "the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ"? I believe Paul knew who Jesus was because look what He said a few verses later:
• Titus 3:6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

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

For emphasis, let's put verses 4 and 6 together:
• Titus 3:4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
• Titus 3:6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

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

I recently quoted a bunch of verses from The Book of The Revelation showing that Jesus is the "beginning and the end" etc., and also that He is the Lord God who sent His angel, etc. and who is "coming quickly."

So, how does this fit ,with what you are trying to say ?

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of all creation.

So, how does anything, with what you believe concerning the trinity, fit with that verse ?

[Angryamerican]

AA, I think you are becoming a "died-in-the-wool" Jehovah's Witness -like DRS- or maybe a Unitarian like Warrior. :)

Anyway, I thought the verses I quoted about Jesus being THE creator made it very clear, so IMO your conclusions must be influenced by man's reasoning (as you guys so often accuse of us Trinitarians).

Then you don't have to see Jesus as God our Savior like Paul does in these next verses:
• Titus 1:3 But hath in due times manifested his word through preaching, which is committed unto me according to the commandment of God our Saviour;
• Titus 2:10 Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things. 11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, 12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; 13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; 14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
• Titus 3:4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

Now, AA, you have said this world could not withstand the actual appearance of God the Father, right?

So, verse 13 says the glorious appearing of "THE GREAT GOD AND OUR SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST."

I must then ask, AA, is God the Father appearing or is it "the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ"? I believe Paul knew who Jesus was because look what He said a few verses later:
• Titus 3:6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

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

For emphasis, let's put verses 4 and 6 together:
• Titus 3:4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
• Titus 3:6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

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

I recently quoted a bunch of verses from The Book of The Revelation showing that Jesus is the "beginning and the end" etc., and also that He is the Lord God who sent His angel, etc. and who is "coming quickly."

We put a lot on your table today Djim, when you get a chance can you respond. but please don't give scripture that you think contradicts other scripture.

Drs said it earlier,if all translations put Gods name where it belongs, all the things you post ,would not be so confusing, about who is being spoken about, or who is speaking.

Lets all tackle this together.

[God is My Rock]

Wow very good post.:clap:

So exactly what are your beliefs again AA?

I mean i know basically where you stand, but what faith are you, etc....

[Angryamerican]

AA, I think you are becoming a "died-in-the-wool" Jehovah's Witness -like DRS- or maybe a Unitarian like Warrior. :)

Anyway, I thought the verses I quoted about Jesus being THE creator made it very clear, so IMO your conclusions must be influenced by man's reasoning (as you guys so often accuse of us Trinitarians).

Then you don't have to see Jesus as God our Savior like Paul does in these next verses:
• Titus 1:3 But hath in due times manifested his word through preaching, which is committed unto me according to the commandment of God our Saviour;
• Titus 2:10 Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things. 11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, 12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; 13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; 14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
• Titus 3:4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

Now, AA, you have said this world could not withstand the actual appearance of God the Father, right?

So, verse 13 says the glorious appearing of "THE GREAT GOD AND OUR SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST."

I must then ask, AA, is God the Father appearing or is it "the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ"? I believe Paul knew who Jesus was because look what He said a few verses later:
• Titus 3:6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

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

For emphasis, let's put verses 4 and 6 together:
• Titus 3:4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
• Titus 3:6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

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

I recently quoted a bunch of verses from The Book of The Revelation showing that Jesus is the "beginning and the end" etc., and also that He is the Lord God who sent His angel, etc. and who is "coming quickly."

Technically Djim is not both, God and Jesus our saviour ? so they would both have that title ?

[Angryamerican]

So exactly what are your beliefs again AA?

I mean i know basically where you stand, but what faith are you, etc....

Non denominational at this time.

I do share a lot of my beliefs with Drs but i am not a JW.

[God is My Rock]

Non denominational at this time.

I do share a lot of my beliefs with Drs but i am not a JW.

cool...

Peace

[DispensationalJim]

So, how does this fit ,with what you are trying to say ?

Col 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of all creation.

So, how does anything, with what you believe concerning the trinity, fit with that verse ?

AA, as I have said lo these many times, I believe Jesus created EVERYTHING, thus being the "first born of every creature" as the King James says. An argument for the existence of God is that He was the "first cause." Obviously, God had no cause, yet He was the "first cause" or "first causer."

Let's look again at the context of your verse (from the good old King James):
• Col. 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: 15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For 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: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. 19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

If the term "firstborn" means what you think it means, AA, then Jesus had to create Himself into a creature according to verse 16, which I believe He did when He made Himself into a man. But since Jesus created everything (which would clearly exclude Him creating Himself as the Son of God), then he was the "firstborn of every creature" by virtue of His creation of all creatures.

Do you think Jesus is a creature now in Heaven?

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

Consider this famous verse:
• 2Cor. 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

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

Finally, I strongly believe that Jesus -- who I feel the Scripture indicates was God the Son in Heaven when He created everything -- MADE HIMSELF INTO A MAN, giving up His Godly attributes when He became a "fetus" (or "zygote") in the womb of Mary. How could a "fetus" be omniscient, omnipotent, and/or omnipresent?

Jesus Christ willingly HUMBLED HIMSELF so that -- as a man -- He could die for our sins. I further believe that when He ascended to Heaven, He was given back all His Godly attributes by His "Holy Father," and yet He somehow maintained His existence as a man, so that He became the "God-man" who is the perfect mediator between the "Holy Father" and all "creatures" who have believed in the shed blood of Christ for our sins.

[DispensationalJim]

We put a lot on your table today Djim, when you get a chance can you respond. but please don't give scripture that you think contradicts other scripture.

Drs said it earlier,if all translations put Gods name where it belongs, all the things you post ,would not be so confusing, about who is being spoken about, or who is speaking.

Lets all tackle this together.

So, AA, I am shocked that you would rather have man's opinion than Scripture!

And, as a dispensationalist, I do not believe there is even one contradiction in my King James Bible. Paul told us this regarding the present dispensation of the Grace of God:
• 2Tim. 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
• 1Cor. 9:17... a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me (Paul, that is).
• Eph. 3:2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me (Paul) to you-ward:
• Col. 1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me(Paul) for you, to fulfil the word of God;
• Rom. 15:16 That I (Paul) should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.
• Rom. 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I (Paul) am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:

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

Now, please contrast that with these verses:
• Matt. 15:24 But he (Jesus) answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
• Matt. 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
• Rom. 15:8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:

I see no contradiction in those passages. But I do see different DISPENSATIONS.

[DispensationalJim]

Technically Djim is not both, God and Jesus our saviour ? so they would both have that title ?

Again, AA, please forgive me, but I just don't understand what you're saying.

Doesn't the Bible call God the Lord and Saviour many times? And yet the Bible also calls Jesus the Lord and Saviour many times.

And, of course, the verse I posted to which you responded:
• Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

I ask again: Is God the Father appearing in the Second Coming?

I say, no, the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ is coming back to earth to set up His Kingdom when He then finally becomes THE KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS!

• 1Tim. 6:14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: 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: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.
Rev. 19:16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

If Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, but you say He isn't God, then where does that put the Lord God? How can God the Father be the Lord but Jesus is the LORD of LORDS?

[DRS]

Rev. 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.
Rev. 19:16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

If Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, but you say He isn't God, then where does that put the Lord God? How can God the Father be the Lord but Jesus is the LORD of LORDS?

lets put Revelation 17 in context

“And the ten horns that you saw mean ten kings, who have not yet received a kingdom, but they do receive authority as kings one hour with the wild beast. 13*These have one thought, and so they give their power and authority to the wild beast. 14*These will battle with the Lamb, but, because he is Lord of lords and King of kings, the Lamb will conquer them. Also, those called and chosen and faithful with him [will do so]

So he is being compared to the kings of the Earth and he does this with his joint heirs do you believe Jim that these ones with him are God also?

[DRS]

Actually when you look at both ones in context you see he is not God

11*And I saw the heaven opened, and, look! a white horse. And the one seated upon it is called Faithful and True, and he judges and carries on war in righteousness. 12*His eyes are a fiery flame, and upon his head are many diadems. He has a name written that no one knows but he himself, 13*and he is arrayed with an outer garment sprinkled with blood, and the name he is called is The Word of God. 14*Also, the armies that were in heaven were following him on white horses, and they were clothed in white, clean, fine linen. 15*And out of his mouth there protrudes a sharp long sword, that he may strike the nations with it, and he will shepherd them with a rod of iron. He treads too the winepress of the anger of the wrath of God the Almighty. 16*And upon his outer garment, even upon his thigh, he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords

[DRS]

So, AA, I am shocked that you would rather have man's opinion than Scripture!

And, as a dispensationalist, I do not believe there is even one contradiction in my King James Bible. Paul told us this regarding the present dispensation of the Grace of God:
• 2Tim. 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
• 1Cor. 9:17... a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me (Paul, that is).
• Eph. 3:2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me (Paul) to you-ward:
• Col. 1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me(Paul) for you, to fulfil the word of God;
• Rom. 15:16 That I (Paul) should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.
• Rom. 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I (Paul) am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:

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

Now, please contrast that with these verses:
• Matt. 15:24 But he (Jesus) answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
• Matt. 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
• Rom. 15:8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:

I see no contradiction in those passages. But I do see different DISPENSATIONS.

Paul was sent to both Jew and Greek

15*But the Lord said to him: “Be on your way, because this man is a chosen vessel to me to bear my name to the nations as well as to kings and the sons of Israel

12*For just as the body is one but has many members, and all the members of that body, although being many, are one body, so also is the Christ. 13*For truly by one spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink one spirit

There is not difference all are on equal footing now by the way the greek word is administration not dispensation

[DispensationalJim]

lets put Revelation 17 in context

“And the ten horns that you saw mean ten kings, who have not yet received a kingdom, but they do receive authority as kings one hour with the wild beast. 13*These have one thought, and so they give their power and authority to the wild beast. 14*These will battle with the Lamb, but, because he is Lord of lords and King of kings, the Lamb will conquer them. Also, those called and chosen and faithful with him [will do so]

So he is being compared to the kings of the Earth and he does this with his joint heirs do you believe Jim that these ones with him are God also?

That is a convenient way to "spin it" and play down the fact that Jesus ALONE is THE KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

But, as usual, DRS, it is YOUR OPINION. :)

More about Rev. 19:16 in my next post.

[DispensationalJim]

Actually when you look at both ones in context you see he is not God

11*And I saw the heaven opened, and, look! a white horse. And the one seated upon it is called Faithful and True, and he judges and carries on war in righteousness. 12*His eyes are a fiery flame, and upon his head are many diadems. He has a name written that no one knows but he himself, 13*and he is arrayed with an outer garment sprinkled with blood, and the name he is called is The Word of God. 14*Also, the armies that were in heaven were following him on white horses, and they were clothed in white, clean, fine linen. 15*And out of his mouth there protrudes a sharp long sword, that he may strike the nations with it, and he will shepherd them with a rod of iron. He treads too the winepress of the anger of the wrath of God the Almighty. 16*And upon his outer garment, even upon his thigh, he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords

Clearly, DRS, I disagree with your OPINION.

I find it quite interesting that you like to use the "original" Greek against us Trintarians, but your New World Translation ignores the Greek in Rev. 19:16 where THE KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS is CAPITALIZED!! Why is that, DRS?

[DRS]

That is a convenient way to "spin it" and play down the fact that Jesus ALONE is THE KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

But, as usual, DRS, it is YOUR OPINION. :)

More about Rev. 19:16 in my next post.

No that is the scripture in context and the bible in a whole as context

There is God, His servents and anointed ones, the kings who are called lords and the prophets and angels who are called god

The messiah who was to serve the only true God and sit on the throne David who sat on Jehovah's throne

[God is My Rock]

Let's look again at the context of your verse (from the good old King James):
• Col. 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: 15 Who is the image of the invisible God

If you take this verse literally, then how do you reconcile it with this ?

John 1:18

18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.


Notice that the word God/Theos is used, not the word "Father". If Jesus is God, then this scripture is untrue.

[DispensationalJim]

Paul was sent to both Jew and Greek

15*But the Lord said to him: “Be on your way, because this man is a chosen vessel to me to bear my name to the nations as well as to kings and the sons of Israel

12*For just as the body is one but has many members, and all the members of that body, although being many, are one body, so also is the Christ. 13*For truly by one spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink one spirit

There is not difference all are on equal footing now by the way the greek word is administration not dispensation

Yes, DRS, you are partly right. In Acts 9:15 when Paul was converted, he was originally sent to the Gentiles and the children of Israel.

But later in Acts 13:46; 18:6; 28:28, Paul is sent to the Gentiles.
• Acts 13:46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.
• Acts 18:6 And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean: from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.
• Acts 28:28 Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.

Paul states his mission wuite clearly:
• Rom. 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
• Rom. 15:16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.

But, Paul also says this:
• Acts 15:9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
• Rom. 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
• Rom. 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

So how can that be? Did Paul go to the Gentiles, or not?

Quite simple, really. The word "Gentile" can also be translated as "heathen" which some might even say could be called "sinner" and since we are ALL SINNERS (Rom. 3:23, etc.) that means Jews who has rejected their Messiah are all heathen or Gentiles!

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

And, DRS, as you probably recall, I especially love 1Cor. 12:13 since that shows that we believers are baptized by ONE SPIRIT into the Body of Christ!

[DispensationalJim]

If you take this verse literally, then how do you reconcile it with this ?

John 1:18

18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.


Notice that the word God/Theos is used, not the word "Father". If Jesus is God, then this scripture is untrue.

I guess, Rock, you missed my posts where I point out that when Jesus walked the earth, He was a MAN!!!

However, since you love the words of our Lord (just as I do), you must surely remember this verse:
• John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

How do you reconcile that verse with your John 1:18?

[God is My Rock]

Again, AA, please forgive me, but I just don't understand what you're saying.

Doesn't the Bible call God the Lord and Saviour many times? And yet the Bible also calls Jesus the Lord and Saviour many times.

And, of course, the verse I posted to which you responded:
• Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

I ask again: Is God the Father appearing in the Second Coming?

I say, no, the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ is coming back to earth to set up His Kingdom when He then finally becomes THE KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS!

• 1Tim. 6:14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: 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: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.
Rev. 19:16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

If Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, but you say He isn't God, then where does that put the Lord God? How can God the Father be the Lord but Jesus is the LORD of LORDS?

Very simple actually

God is the King of Kings, Lord of Lords.

Aha you say! See Jesus is called those things too!!!

Yes, but what does ALL of scripture say.....

John 17:11

11I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name—the name you gave me—so that they may be one as we are one.


There is a whole lot packed in this verse, the concept of God giving Jesus his name, the idea of the oneness that the Father and Son share, which can be shared by believers. etc...


John 17 is actually a very powerful chapter for an explanation of the relationship of Jesus to his Father, who according to Jesus' own words is

1After Jesus said this, he looked toward heaven and prayed: "Father, the time has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you. 2For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him. 3Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.


Jesus is praying to his Father, and he says flat out, that his Father is "the only true God".

And our trinitarians favorite Phil

Phil 2: (but verse 9)

9Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,


Notice here that the word God/Theos is used, not "Father". And that GOD gave Jesus THE name that is above every name.


So what is THE name that is above all names, that would allow Jesus to be one with his God?

KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

And Notice in Revelation it says

Rev. 19:16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.


This is the name that he was "given"


All from scripture, very clear, no debatable word definitions.


It requires effort to change the clear words of Jesus, and scripture.

Non- trinitarians can easily point to a whole chapter that supports a non-trinitarian view.

Is there any such detailed discussion on the trinity in the entire Bible?

Hmmm.

I wonder why that is?


Could it be that even if true, that it matters not to ones salvation?


Or more likely (IMVERYHO) that it simply is an extrabiblical doctrine which has been imposed upon scripture.

[God is My Rock]

I guess, Rock, you missed my posts where I point out that when Jesus walked the earth, He was a MAN!!!

However, since you love the words of our Lord (just as I do), you must surely remember this verse:
• John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

How do you reconcile that verse with your John 1:18?

If no man can see God and live, was Philip literally asking to die in your opinion?


I think this is a rather easy one DJ.

[DispensationalJim]

Very simple actually

God is the King of Kings, Lord of Lords.

Aha you say! See Jesus is called those things too!!!

Yes, but what does ALL of scripture say.....

John 17:11

11I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name—the name you gave me—so that they may be one as we are one.


There is a whole lot packed in this verse, the concept of God giving Jesus his name, the idea of the oneness that the Father and Son share, which can be shared by believers. etc...


John 17 is actually a very powerful chapter for an explanation of the relationship of Jesus to his Father, who according to Jesus' own words is

1After Jesus said this, he looked toward heaven and prayed: "Father, the time has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you. 2For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him. 3Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.


Jesus is praying to his Father, and he says flat out, that his Father is "the only true God".

And our trinitarians favorite Phil

Phil 2: (but verse 9)

9Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,


Notice here that the word God/Theos is used, not "Father". And that GOD gave Jesus THE name that is above every name.


So what is THE name that is above all names, that would allow Jesus to be one with his God?

KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

And Notice in Revelation it says

Rev. 19:16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.


This is the name that he was "given"


All from scripture, very clear, no debatable word definitions.


It requires effort to change the clear words of Jesus, and scripture.

Non- trinitarians can easily point to a whole chapter that supports a non-trinitarian view.

Is there any such detailed discussion on the trinity in the entire Bible?

Hmmm.

I wonder why that is?


Could it be that even if true, that it matters not to ones salvation?


Or more likely (IMVERYHO) that it simply is an extrabiblical doctrine which has been imposed upon scripture.

Of course, Rock, IMO the extra-biblical doctrine is the Unitarian one which can be traced back to Arian. :)

My son's name is Jim, also. Isn't that allowed? Does that make him any less my son?

But, once again, I ask: "Who is coming back to earth?" Is it God the Father?

No, it is "the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ."
• Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

[DispensationalJim]

If no man can see God and live, was Philip literally asking to die in your opinion?


I think this is a rather easy one DJ.

In John 14:9, was Jesus lying, then? If it is so easy to reconcile John 1:18 with John 14:9, dear Rock, please explain to us how you do it.

[God is My Rock]

Of course, Rock, IMO the extra-biblical doctrine is the Unitarian one which can be traced back to Arian. :)

My son's name is Jim, also. Isn't that allowed? Does that make him any less my son?

But, once again, I ask: "Who is coming back to earth?" Is it God the Father?

No, it is "the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ."
• Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

But what about the post?

This is scripture, it is not from some website, this is scripture standing by itself, very little of me or anyone else for that matter in it.

The presentation is mine, the order of listing is mine, but that is it.

[God is My Rock]

In John 14:9, was Jesus lying, then? If it is so easy to reconcile John 1:18 with John 14:9, dear Rock, please explain to us how you do it.

Well at least I thought this was a simple one.

Let's start with you answering the post.

Was Philip literally asking to die?

[DRS]

Yes, DRS, you are partly right. In Acts 9:15 when Paul was converted, he was originally sent to the Gentiles and the children of Israel.

But later in Acts 13:46; 18:6; 28:28, Paul is sent to the Gentiles.
• Acts 13:46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.
• Acts 18:6 And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean: from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.
• Acts 28:28 Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.

Paul states his mission wuite clearly:
• Rom. 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
• Rom. 15:16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.

But, Paul also says this:
• Acts 15:9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
• Rom. 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
• Rom. 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

So how can that be? Did Paul go to the Gentiles, or not?

Quite simple, really. The word "Gentile" can also be translated as "heathen" which some might even say could be called "sinner" and since we are ALL SINNERS (Rom. 3:23, etc.) that means Jews who has rejected their Messiah are all heathen or Gentiles!

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

And, DRS, as you probably recall, I especially love 1Cor. 12:13 since that shows that we believers are baptized by ONE SPIRIT into the Body of Christ!

Can you give us one example where it is translated as heathens?

But Paul continued to serve both Jew and Gentile, with his letter of Hebrews and his preaching tours he served the Jews as there were Jews also scattered about in the nations from the exile. He preached to the Gentiles also

Those who preach that Jesus is not the Christ are anti christs as John shows and preach the message inspired by anti christ

[DRS]

In John 14:9, was Jesus lying, then? If it is so easy to reconcile John 1:18 with John 14:9, dear Rock, please explain to us how you do it.

I can

Hebrews 1: 3*He is the reflection of [his] glory and the exact representation of his very being, and he sustains all things by the word of his power; and after he had made a purification for our sins he sat down on the right hand of the Majesty in lofty places.

Colossians 1:15*He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation

2 Corinthians 4:, 4*among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through

So John 1:18 iight no man has seen God at anytime the only begotten god has explained him

By his life course his way of dealing with us he perfectly reflected Jehovah God in all he did, not something we are capable even though we were made in God's image we are now sinful and can not reflect Jehovah in all we do

[DispensationalJim]

Can you give us one example where it is translated as heathens?

But Paul continued to serve both Jew and Gentile, with his letter of Hebrews and his preaching tours he served the Jews as there were Jews also scattered about in the nations from the exile. He preached to the Gentiles also

Those who preach that Jesus is not the Christ are anti christs as John shows and preach the message inspired by anti christ

Yes, DRS. Here are some examples:
• Acts 4:25 ..., Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things?
• 2Cor. 11:26 ... in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren;
• Gal. 1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:
• Gal. 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; 8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles) 9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.
• Gal. 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.

The same greek word is also sometimes translated as "nations"

As I said, Paul preached to Gentiles -- which in the dispensation of the Grace of God means anyone and everyone who rejects the Jesus Christ as their Saviour. Just as Peter, James, and John did what they were told to do by Christ Himself and preached to the nation of Israel. (See Gal. 2:7-9 above)
• Acts 11:19 Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only.
• James 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
• 1Pet. 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Chris throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,

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

Paul opened every epistle with his name, Paul.

Therefore, IMO Hebrews was not written by Paul. We can debate that all week, but there is no proof either way. There are plenty of "scholars" on both sides of that fence. So you may say you believe or think Paul wrote Hebrews, but you cannot say he did write Hebrews, because you just can't know for sure.

There are many doctrinal issues that we could discuss regarding Hebrews compared to Romans through Philemon, but that would be side tracking this thread again, so if you want to start a new thread about Hebrews, that would be fine.

[DispensationalJim]

Well at least I thought this was a simple one.

Let's start with you answering the post.

Was Philip literally asking to die?

I see no scriptural support for that idea. What do you think?

BTW, I recall going through this issue a couple of times previously on here, and I'm sure I mentioned the OT verses which indicate that some did see God. Should I dig those back up and ask you how you explain them again? For instance, did Adam and Eve see God or not? Then there is Jacob in Gen. 32 and Moses and his buddies in Ex. 24.

Is that enough of an answer, or are you looking for some deeper analogy?

[DispensationalJim]

But what about the post?

This is scripture, it is not from some website, this is scripture standing by itself, very little of me or anyone else for that matter in it.

The presentation is mine, the order of listing is mine, but that is it.

I reread it and your presentation is fine. I have no problem with the Scripture verses. The Father rewarded His Son for His willingness to "give up" His Heavenly position as THE CREATOR OF EVERYTHING, etc. to come to earth as a MAN to die for our sins (Phil. 2). When Jesus returned to His throne in Heaven, His "Holy Father" gave Him all He had before and more since He now has the "name above all names" and He will return to earth to set up the Kingdom for Israel that was promised so many times in the OT after He raptures HIS BODY, the Church, up to Heaven.

I see no evidence in your post that Jesus was not God in the beginning. But I see John 1:1-3 which does say clearly that He was God in the beginning and in Titus 2:13 and many other verses which have been quoted on here repeatedly showing He is God in the end as He comes back to earth to reign. That Jesus was a man while on this earth is not a problem for any Trinitarian I know.

[DRS]

Yes, DRS. Here are some examples:
• Acts 4:25 ..., Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things?
• 2Cor. 11:26 ... in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren;
• Gal. 1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:
• Gal. 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; 8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles) 9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.
• Gal. 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.

The same greek word is also sometimes translated as "nations"

As I said, Paul preached to Gentiles -- which in the dispensation of the Grace of God means anyone and everyone who rejects the Jesus Christ as their Saviour. Just as Peter, James, and John did what they were told to do by Christ Himself and preached to the nation of Israel. (See Gal. 2:7-9 above)
• Acts 11:19 Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only.
• James 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
• 1Pet. 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Chris throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,

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

Paul opened every epistle with his name, Paul.

Therefore, IMO Hebrews was not written by Paul. We can debate that all week, but there is no proof either way. There are plenty of "scholars" on both sides of that fence. So you may say you believe or think Paul wrote Hebrews, but you cannot say he did write Hebrews, because you just can't know for sure.

There are many doctrinal issues that we could discuss regarding Hebrews compared to Romans through Philemon, but that would be side tracking this thread again, so if you want to start a new thread about Hebrews, that would be fine.

So I looked at all those and they say nation not heathens

And Acts is quoting psalms 2 which says  Why have the nations been in tumult
And the national groups themselves kept muttering an empty thing?