Should You Believe In The Trinity?

[matt1618]

One other thing, somebody mentioned no one was awed by Jesus, they didn't fall down, or worshiped or whatever. The incarnation in some sense of appearance, shielded his awesomeness. But in Glory, we will all fall down before Jesus. John himself, who walked & talked with him, and heard Jesus talk, when saw him in glory, did exactly that in Revelation 1:7-8, 17-18. Jesus appears to John in Revelation 1:

5 To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood 6 and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. 7 Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, every one who pierced him; and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Even so. Amen. 8 "I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.

13 and in the midst of the lampstands one like a son of man, clothed with a long robe and with a golden girdle round his breast; 14 his head and his hair were white as white wool, white as snow; his eyes were like a flame of fire, 15 his feet were like burnished bronze, refined as in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters; 16 in his right hand he held seven stars, from his mouth issued a sharp two-edged sword, and his face was like the sun shining in full strength. 17 When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand upon me, saying, "Fear not, I am the first and the last, 18 and the living one; I died, and behold I am alive for evermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades.


Okay, so Jesus says that he himself is the Alpha and the Omega in Revelation, which is the first and last. When Jesus appears in his glory, John shows the deference that you asked for. Who is the first & last except God himself? The Alpha & Omega (means first & last) is God himself, God almighty, vs. 7 & 8. And who is that one? The one who is coming on the clouds, the one who is pierced, Jesus himself. He is the same one who is the first & the last. He repeats the same thing as the Son of Man (vv. 13-14), the first and the last.


John sees him in his glory and then falls dead at his feet v. 17, what you said you'd expect the disciples to do. Jesus comforts him, by saying, repeating what was referred to earlier, I am the First and the Last. I was dead, and am alive forevermore. Isaiah confirms what Jesus again is proclaiming to John in Revelation:

Isaiah 44:6: Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.

Isaiah 48:12: "Hearken to me, O Jacob, and Israel, whom I called! I am He, I am the first, and I am the last.

In case somehow we don't get it, John spells this out one more time near the end of his book, Jesus is the first & the last, the Alpha, the Omega, Rev: 22:13

12 "Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense, to repay every one for what he has done. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."

Now, So who is Jesus saying He is when He says 'I am the First and the Last?' The Alpha & the Omega, The Lord God Himself!!!!!

Going to work, will respond to feedback late tonight.

[DRS]

Who gave the Revelation to Jesus according 1:1

[God is My Rock]

But only God is judge. Nothing about whoa. Let us look again at John 5:18-24:

18 This was why the Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God. 19 Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing; for whatever he does, that the Son does likewise. 20 For the Father loves the Son, and shows him all that he himself is doing; and greater works than these will he show him, that you may marvel. 21 For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will. 22 The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. 24 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears my word and believes him who sent me, has eternal life; he does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.


Ok, John the author says He made himself equal with God, and the context shows this. Now I understand you can say 'well in the first part, it says he broke the Sabbath and you can say 'well are you saying Jesus broke the Sabbath if you say he is equal to God.?'' I'd say, no, but the context shows that the 2nd part of v. 18, goes along with this. That He 'makes himself equal with he Father'. The Trnity is perfect unity, but there are different roles and functions. So He is not going to do anything that the Father does, but only does what the Father does. So if he does what the Father does, He thus, must have ALL the capabilities, of the Father, right? For as the Father does He does, vs. 20. The Father raises the dead and gives life, in the exact same way the Son gives life to whom he wills. That is the fleshing out of verse 19, in action. How in the world does that show inferiority in any way at all?


Then we go on to vs. 22, The Father judges no one but has given all judgment to the Son. Hmm, but who is the Judge of the World but God?

Thus, there is a delegation, but to say that Jesus is lesser but he is given delegation that makes him less of a person? Not so. After all, what does Scripture say about who is judge?

Psalm 9:7-8
7: But the LORD sits enthroned for ever, he has established his throne for judgment; 8: and he judges the world with righteousness, he judges the peoples with equity.

Romans 14:10 Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God;

Psalm 94: 1: O LORD, thou God of vengeance, thou God of vengeance, shine forth! 2: Rise up, O judge of the earth; render to the proud their deserts!


Who has this role of judging the earth? Is it not God? Does that make God the Father not God? And who is it but Jesus? Doesn't matter if there are roles. Jesus is the God of vengeance, he is the judge of all the earth. Jesus is the one who judges with equity. Any idea of Jesus being judge, shows that he is Yahweh, Jehovah himself.


Now, moving along it says that all may honor the Son even as he honors the Father, v. 23? He is thus equal with God? Thus, this explication, shows that what John wrote in John 5:18, is shown to be absolutely correct. How does that not say he is equal? You diminish Jesus you diminish the Father. He is due the exact same worship that is due the Father, does it not? To me it is a stupendous tearing out of context of verse 19, to say anything else than that Jesus, judge of all the earth, who is not only declared by John to be equal to God the Father v. 18, is due the exact same regard as the Father. Who cares if it is delegated role,it still in Scripture says that He is judge over all the Earth. If Jesus is judge, he is equal, and is God himself!!

This time, I will interact in the evening. Going to work now.

The point is, and the reason I believe Jesus is "inferior" to God, is because each and every power, attribute, or quality which he has, was given to him by God.

GOD cannot be given anything.

You can say "roles" and "delegate" all you want, but one verse is very clear that "life" was one of those qualities.

Is "life" a role?

Is "life" a delegated position?


What about the power and authority to give the attribute of life to another?


Also just like the power of attorney for all intents and purposes ,makes another "equal" to the grantee, does not make that other person the grantee.

Another example would be the concept of royalty. Just as a prince, or queen, or someone of an even lesser rank may "speak as" the king, have the same authority, be due the same honor, and respect as the king, and yet they are not the king.



By the way if you use the color white, then when we repost, your text dissapears.

[God is My Rock]

Romans 3:10 "There is no righteous, not even one".
Romans 3:23 "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God". . In a logical line of reasoning would this not have to include Jesus?
Many places in the Bible state that God is the only one who is sinless. Therefore, if Jesus is not "God come in the flesh", then how would he be the perfect sacrifice, The spotless lamb? To help me try to follow your line of reasoning, Do you personally believe Jesus to be a sinner.
In Isaiah 9:6 " and He will be called, Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace" And there are more than enough places in the Greek ,to show that there is no difference in this context between," Mighty God", "Almighty God", "Alpha and Omega", "Everlasting Father". And Jesus, throughout scripture is called by ALL these titles. So, who is He. Is He the Lord, a liar, or a lunatic. If he isn't God come in the flesh than who do you say He is.

He is also said to have been given the name above all names. All that he has and is, (think about that statement for a second, I mean really think about it) ALL that he has or is, was given to him!

Can GOD be given anything?

What power does GOD not already posess?

What name is not already his?

What aspect of authority did he not always hold?

How could he be everlasting and yet not posess the most basic GODly attribute which is life?


And yet, you would have me believe that such an entity (Jesus) is GOD.


Major, Major hurdles to overcome, and so far no one on this thread has come close to explaining this.

The closest that anyone has put forward is a watery version of modalism. (economy of the trinity). But if one thinks about that logic, it fails miserably because it is just that, modalism. And does not and cannot address the concept of Jesus not posessing life in the first place.

And no, I do not think that Jesus was a sinner. Nor do I think that "the Christ" had to be God, nor a sinner.

Jesus is the Christ, the SON of GOD.

[the oldtimer]

[quote=DRS;47858051][No as we see in other verses all does not mean all.]/quote]

In Ro.3: 23 " For ALL have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God". Staying within logical bounds, then what would be the meaning of Ro. 3: 10 "There is NO ONE righteous, NOT EVEN ONE".

[Jesus is not called the Alpha and Omega remember God gives the Revelation of Jesus who gives to his angel who relays it to John, so you have 4 persons speaking in Revelation]/quote]

In rev.1:8 it is clearly Jesus speaking, and He says " I am the Alpha and Omega,...who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty". And in Rev 1:17-18. Jesus says, "I am the First and the Last, and Jesus repeats Himself in Rev 22: 13, Among other places. You will notice who was speaking in Rev:22:16, " I Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony". It was not an angel, or John, but Jesus himself. Do you believe Jesus was not telling the truth?


[Jesus is called El Gibbor in Isaiah not El Shaddai, Mighty not Almighty only Jehovah has that title applied to Him]/quote]

Is it not true, that the names are used inter-changeably in scripture.

[Of course Jesus is he is head of the congregation and as such that makes him lord but Jesus has a head or lord over him to.]/quote]

I would agree, that Jesus is the head of the congregation. But, my question was, "do you believe that Jesus is God come in the Flesh"? Based on your answer, how would you rate yourself in light of 2 John, verse 7.

[DRS]

I Peter 2:22*He committed no sin, nor was deception found in his mouth.

Seems Jesus was not part of that all

Who gives the Revelation to Jesus according to Revelation 1:1?

Show me where Jesus is called El Shaddai

I would rate myself a Christian who made Jesus the Christ?

[the oldtimer]

I Peter 2:22*He committed no sin, nor was deception found in his mouth.

Seems Jesus was not part of that all

Who gives the Revelation to Jesus according to Revelation 1:1?

Show me where Jesus is called El Shaddai

I would rate myself a Christian who made Jesus the Christ?


Ro.3:10," There is NO ONE righteous,not even one." What part of that statement would Jesus have missed.


In Rev1:1, It says "the relevation OF Jesus Christ, not TO Him. In other words the truth about Jesus. And yes the message was given to an angel, to give to John. But, I was talking about Rev.1:8, not Rev. 1:1, wasn't I. In Rev. 1:8, who is speaking when He calls himself "The Almighty". In the Greek1:8 reads " I am the Alpha and the Omega, says The God. The one being,and one who was, and the one who Is to come."
The "New World Translation" Has added the words,"and to the angel of Smyrna write: these are the things he has said. In the next sentence they leave out the words " I Am" , to make it appear that it isn't God talking. This interpetaion can in no way be supported by the Greek, and in fact cannot be found anywhere in history before the publication of the NWT.

Of course the word "El Shaddai" is not used. It was a Hebrew term that translates to "God Almighty" in english. If El Shaddai were to be used in a modern translation very few people would have any idea what was being talked about. Jesus is called, and in fact calls himself,"God Almighty" many times in Scripture, is this not true.

No one "made" Jesus the Christ. He always has been, and always will be "the Christ". He said it, and I believe!!

[God is My Rock]

I'll have to address this in portions for the sake of brevity.
I'll go with the low hanging fruit first.



Except Thomas addresses Christ as "my Lord and my God". To make it even clearer, the Greek text is:

και απεκριθη ο θωμας και ειπεν αυτω ο κυριος μου και ο θεος μου

There is nothing exclamatory in the Greek as a kinda "Oh my God" moment. If it were, the original Greek would have been Thee (two short "e", not one long "e" sound) Mou. Thomas here is literally calling Christ "his God". It is clearly the possessive form of the Greek and not the exclamatory colloquiallism. In English, the two are the same. Not in the Greek.

Even if I were to accept that, your explanation still does not prove that theos has to mean THE GOD.

[DRS]

Ro.3:10," There is NO ONE righteous,not even one." What part of that statement would Jesus have missed.


In Rev1:1, It says "the relevation OF Jesus Christ, not TO Him. In other words the truth about Jesus. And yes the message was given to an angel, to give to John. But, I was talking about Rev.1:8, not Rev. 1:1, wasn't I. In Rev. 1:8, who is speaking when He calls himself "The Almighty". In the Greek1:8 reads " I am the Alpha and the Omega, says The God. The one being,and one who was, and the one who Is to come."
The "New World Translation" Has added the words,"and to the angel of Smyrna write: these are the things he has said. In the next sentence they leave out the words " I Am" , to make it appear that it isn't God talking. This interpetaion can in no way be supported by the Greek, and in fact cannot be found anywhere in history before the publication of the NWT.

Of course the word "El Shaddai" is not used. It was a Hebrew term that translates to "God Almighty" in english. If El Shaddai were to be used in a modern translation very few people would have any idea what was being talked about. Jesus is called, and in fact calls himself,"God Almighty" many times in Scripture, is this not true.

No one "made" Jesus the Christ. He always has been, and always will be "the Christ". He said it, and I believe!!

Revelation 1:1 A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place. And he sent forth his angel and presented [it] in signs through him to his slave John,

So God gave it to Jesus so God would be speaking also

As for you assertion that the NWT altered Revelation 2:8

"To the angel of the church in Smyrna write:
These are the words of him who is the First and the Last, who died and came to life again.

There is no ego emi in Revelation 2:8

Do you know what Christ means?

No where in scripture does Jesus call himself God Almighty

[the oldtimer]

Even if I were to accept that, your explanation still does not prove that theos has to mean THE GOD.

The word theos in and of itself, does not mean "The GOD". But when you put the O with the funny little mark above it, in front of the word Theos, it does mean THE GOD. So even I can tell which is being talked about.

[DRS]

The word theos in and of itself, does not mean "The GOD". But when you put the O with the funny little mark above it, in front of the word Theos, it does mean THE GOD. So even I can tell which is being talked about.

Do you mean Ho or Ton?

Do you notice that is missing from in front of the description in John 1:1 for the second occurance of God but no the first instance the God the word was with?

[God is My Rock]

To address a few of your points;
Trinitarians believe Christ was fully God, and fully man. Two natures. Now, part of Christ's mission was to live the human existence up to a certain extent. He was born of a woman, as all humans are. He was tempted by Satan, as all humans are. He was struck with sorrow at the prospect of losing His life, as most humans are, unless they are suicidal. And even though Christ knew, KNEW He would be risen again in glory, His human nature was still greatly grieved at the prospect of dying. However, Christ also states that His Father loves Him because He (Christ) willingly would be laying down His life, and willingly taking it up again. So the fact He possessed a human nature is undeniabe I think by both you and I up to this point. So I think so far we are in agreement.
Now, having possessed a human nature that manifested itself quite explicitly, it is not too big of a stretch to also show that Christ was teaching (or trying to teach though many did not follow) subordination to God (or for us Trinitarians Himself). God had tried to instruct the Israelites to submit to His will through Moses and other prophets and always something would go wrong. So God takes it upon Himself, taking human form, to save mankind from death and preach subjection to His will by giving them a more perfect example to follow and He provided the ultimate example; crucifixion even though His human will wished to avoid it.
Now in John 1:1, St. John says that in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word WAS God. John is quite specific here. As Chrysostom states and makes the case quite nicely;

"Then, as he advances, he has more clearly revealed it, by adding, that this “Word” also “was God.”
“But yet created,” it may be said. What then hindered him from saying, that “In the beginning God made the Word”? at least Moses speaking of the earth says, not that “in the beginning was the earth,” but that “He made it,” and then it was. What now hindered John from saying in like manner, that “In the beginning God made the Word”? For if Moses feared lest any one should assert that the earth was uncreated,52 (javascript:toggle('fnf_iv.v-p26.1');)52 ἀ γένητον. much more ought John to have feared this respecting the Son, if He was indeed created. "
This is quite the point being made. John becomes very purposeful in his language in writing this verse and there was no reason for him to say the Word was God, instead of saying the Word was created by God. Also, John opens the Gospel with this very phrase. He lays the foundation for everything else to follow; that Jesus was the Word of God, but is also God.

OR

Jesus could be the uncreated Son of God, like he claimed.

Just because he is the Son, does not mean by default that he was created.

Also

This repost
#9893


First let me say I am not JW. I do not believe that Jesus is "a god".

To me our debate here is over interpretation.

The validity of it, and the support for one interpretation over another.

Let me stress one more time, technically I am arguing a position that I do not fully agree with.


Okay, so Grudem and John 1:1

Pg 234.

read the paragraph there. Then go to the footnote(the loooooonnnng footnote underneath) #12.

The second paragraph.

Grudem says " Of course if John had wanted to say, "The word was a god" (with an indefinite predicate, "a god") it would have been written this way,....

So what does Grudem then say?

He asks who really is John talking about, The God, or some other heavenly being.

He then says that "The context decides this question clearly"

Grudem then goes on to quote some verses in chapter 1 and Genesis 1:1.

He then says that because these verses refer to "THE GOD", then verse 2 must also refer to "THE GOD" (I wonder if he meant verse 1 there?)

I would counter that by agreeing with Grudem that context does clearly decide the question



1.) The immediate context

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning.

If we were to take this sentence, and instead of the emotionally, and theologically charged sentences above used these instead:


In the beginning was the SPROCKET, and the SPROCKET was with THE WIDGET, and THE WIDGET was SPROCKET. He was with THE WIDGET in the beginning.

The second half of verse 1 is in question.

It can be interpreted in one of two ways. In modern english it could be interpreted as :

and the SPROCKET was THE WIDGET.

or

and the SPROCKET was a WIDGET.


Since there can only be 1 THE WIDGET, and the surrounding immediate context, says that the SPROCKET was with THE WIDGET

I contend that no one in the past, nor the present, without a priorly accepted doctrine, would interpret this in any other way than to say that

whatever is with something, does not make it the thing itself.

I challenge you to give me a single example aside from these verses where someone would think that the stating (twice)of something being with something else would provide a context to suggest that the thing in question is the same as the other thing that it was with.

This is immediate context.

As far as context within John itself,

John 1:34

34"I myself have seen, and have testified that this is the Son of God."

John 3:16

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:17

For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world
through him.

John 3:18

Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.



Jesus' own words are pretty good.....



John 10:36
what about the one whom the Father set 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'?



His accursers are pretty good too.....



John 19:7
The Jews insisted, "We have a law, and according to that law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God."


And how about the point of John's Gospel? Why does JOHN say that he wrote this?

John 20:31
But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.



Notice that "the Father" is not used in any of these.

The Word "God" is used.

Remember the post about definitions and interpretations of words????

So immediate context, and then the context of John.

Grudem is correct, Context is clearly decisive

[the oldtimer]

Do you mean Ho or Ton?

Do you notice that is missing from in front of the description in John 1:1 for the second occurance of God but no the first instance the God the word was with?

I don't know if it is Ho, or Ton. You already know I have not studied Greek. I know it is that "O" with the little line above it that I am talking about, and that letter is"THE" , as in "THE GOD . In the three interlinears that I have, that letter is there in front of" WORD". Making it read , In the beginning was "THE WORD" And "THE WORD" was with God, and "GOD" was"THE WORD". Beside that, I wasn't talking about John 1:1 was I ?

[God is My Rock]

Sure, but the main point of the incarnation was 'The Word was made flesh' and dwelt among us. He became a person, just like you and me in one sense, the whole point of the incarnation. He talked with people as a regular person, so even though he made this outlandish declaration of him being God (as he did in John 5), they had walked with him over a period of time, that they could approach Him. I didn't see a statement from any disciple saying that He wasn't God. We do have Scriptures written by apostles noting that He is God (Heb. 1:6, 8, Co. 1:16, Tit. 2:13)

John 20:28 Thomas does so declare Him to be so. They understood him, there was no need to proclaim it. The people picked up the stones on those occasions I noted ( Jn 10:30-31, John 8:58-59, Mt. 26:64, noting that He was God, & it would have been blasphemy. Ultimately the disciples accepted him. So they called him teacher. Why can't he be an ultimate teacher? There is one ultimate teacher, that teacher is God, Mt. 23:7.

Not buying it.

[the oldtimer]

Not buying it.

So, where do you think Matt1618 is being dishonest with you? Or is it that you WILL NOT understand. If it is that you "cannot understand" that can be reasoned with, But if it is that you "will not understand" that can not, and this whole discussion becomes a waste of time for both of us. I think you should know that I am a person whom if you show me that I am wrong, and you are right, I will come bang your drum with you. So far you have not.

[God is My Rock]

So, where do you think Matt1618 is being dishonest with you? Or is it that you WILL NOT understand. If it is that you "cannot understand" that can be reasoned with, But if it is that you "will not understand" that can not, and this whole discussion becomes a waste of time for both of us. I think you should know that I am a person whom if you show me that I am wrong, and you are right I will come bang your drum with you. So far you have not.

I agree.

It is not that I will not, but whatever someone holds as THE TRUTH, I set awfully high standards for.


Jesus nor God expects us to be masterminds/ expert theologians/ linguistic experts/ etc....

Having said that, the concept of a triune God IMO is not in line with the majority of scripture.


And I did just look and DRS is right there is no "o" with a squiggle nor any other discernible "article" in John 1 for the second reference to the word theos.

actually see post 17763

[Constantine the Great]

Even if I were to accept that, your explanation still does not prove that theos has to mean THE GOD.
Your acceptance or not does not change the facts. And no, THomas did not say, THE GOD, he said MY GOD. Very different. Nothing changes that FACT.

[ralittlefield]

I agree.

It is not that I will not, but whatever someone holds as THE TRUTH, I set awfully high standards for.


Jesus nor God expects us to be masterminds/ expert theologians/ linguistic experts/ etc....

Having said that, the concept of a triune God IMO is not in line with the majority of scripture.


And I did just look and DRS is right there is no "o" with a squiggle nor any other discernible "article" in John 1 for the second reference to the word theos.

actually see post 17763

If DRS is correct then to be consistent theos should be translated "a god" in verse 6, 12, 13, and twice in verse 18 also. Do you believe "a god" is a correct translation in those verses?

[God is My Rock]

Your acceptance or not does not change the facts. And no, THomas did not say, THE GOD, he said MY GOD. Very different. Nothing changes that FACT.

He used the word theos. What I was trying to point out is that even if Thomas said my theos, that that does not mean that he was using the word theos to refer to Jesus as GOD.

[God is My Rock]

If DRS is correct then to be consistent theos should be translated "a god" in verse 6, 12, 13, and twice in verse 18 also. Do you believe "a god" is a correct translation in those verses?

No, but in the other two instance the word tov is used addressing GOD.

[God is My Rock]

If DRS is correct then to be consistent theos should be translated "a god" in verse 6, 12, 13, and twice in verse 18 also. Do you believe "a god" is a correct translation in those verses?

And besides, Just because I use a word that has multiple definitions more than once in the same thought, does not AUTOMATICALLY mean that they MUST have the same definition.

missed the rule on that one.....

[ralittlefield]

No, but in the other two instance the word tov is used addressing GOD.


We (including DRS) would do well to leave the Greek to those that are qualified to talk about it. My point is that verses 6, 12, 13, and 18 seem to be written the same as the second instance of theos in verse 1. Why would they not be translated "a god"?

[DispensationalJim]

He is also said to have been given the name above all names. All that he has and is, (think about that statement for a second, I mean really think about it) ALL that he has or is, was given to him!

Can GOD be given anything?

What power does GOD not already posess?

What name is not already his?

What aspect of authority did he not always hold?

How could he be everlasting and yet not posess the most basic GODly attribute which is life?


And yet, you would have me believe that such an entity (Jesus) is GOD.


Major, Major hurdles to overcome, and so far no one on this thread has come close to explaining this.

The closest that anyone has put forward is a watery version of modalism. (economy of the trinity). But if one thinks about that logic, it fails miserably because it is just that, modalism. And does not and cannot address the concept of Jesus not posessing life in the first place.

And no, I do not think that Jesus was a sinner. Nor do I think that "the Christ" had to be God, nor a sinner.

Jesus is the Christ, the SON of GOD.

If I may interupt, IMO your so-called "hurdles" are of your own creation, since when Jesus WAS GOD in Heaven, He chose to MAKE HIMSELF INTO A MAN (as usual, please read Phil. 2). Now, please, please, Rock, think about this.

Jesus has made Himself into a man, so now He has voluntarily "given up" His OMNIPOTENCE, OMNIPRESENCE, and OMNISCIENCE which He clearly had when He CREATED THE WORLDS, etc. OK, now He has become a man SO HE COULD DIE FOR OUR SINS. You agree with that, right?

Since He was able to die as a man (but now has risen from the grave), would He not need to depend on His Holy Father to GIVE HIM BACK WHAT WAS HIS BEFORE?

I don't see that as "rocket science" to comprehend.

[the oldtimer]

I agree.

It is not that I will not, but whatever someone holds as THE TRUTH, I set awfully high standards for.


Jesus nor God expects us to be masterminds/ expert theologians/ linguistic experts/ etc....

Having said that, the concept of a triune God IMO is not in line with the majority of scripture.


And I did just look and DRS is right there is no "o" with a squiggle nor any other discernible "article" in John 1 for the second reference to the word theos.

actually see post 17763

Do you Think it is possible to raise the level of what a person wants to see, to the point that it blocks out what is really true?

Nowhere in the Bible is the word, trinity, to be found, but the concept is there.
Deut6:4 " hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is . And that seem pretty clear cut. That would be The Almighty God. But , The Father, The Son, And The Spirit, are all eluded to as being God. In Acts 5: 1-5 is one place that The Spirit is Called God, and there are more. I am sorry I cannot take the time to look them up, I am supposed to be packing for a trip. And Jesus called himself, and was referred to by others as The God. So to my untrained eye I came to the conclusion that there had to be something going on there that was way above my head. In Acts 17:29,Romans1:20, And Col 2:9. ( KJV) the word Godhead is used. Col:2:9"for in him dwelleth the fulness of the God head fully"(KJV). Col 2:9 "because it is in him that all the fullness of the divine quallity dwells bodily". (NWT). would you explain these verses according to your theology. If God is 1, and not 3 in 1, it does not make sense. What does the term Godhead mean? The God I serve, Father,Son, and Holy Spirit, is above my explaining. OOPS, My wife is home . I am supposed to be packed.

[Constantine the Great]

He used the word theos. What I was trying to point out is that even if Thomas said my theos, that that does not mean that he was using the word theos to refer to Jesus as GOD.

If this is the case, and Thomas was not calling Christ God, but a god, do you think Christ would be ok with someone violating God's Commandments, not to mention the cornerstone of Christ's entire ministry; to believe in Him and Him alone?

[Unsilent Minority]

:cry:

[DispensationalJim]

:cry:

Welcome to Hannity's Religion Forum, and especially to the "Trinity" thread.

I am curious to learn which side you are on with the "O ye of little faith" comment. Do you mind being a little more specific?

[the oldtimer]

And I did just look and DRS is right there is no "o" with a squiggle nor any other discernible "article" in John 1 for the second reference to the word theos.

actually see post 17763[/quote]

I had to look this one up, and I still cannot figure out what point you are trying to make. If you are saying that it should be "a god" or any form of small "g" then the context of the sentence totally lose its meaning. My Pastor, who has a Masters in Greek, said that the sentence must be translated to mean the 'All Mighty". Will you please tell me what you are saying, because when I read it, all I can come up with " in the beginning was the Word, (All Mighty God). And the Word (All Mighty God) was with God (All Mighty God). And the Word(All Mighty God) was God. ( All Mighty God) Now do I understand how that can be? NO, but it is there so I must accept that it is true. I do not believe that God would lie to me, and if I refuse to accept one part of the Bible then I might as well throw the whole thing out.

[matt1618]

The point is, and the reason I believe Jesus is "inferior" to God, is because each and every power, attribute, or quality which he has, was given to him by God.

GOD cannot be given anything.

You can say "roles" and "delegate" all you want, but one verse is very clear that "life" was one of those qualities.

Is "life" a role?

Is "life" a delegated position?


What about the power and authority to give the attribute of life to another?


Okay, you are ignoring the fact that only Jehova is judge of the whole world, he judges with equity. He is God himself. Jesus is judge of the world. Even if it is delegated to Jesus, Scripture attests that only God can give that judgment. John relates that he makes himself equal with God, because he is, in John 5:18, as shown in John 5:23, when he says one must honor the Son in the same way as He honors the Father.

Now, in reference to life, and Jesus we can see John 5:26 saying about the Son having life in Himself granted by the Father. Sure, but that can't be seen in isolation of what scripture attests to Jesus in the beginning of John's gospel.

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God; 3 all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. 4 In him was life, and the life was the light of men.

Okay, I did it in orange, you said you needed something visible, white wasn't good enough. He was in the beginning, created alll things, not going into debate about God, a god, etc, but the fact that in Himself was life. In him, in and of itself, He was life. He created all things, and He is the source of life.

Now, on to John 5:26:

For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself,

You can not read John 5:26 in opposition to Jesus being called the source of all things, and He is the life.


Now, it says that as the Father has life in Himself, in the same way, the Son has life in Himself. Ok, so no difference, whether it was granted or not. It does not say that He gave him life, it says the Son Has life Himself in the same way as the Father. So if 'as the Father, 'as the Son'.

It is not that he was given life. It isn 't noted as though He was without life, and then he received life. For if He received life, He would not have it in Himself. For indeed, what is in Himself? That He should Himself be the very life.


Now what has happened is though He's shared life with His Father from all eternity, He brings this life into the World into the world as the gift of the Father who He reveals to men (Jn 1:4).


Again, I continue to stress this is in the midst of Jesus proclaiming that He is executing judgment, which only God Himself can do.

[DispensationalJim]

And I did just look and DRS is right there is no "o" with a squiggle nor any other discernible "article" in John 1 for the second reference to the word theos.

actually see post 17763

I had to look this one up, and I still cannot figure out what point you are trying to make. If you are saying that it should be "a god" or any form of small "g" then the context of the sentence totally lose its meaning. My Pastor, who has a Masters in Greek, said that the sentence must be translated to mean the 'All Mighty". Will you please tell me what you are saying, because when I read it, all I can come up with " in the beginning was the Word, (All Mighty God). And the Word (All Mighty God) was with God (All Mighty God). And the Word(All Mighty God) was God. ( All Mighty God) Now do I understand how that can be? NO, but it is there so I must accept that it is true. I do not believe that God would lie to me, and if I refuse to accept one part of the Bible then I might as well throw the whole thing out.

Good job, oldtimer! I hope you can continue to use your Pastor's Greek expertise in such a fine way.

And I am certainly with on you on that last statement about the Bible, too!

[DispensationalJim]

Okay, you are ignoring the fact that only Jehova is judge of the whole world, he judges with equity. He is God himself. Jesus is judge of the world. Even if it is delegated to Jesus, Scripture attests that only God can give that judgment. John relates that he makes himself equal with God, because he is, in John 5:18, as shown in John 5:23, when he says one must honor the Son in the same way as He honors the Father.

Now, in reference to life, and Jesus we can see John 5:26 saying about the Son having life in Himself granted by the Father. Sure, but that can't be seen in isolation of what scripture attests to Jesus in the beginning of John's gospel.

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God; 3 all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. 4 In him was life, and the life was the light of men.

Okay, I did it in orange, you said you needed something visible, white wasn't good enough. He was in the beginning, created alll things, not going into debate about God, a god, etc, but the fact that in Himself was life. In him, in and of itself, He was life. He created all things, and He is the source of life.

Now, on to John 5:26:

For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself,

You can not read John 5:26 in opposition to Jesus being called the source of all things, and He is the life.


Now, it says that as the Father has life in Himself, in the same way, the Son has life in Himself. Ok, so no difference, whether it was granted or not. It does not say that He gave him life, it says the Son Has life Himself in the same way as the Father. So if 'as the Father, 'as the Son'.

It is not that he was given life. It isn 't noted as though He was without life, and then he received life. For if He received life, He would not have it in Himself. For indeed, what is in Himself? That He should Himself be the very life.


Now what has happened is though He's shared life with His Father from all eternity, He brings this life into the World into the world as the gift of the Father who He reveals to men (Jn 1:4).


Again, I continue to stress this is in the midst of Jesus proclaiming that He is executing judgment, which only God Himself can do.

Excellent, matt! So good to have you in the Trinity debate. :)

Edit to add: After posting, I noticed the same problem Rock was having. Why are some parts showing up white in the quote box??

[Mathius]

Now, on to John 5:26:

For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself,

You can not read John 5:26 in opposition to Jesus being called the source of all things, and He is the life.


Now, it says that as the Father has life in Himself, in the same way, the Son has life in Himself. Ok, so no difference, whether it was granted or not. It does not say that He gave him life, it says the Son Has life Himself in the same way as the Father. So if 'as the Father, 'as the Son'.

It is not that he was given life. It isn 't noted as though He was without life, and then he received life. For if He received life, He would not have it in Himself. For indeed, what is in Himself? That He should Himself be the very life.


Now what has happened is though He's shared life with His Father from all eternity, He brings this life into the World into the world as the gift of the Father who He reveals to men (Jn 1:4).


Again, I continue to stress this is in the midst of Jesus proclaiming that He is executing judgment, which only God Himself can do.


If you would just include all the verses surrounding John 5:26 it brings everything into light

John 5:24-30
[24]Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes in the one who sent me has eternal life and will not come to condemnation, but has passed from death to life.

[25]Amen, amen, I say to you, the hour is coming and is now here when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.

[26]For just as the Father has life in himself, so also he gave to his Son the possession of life in himself.

[27]And he gave him power to exercise judgment, because he is the Son of Man.

[28]Do not be amazed at this, because the hour is coming in which all who are in the tombs will hear his voice

[29]and will come out, those who have done good deeds to the resurrection of life, but those who have done wicked deeds to the resurrection of condemnation.

[30]"I cannot do anything on my own; I judge as I hear, and my judgment is just, because I do not seek my own will but the will of the one who sent me.

Jesus is not God but a son of God. He was sent to spread the word to open the eyes of those of us who are asleep. Infact in the same chapter he himself claims he is not God but does the will of God, John 5:30.

[the oldtimer]

For DRS, and God is my rock. I think that you and I, would agree that we do not, have the same meaning when we use the same term, "Son of God" I believe that Jesus is equal to "Almighty God" in every way. You do not. Now, and I really am not, trying to be disrespectful, or antagonistic in any way, but, I would ask you to give me your reasoning of , John 3:18, John3:36, 2 John: 7, and 1 John 2: 22 & 23. If I were to follow your theology I think reading those verses would jump out as red flags to me and cause me to rethink my position, but they don't seem to bother you, and I am curious why not.
:flag:

[Constantine the Great]

If you would just include all the verses surrounding John 5:26 it brings everything into light



“As,” saith Christ, “the Father hath life in Himself, so hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself.” ( Ver. 26 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.John.5.html#John.5.26).) “What then? Did he first beget and then give Him life? For he who giveth, giveth to something which is. Was He then begotten without life?” Not even the devils could imagine this, for it is very foolish as well as impious. As then “hath given life” is “hath begotten Him who is Life,” so, “hath given judgment” is “hath begotten Him who shall be Judge.” That thou mayest not when thou hearest that He hath the Father for His cause imagine any difference of essence or inferiority of honor, He cometh to judge thee, by this proving His Equality.” For He who hath authority to punish and to honor whom He will, hath the same Power with the Father. Since, if this be not the case, if having been begotten He afterwards received the honor, how came it that He was afterwards [thus] honored, by what mode of advancement reached He so far as to receive and be appointed to this dignity? Are ye not ashamed thus impudently to apply to that Pure Nature which admitteth of no addition these carnal and mean imaginations?
“Why then,” saith some one, “doth Christ so speak?” That His words may be readily received, and to clear the way for sublime sayings; therefore He mixeth these with those, and those with these. And observe how (He doth it); for it is good to see this from the beginning. He said, “My Father worketh, and I work” ( c. v. 17 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.John.5.html#John.5.17) , &c.): declaring by this their Equality and Equal honor. But they “sought to kill Him.” What doth He then? He lowereth His form of speech indeed, and putteth the same meaning when He saith, “The Son can do nothing of Himself.” Then again He raiseth His discourse to high matters, saying, “What things soever the Father doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.” Then He returneth to what is lower, “For the Father loveth the Son, and showeth Him all things that Himself doeth; and He will show Him greater things than these.” Then He riseth higher, “For as the Father raiseth up the dead and quickeneth them, even so the Son quickeneth whom He will.” After this again He joineth the high and the low together, “For neither doth the Father judge any one, but hath given all judgment to the Son”; then riseth again, “That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father.” Seest thou how He varieth the discourse, weaving it both of high and low words and expressions, in order that it might be acceptable to the men of that time, and that those who should come after might receive no injury, gaining from the higher part a right opinion of the rest? For if this be not the case, if these sayings were not uttered through condescension, wherefore were the high expressions added? Because one who is entitled to utter great words concerning himself, hath, when he saith anything mean and low, this reasonable excuse, that he doth it for some prudential purpose; but if one who ought to speak meanly of himself saith anything great, on what account doth he utter words which surpass his nature? This is not for any purpose at all, but an act of extreme impiety. We are therefore able to assign a reason for the lowly expressions, a reason sufficient, and becoming to God, namely, His condescension, His teaching us to be moderate, and the salvation which is thus wrought for us. To declare which He said Himself in another place, “These things I say that ye might be saved.” For when He left His own witness, and betook Himself to that of John, (a thing unworthy of His greatness,) He putteth the reason of such lowliness of language, and saith, “These things I say that ye might be saved.” And ye who assert that He hath not the same authority and power with Him who begat Him, what can ye say when ye hear Him utter words by which He declareth His Authority and Power and Glory equal in respect of the Father? Wherefore, if He be as ye assert very inferior, doth He claim the same honor? Nor doth He stop even here, but goeth on to say,
“He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father which hath sent Him.” Seest thou how the honor of the Son is connected with that of the Father? “What of that?” saith one. “We see the same in the case of the Apostles; ‘He,’ saith Christ, ‘who receiveth you receiveth Me.’” ( Matt. x. 40 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.Matt.10.html#Matt.10.40).) But in that place He speaketh so, because He maketh the concerns of His servants His own; here, because the Essence and the Glory is One (with that of the Father). Therefore it is not said of the Apostles “that they may honor,” but rightly He saith, “He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father.” For where there are two kings, if one is insulted the other is insulted also, and especially when he that is insulted is a son. He is insulted even when one of his soldiers is maltreated; not in the same way as in this case, but as it were in the person of another while here it is as it were in his own. Wherefore He beforehand said, “That they should honor the Son even as they honor the Father,” in order that when He should say, “He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father,” thou mightest understand that the honor is the same. For He saith not merely, “he that honoreth not the Son,” but “he that honoreth Him not so as I have said” “honoreth not the Father.”
“And how,” saith one, “can he that sendeth and he that is sent be of the same essence?” Again, thou bringest down the argument to carnal things, and perceivest not that all this has been said for no other purpose, but that we might know Him to be The Cause, and not fall into the error of Sabellius, and that in this manner the infirmity of the Jews might be healed, so that He might not be deemed an enemy of God; For from their extreme senselessness He was counted among them an enemy of God. Morel. for they said, “This man is not of God” ( c. ix. 16 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.John.9.html#John.9.16) ), “This man hath not come from God.” Now to remove this suspicion, high sayings did not contribute so much as the lowly, and therefore continually and everywhere He said that He had been “sent”; not that thou mightest suppose that expression to be any lessening of His greatness, but in order to stop their mouths. And for this cause also He constantly betaketh Himself to the Father, interposing moreover mention of His own high Parentage. For had He said all in proportion to His dignity, the Jews would not have received His words, since because of a few such expressions, they persecuted and oftentimes stoned Him; and if looking wholly to them He had used none but low expressions, many in after times might have been harmed. Wherefore He mingleth and blendeth generally of mixing wine with water. His teaching, both by these lowly sayings stopping, as I said, the mouths of the Jews, and also by expressions suited to His dignity banishing from men of sense any mean notion of what He had said, and proving that such a notion did not in any wise apply to Him at all.
The expression “having been sent” denoteth change of place—but God is everywhere present. Wherefore then saith He that He was “sent”? He speaketh in an earthly way, declaring His unanimity with the Father. At least He shapeth His succeeding words with a desire to effect this.
Ver. 24 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.John.5.html#John.5.24). “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth My word, and believeth on Him that sent Me, hath everlasting life.”
Seest thou how continually He putteth the same thing to cure that feeling of suspicion, both in this place and in what follows by fear and by promises of blessings removing their jealousy of Him, and then again condescending greatly in words? For He said not, “he that heareth My words, and believeth on Me,” since they would have certainly deemed that to be pride, and a superfluous pomp of words; because, if after a very long time, and ten thousand miracles, they suspected this when He spake after this manner, much more would they have done so then. It was on this account that at that later period they said to Him, “Abraham is dead, and the prophets are dead, how sayest Thou, If a man keep My saying, he shall never taste of death?” ( c. viii. 52 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.John.8.html#John.8.52).) In order therefore that they may not here also become furious, see what He saith, “He that heareth My word, and believeth on Him that sent Me, hath everlasting life.” This had no small effect in making His discourse acceptable, when they learned that those who hear Him believe in the Father also; for after having received this with readiness, they would more easily receive the rest. So that the very speaking in a humble manner contributed and led the way to higher things;"


St. John Chrysostom

[DispensationalJim]

If you would just include all the verses surrounding John 5:26 it brings everything into light

John 5:24-30
[24]Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes in the one who sent me has eternal life and will not come to condemnation, but has passed from death to life.

[25]Amen, amen, I say to you, the hour is coming and is now here when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.

[26]For just as the Father has life in himself, so also he gave to his Son the possession of life in himself.

[27]And he gave him power to exercise judgment, because he is the Son of Man.

[28]Do not be amazed at this, because the hour is coming in which all who are in the tombs will hear his voice

[29]and will come out, those who have done good deeds to the resurrection of life, but those who have done wicked deeds to the resurrection of condemnation.

[30]"I cannot do anything on my own; I judge as I hear, and my judgment is just, because I do not seek my own will but the will of the one who sent me.

Jesus is not God but a son of God. He was sent to spread the word to open the eyes of those of us who are asleep. Infact in the same chapter he himself claims he is not God but does the will of God, John 5:30.

Nope, Mathius. Jesus is NOT A son of God, but THE SON OF GOD.
• Luke 22:70 Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am.
• John 1:34 And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.
... 49 Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.
• John 10:36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

But, Mathius, your entire post ignores the FACT that Jesus WAS God, the Creator -- as has been shown from Scripture about a zillion times on this thread :) -- but then He lovingly and voluntarily MADE HIMSELF INTO A MAN SO HE COULD DIE FOR OUR SINS (since we all agree that God cannot die).

• John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
• 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.

Doesn't that explain it beautifully? No opinions necessary. Just God's Word.

[DispensationalJim]

Constantine, that was one HEAVY post!! Superb!

I am curious, though. Do you know who translated Chrysostom's writings into the English?

[Mathius]

Nope, Mathius. Jesus is NOT A son of God, but THE SON OF GOD.
• Luke 22:70 Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am.
• John 1:34 And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.
... 49 Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.
• John 10:36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

But, Mathius, your entire post ignores the FACT that Jesus WAS God, the Creator -- as has been shown from Scripture about a zillion times on this thread :) -- but then He lovingly and voluntarily MADE HIMSELF INTO A MAN SO HE COULD DIE FOR OUR SINS (since we all agree that God cannot die).

• John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
• 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.

Doesn't that explain it beautifully? No opinions necessary. Just God's Word.

Lets go with you favorite verse that "proves" the trinity.

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

In the footnotes from the New American Bible.
[1] In the beginning: also the first words of the Old Testament (Genesis 1:1). Was: this verb is used three times with different meanings in this verse: existence, relationship, and predication. The Word (Greek logos): this term combines God's dynamic, creative word (Genesis), personified preexistent Wisdom as the instrument of God's creative activity (Proverbs), and the ultimate intelligibility of reality (Hellenistic philosophy). With God: the Greek preposition here connotes communication with another. Was God: lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification.

They define the Word(Jesus) as the tool of God.
"The Word (Greek logos): this term combines God's dynamic, creative word (Genesis), personified preexistent Wisdom as the instrument of God's creative activity (Proverbs), and the ultimate intelligibility of reality (Hellenistic philosophy). "

In the beginning (when God spoke he created the Word) was the Word. (Now we have two entities.) The Word was with God. (meaning exactly that) And the Word was God (Was God: lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification.)

God is so powerful that his very Word can create the universes. hence John 1:3-14.

Jesus is an instrument of God much like Moses, the prophets, the Holy Spirit, the burning bush, and other items. These instruments rank differently in importance but they still not God. But as Christians we don't worship Moses and the prophets now do we? God used Mary to borne Jesus into this world but we don't worship her. I know you guys are just going to say that I am spinning this but this is how I interpret the scripture and why I don't worship Jesus but only God.

Philippians 2:5-9
[5]Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,
[6]who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,
[7]but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
[8]Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
[9]For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,
Jesus existed in the form of God. Means exactly what it says. God has no “form” but is a Spirit. If you take out “, although He existed in the form of God,” the verse will read “who did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,” which is a lesson that no man can possibly be equal to God in any shape or form and Jesus knew this. Verse 7-8 just states what the gospels do. Then with verse 9 the light really shines on this subject. “ [9]For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,” Now with this very verse God “promoted” Jesus to a status higher than any other being. The question that should be asked is, why would God promote himself if he is already the big guy on the block?

John 10:30
The Father and I are one."

is the statement that got him in trouble with the Pharases. And Jesus follows with John 10:32-38 where he tries to explain that he is one with the Father in thoughts, words, and deeds but he is not God.

John 10:32-36
[32]Jesus answered them, "I have shown you many good works from my Father. For which of these are you trying to stone me?" [33]The Jews answered him, "We are not stoning you for a good work but for blasphemy. You, a man, are making yourself God." [34Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, "You are gods"'? [35]If it calls them gods to whom the word of God came, and scripture cannot be set aside, [36]can you say that the one whom the Father has consecrated and sent into the world blasphemes because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?

Jesus is using scripture to debunk the Pharisees as usual and in verse 36 refers to himself as the Son of God not God. When Jesus sees that this is too much for them he moves onto something a little easier to comprehend.

John 10:37-38
[37]If I do not perform my Father's works, do not believe me; [38]but if I perform them, even if you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may realize (and understand) that the Father is in me and I am in the Father."

As you can see Jesus distinguishes as being a separate entity from God instead of being one distinct entity. Jesus was trying to teach us that we need to be in the Father, become one with the Father, and become like the Father. We all have the Father within us, whether you want to call it conscience or the Holy Spirit, but now it is our turn to be in the Father. That is called unconditional love where 2 beings can "become one" and can never be separated no matter what.

[the oldtimer]

Lets go with you favorite verse that "proves" the trinity.

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

In the footnotes from the New American Bible.
[1] In the beginning: also the first words of the Old Testament (Genesis 1:1). Was: this verb is used three times with different meanings in this verse: existence, relationship, and predication. The Word (Greek logos): this term combines God's dynamic, creative word (Genesis), personified preexistent Wisdom as the instrument of God's creative activity (Proverbs), and the ultimate intelligibility of reality (Hellenistic philosophy). With God: the Greek preposition here connotes communication with another. Was God: lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification.

They define the Word(Jesus) as the tool of God.
"The Word (Greek logos): this term combines God's dynamic, creative word (Genesis), personified preexistent Wisdom as the instrument of God's creative activity (Proverbs), and the ultimate intelligibility of reality (Hellenistic philosophy). "

In the beginning (when God spoke he created the Word) was the Word. (Now we have two entities.) The Word was with God. (meaning exactly that) And the Word was God (Was God: lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification.)

God is so powerful that his very Word can create the universes. hence John 1:3-14.

Jesus is an instrument of God much like Moses, the prophets, the Holy Spirit, the burning bush, and other items. These instruments rank differently in importance but they still not God. But as Christians we don't worship Moses and the prophets now do we? God used Mary to borne Jesus into this world but we don't worship her. I know you guys are just going to say that I am spinning this but this is how I interpret the scripture and why I don't worship Jesus but only God.

Philippians 2:5-9
[5]Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,
[6]who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,
[7]but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
[8]Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
[9]For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,
Jesus existed in the form of God. Means exactly what it says. God has no “form” but is a Spirit. If you take out “, although He existed in the form of God,” the verse will read “who did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,” which is a lesson that no man can possibly be equal to God in any shape or form and Jesus knew this. Verse 7-8 just states what the gospels do. Then with verse 9 the light really shines on this subject. “ [9]For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,” Now with this very verse God “promoted” Jesus to a status higher than any other being. The question that should be asked is, why would God promote himself if he is already the big guy on the block?

John 10:30
The Father and I are one."

is the statement that got him in trouble with the Pharases. And Jesus follows with John 10:32-38 where he tries to explain that he is one with the Father in thoughts, words, and deeds but he is not God.

John 10:32-36
[32]Jesus answered them, "I have shown you many good works from my Father. For which of these are you trying to stone me?" [33]The Jews answered him, "We are not stoning you for a good work but for blasphemy. You, a man, are making yourself God." [34Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, "You are gods"'? [35]If it calls them gods to whom the word of God came, and scripture cannot be set aside, [36]can you say that the one whom the Father has consecrated and sent into the world blasphemes because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?

Jesus is using scripture to debunk the Pharisees as usual and in verse 36 refers to himself as the Son of God not God. When Jesus sees that this is too much for them he moves onto something a little easier to comprehend.

John 10:37-38
[37]If I do not perform my Father's works, do not believe me; [38]but if I perform them, even if you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may realize (and understand) that the Father is in me and I am in the Father."

As you can see Jesus distinguishes as being a separate entity from God instead of being one distinct entity. Jesus was trying to teach us that we need to be in the Father, become one with the Father, and become like the Father. We all have the Father within us, whether you want to call it conscience or the Holy Spirit, but now it is our turn to be in the Father. That is called unconditional love where 2 beings can "become one" and can never be separated no matter what.

Where outside of Jehovah's witness can I study more on the theology that you have put forward? Got to go.

[DispensationalJim]

Lets go with you favorite verse that "proves" the trinity.

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

In the footnotes from the New American Bible.
[1] In the beginning: also the first words of the Old Testament (Genesis 1:1). Was: this verb is used three times with different meanings in this verse: existence, relationship, and predication. The Word (Greek logos): this term combines God's dynamic, creative word (Genesis), personified preexistent Wisdom as the instrument of God's creative activity (Proverbs), and the ultimate intelligibility of reality (Hellenistic philosophy). With God: the Greek preposition here connotes communication with another. Was God: lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification.

They define the Word(Jesus) as the tool of God.
"The Word (Greek logos): this term combines God's dynamic, creative word (Genesis), personified preexistent Wisdom as the instrument of God's creative activity (Proverbs), and the ultimate intelligibility of reality (Hellenistic philosophy). "

In the beginning (when God spoke he created the Word) was the Word. (Now we have two entities.) The Word was with God. (meaning exactly that) And the Word was God (Was God: lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification.)

God is so powerful that his very Word can create the universes. hence John 1:3-14.

Jesus is an instrument of God much like Moses, the prophets, the Holy Spirit, the burning bush, and other items. These instruments rank differently in importance but they still not God. But as Christians we don't worship Moses and the prophets now do we? God used Mary to borne Jesus into this world but we don't worship her. I know you guys are just going to say that I am spinning this but this is how I interpret the scripture and why I don't worship Jesus but only God.

Philippians 2:5-9
[5]Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,
[6]who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,
[7]but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
[8]Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
[9]For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,
Jesus existed in the form of God. Means exactly what it says. God has no “form” but is a Spirit. If you take out “, although He existed in the form of God,” the verse will read “who did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,” which is a lesson that no man can possibly be equal to God in any shape or form and Jesus knew this. Verse 7-8 just states what the gospels do. Then with verse 9 the light really shines on this subject. “ [9]For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,” Now with this very verse God “promoted” Jesus to a status higher than any other being. The question that should be asked is, why would God promote himself if he is already the big guy on the block?

John 10:30
The Father and I are one."

is the statement that got him in trouble with the Pharases. And Jesus follows with John 10:32-38 where he tries to explain that he is one with the Father in thoughts, words, and deeds but he is not God.

John 10:32-36
[32]Jesus answered them, "I have shown you many good works from my Father. For which of these are you trying to stone me?" [33]The Jews answered him, "We are not stoning you for a good work but for blasphemy. You, a man, are making yourself God." [34Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, "You are gods"'? [35]If it calls them gods to whom the word of God came, and scripture cannot be set aside, [36]can you say that the one whom the Father has consecrated and sent into the world blasphemes because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?

Jesus is using scripture to debunk the Pharisees as usual and in verse 36 refers to himself as the Son of God not God. When Jesus sees that this is too much for them he moves onto something a little easier to comprehend.

John 10:37-38
[37]If I do not perform my Father's works, do not believe me; [38]but if I perform them, even if you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may realize (and understand) that the Father is in me and I am in the Father."

As you can see Jesus distinguishes as being a separate entity from God instead of being one distinct entity. Jesus was trying to teach us that we need to be in the Father, become one with the Father, and become like the Father. We all have the Father within us, whether you want to call it conscience or the Holy Spirit, but now it is our turn to be in the Father. That is called unconditional love where 2 beings can "become one" and can never be separated no matter what.

We can all find "experts" who give their spin on God's Word, but since I believe the King James IS God's preserved Word in the English language for today (in this present dispensation of the grace of God), your "spin" still does not mean that much to me. You are still not accepting that even in your above translation, Jesus "emptied Himself" which shows that He was much more than a man prior to BECOMING A MAN.

While he was a MAN on this earth, He naturally was subservient and even dependant on His Holy Father until after His resurrection, at which time His Holy Father returned Him to His former status at His right hand.

So do you think that God lied in John 1? Must we look all over for someone to interpret or spin the Bible to say what we want it to mean? I'll just stick with the grand-daddy of English Bibles, thank you. Then there is no interpretation needed. Just let His Word interpret itself and "rightly divide it."

[Mathius]

We can all find "experts" who give their spin on God's Word, but since I believe the King James IS God's preserved Word in the English language for today (in this present dispensation of the grace of God), your "spin" still does not mean that much to me. You are still not accepting that even in your above translation, Jesus "emptied Himself" which shows that He was much more than a man prior to BECOMING A MAN.

We are all more than man before we have come here to play this game and to experience the wonders that the Gather has given us.

While he was a MAN on this earth, He naturally was subservient and even dependant on His Holy Father until after His resurrection, at which time His Holy Father returned Him to His former status at His right hand.

I do not diminish his importance to the earth. If it wasn't for him and other ascended masters we would not be able to leave this game and would be stuck in this hell for eternity

So do you think that God lied in John 1? Must we look all over for someone to interpret or spin the Bible to say what we want it to mean? I'll just stick with the grand-daddy of English Bibles, thank you. Then there is no interpretation needed. Just let His Word interpret itself and "rightly divide it."

He didn't lie. You have been taught all your life that the trinity is Father, son, holy spirit, and that is your set of truths. Mine on the other hand is something completely different and that is ok as we all have different paths we follow. The New American Bible was translated during the Vatican 2 and is currently the bible used by the Catholic Church. Since I used to be Catholic that is the bible I prefer to use.

[Mathius]

Where outside of Jehovah's witness can I study more on the theology that you have put forward? Got to go.

It is a combination of Catholicism, Buddhism, and esoteric thoughts/beliefs.

[DRS]

We (including DRS) would do well to leave the Greek to those that are qualified to talk about it. My point is that verses 6, 12, 13, and 18 seem to be written the same as the second instance of theos in verse 1. Why would they not be translated "a god"?

But what is missing in all those cases is ho or ton theos with another instance of theos

[DRS]

And I did just look and DRS is right there is no "o" with a squiggle nor any other discernible "article" in John 1 for the second reference to the word theos.

actually see post 17763

I had to look this one up, and I still cannot figure out what point you are trying to make. If you are saying that it should be "a god" or any form of small "g" then the context of the sentence totally lose its meaning. My Pastor, who has a Masters in Greek, said that the sentence must be translated to mean the 'All Mighty". Will you please tell me what you are saying, because when I read it, all I can come up with " in the beginning was the Word, (All Mighty God). And the Word (All Mighty God) was with God (All Mighty God). And the Word(All Mighty God) was God. ( All Mighty God) Now do I understand how that can be? NO, but it is there so I must accept that it is true. I do not believe that God would lie to me, and if I refuse to accept one part of the Bible then I might as well throw the whole thing out.[/QUOTE]

No you have the word with the God but he is not the God

When one then studies how god is used in the OT then it is understanble what is being said

Moses was made God to Aaron and pharaoh

Angels were called Godlike in Psalms

[DispensationalJim]

No you have the word with the God but he is not the God

When one then studies how god is used in the OT then it is understanble what is being said

Moses was made God to Aaron and pharaoh

Angels were called Godlike in Psalms

So then, DRS, how do you know when the OT is actually speaking of God and when it is speaking of Aaron or pharoah or angels?

[DispensationalJim]

It is a combination of Catholicism, Buddhism, and esoteric thoughts/beliefs.

IMO, Mathius, if you are combining Catholicism (with their strong Trinitarian faith) and Buddhism (a strange mix of Eastern thought) and other "esoteric" beliefs, you are heading for complete and total CONFUSION!! Maybe you should consider "Confusciousism"!? :)

Here is a brief quote from Wikipedia on Buddhism:
"Buddhist schools disagree on what the historical teachings of Gautama Buddha were, so much so that some scholars claim Buddhism does not have a clearly definable common core."

[Constantine the Great]

Constantine, that was one HEAVY post!! Superb!

I am curious, though. Do you know who translated Chrysostom's writings into the English?

Philip Schaff I believe. There's a reason why we honor the Church Fathers.

[Mathius]

IMO, Mathius, if you are combining Catholicism (with their strong Trinitarian faith) and Buddhism (a strange mix of Eastern thought) and other "esoteric" beliefs, you are heading for complete and total CONFUSION!! Maybe you should consider "Confusciousism"!? :)

Oh but it isn't confusing, infact from what I have read and come to understand they all fit very well together. Infact they fit so well together they all appear to have a common source.

[DRS]

So then, DRS, how do you know when the OT is actually speaking of God and when it is speaking of Aaron or pharoah or angels?

It is quite easy you read the entire chapter and books

[DRS]

For DRS, and God is my rock. I think that you and I, would agree that we do not, have the same meaning when we use the same term, "Son of God" I believe that Jesus is equal to "Almighty God" in every way. You do not. Now, and I really am not, trying to be disrespectful, or antagonistic in any way, but, I would ask you to give me your reasoning of , John 3:18, John3:36, 2 John: 7, and 1 John 2: 22 & 23. If I were to follow your theology I think reading those verses would jump out as red flags to me and cause me to rethink my position, but they don't seem to bother you, and I am curious why not.
:flag:

There is only one who is Most High God alone according to Psalm 83:18

Jesus is called son of the Most High God Mark 5:7

I asked you who made Jesus the Christ or anointed one have you answered that?

Putting faith into something does not make it God

53 Who has put faith in the thing heard by us? And as for the arm of Jehovah, to whom has it been revealed?

[DispensationalJim]

It is quite easy you read the entire chapter and books

You, DRS, are the one who uses that argument to support your view that Jesus cannot be God even though there are clear verses that show Jesus to be God.

You continually say that Moses was called God, but the Bible actually said he was made "a god." Likewise with the others you mentioned. They were "a god," not GOD.
• Ex. 7:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

If you can use that argument to discredit the Bible and Jesus, then why can't we use it to discredit your Arian view?

I can read quite well, thank you, and I have STUDIED the Bible most of my life, so why do you tell me that I need to "read the entire chapter and books"? Can you not resist the temptation to insult anyone who disagrees with you? Apparently not, since you seem to give in to that temptation repeatedly.

[DispensationalJim]

Oh but it isn't confusing, infact from what I have read and come to understand they all fit very well together. Infact they fit so well together they all appear to have a common source.

I have several books on the Religions of the World, and one of the points that they all seem to agree on regarding Buddhism is that no one is certain what "true Buddhism" is. A Buddhist scholar named Edward Conze said: "I confess that I do not know what the 'original gospel' of Buddhism was." Buddha's actual words were apparently never recorded, so it would seem to be impossible to ascertain if what is being taught today as "Buddhism" is what Buddha taught or not.

If you can "blend" the Word of God with Buddhism, then why not add the Muslim faith to your growing list. Have you studied the Koran? Well, I have, and even wrote a booklet about it. And I will say that I could not find much of anything "in common" between the Bible and the Koran, but I certainly found tons of "verses" in the Koran that completely disagreed with God's Word.

Thus, Mathius, I would challenge you to show some actual Buddhist teachings that correspond with the teachings of the Word of God, especially the New Testament.

And, mainly Mathius, please show where Buddhism teaches that "CHRIST DIED FOR OUR SINS." That, IMO, is the primary teaching of the New Testament, and thus is the most basic tenet of the Bible for us TODAY in this present dispensation of the GRACE OF GOD.

Here is a good dispensational verse for you to think about:
• Eph. 4:14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

[Mathius]

I have several books on the Religions of the World, and one of the points that they all seem to agree on regarding Buddhism is that no one is certain what "true Buddhism" is. A Buddhist scholar named Edward Conze said: "I confess that I do not know what the 'original gospel' of Buddhism was." Buddha's actual words were apparently never recorded, so it would seem to be impossible to ascertain if what is being taught today as "Buddhism" is what Buddha taught or not.

That maybe true but we don’t have what Jesus’ actual words were either. We have what people said that he said some 100+ years after the fact. I get all of my information on Buddhism out of the Pali Canon. Everything that you use to bash Buddha’s teaching could also be said about Jesus.

If you can "blend" the Word of God with Buddhism, then why not add the Muslim faith to your growing list. Have you studied the Koran? Well, I have, and even wrote a booklet about it. And I will say that I could not find much of anything "in common" between the Bible and the Koran, but I certainly found tons of "verses" in the Koran that completely disagreed with God's Word.

There is no "blending." I have studied the Koran and don’t much care for it. Though I am glad that you are "open minded" enough to read another "sacred book" besides the bible.

Thus, Mathius, I would challenge you to show some actual Buddhist teachings that correspond with the teachings of the Word of God, especially the New Testament.

The liberation of the mind by loving-kindness surpasses them and shines forth, bright and brilliant. (It 27:19-21)

go to your local bookstore and buy a copy of the Pali canon. The book is chalk full of teachings that you are looking for.

And, mainly Mathius, please show where Buddhism teaches that "CHRIST DIED FOR OUR SINS." That, IMO, is the primary teaching of the New Testament, and thus is the most basic tenet of the Bible for us TODAY in this present dispensation of the GRACE OF GOD.

Ah yes your most important teaching is not my most important teaching. That is why you can not see what I see. I prefer the teaching that relate to the following.

Matthew 6:5-8,
[5] "When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on street corners so that others may see them. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward.
[6] But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.
[7] In praying, do not babble like the pagans, who think that they will be heard because of their many words.
[8] Do not be like them. Your Father knows what you need before you ask him.

Matthew 15:1-20
[17] Do you not realize that everything that enters the mouth passes into the stomach and is expelled into the latrine?
[18] But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile.
[19] For from the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, unchastity, theft, false witness, blasphemy.
[20] These are what defile a person, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile."

I did not add 1-16 as it is the lead up to the climax which is 17-20 but those verses are still important.

Mark 13:28-33
[28] "Learn a lesson from the fig tree. When its branch becomes tender and sprouts leaves, you know that summer is near.
[29] In the same way, when you see these things happening, know that he is near, at the gates.
[30] Amen, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place.
[31] Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.
[32] "But of that day or hour, no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.
[33] Be watchful! Be alert! You do not know when the time will come.

Mark 10:13-16
[13] And people were bringing children to him that he might touch them, but the disciples rebuked them.
[14] When Jesus saw this he became indignant and said to them, "Let the children come to me; do not prevent them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.
[15] Amen, I say to you, whoever does not accept the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it."
[16] Then he embraced them and blessed them, placing his hands on them.

Matthew 7:21-23
[21] "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.
[22] Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name? Did we not drive out demons in your name? Did we not do mighty deeds in your name?'
[23] Then I will declare to them solemnly, 'I never knew you. Depart from me, you evildoers.'

I place much more emphasis on the teaching of Jesus and the path he laid out before us to return to the Father than on the resurrection of a man made god who even he claims he could never dream of becoming that which the true Father is.

Philippians 2:5-9
[5]Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,
[6]who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,
[7]but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
[8]Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
[9]For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,

Here is a good dispensational verse for you to think about:
• Eph. 4:14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

You could reflect on that as well....who was it that laid the ground work for the trinity in the first place and made it doctrine? Was it the council of Nicaea?

[DispensationalJim]

(I am not quoting Mathius's complete post below for space reasons)

Wow, Mathius, you do not believe that Christ died for your sins??? I am so sorry to hear that. Obviously, you do not see what I see then, either, which is the most wonderful free gift ever given, the free gift of eternal life with Jesus Christ Himself in Heaven just by believing in His finished work on the cross and His resurrection.

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

But, Mathius, you seem to contradict yourself here:
You began, Mathius, by saying (I will call this Paragragh A):
"That maybe true but we don’t have what Jesus’ actual words were either. We have what people said that he said some 100+ years after the fact. I get all of my information on Buddhism out of the Pali Canon. Everything that you use to bash Buddha’s teaching could also be said about Jesus."

Then, Mathius, you later say this (I call this Paragraph B):
"I place much more emphasis on the teaching of Jesus and the path he laid out before us to return to the Father than on the resurrection of a man made god who even he claims he could never dream of becoming that which the true Father is."

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

So in paragraph A, Mathius, you seem to imply that the words of Jesus are not all that reliable, yet then in Paragraph B, you turn around and suggest that you accept that the writer's quotes of the words of Jesus are more authoritative than the same writers who put those words on paper. I would appreciate greatly if you would explain your justification for that kind of thinking.

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

Finally, if you have read this entire thread (as many of us have), you would see that your "claims" above that Jesus may not have been resurrected and could "never dream of becoming that which the true Father is" have been explained repeatedly in some very long and detailed posts.

Here are some of Jesus' words about His resurrection:
• Matt. 20:17 And Jesus going up to Jerusalem took the twelve disciples apart in the way, and said unto them, 18 Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death,19 And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third day he shall rise again.
• Mark 8:31 And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.
• Mark 10:32 And they were in the way going up to Jerusalem; and Jesus went before them: and they were amazed; and as they followed, they were afraid. And he took again the twelve, and began to tell them what things should happen unto him, 33 Saying, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles: 34 And they shall mock him, and shall scourge him, and shall spit upon him, and shall kill him: and the third day he shall rise again.
• Luke 18:32 For he shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spitted on: 33 And they shall scourge him, and put him to death: and the third day he shall rise again.
• Luke 24:7 Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.

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


So, Mathius, IMO, if you want to make such brief statements discrediting Jesus, please give us some more evidence of your reasoning for such conclusions. And, I must add that if your reasoning includes discrediting God's Word, as you seem to be implying, then please explain how you can accept the words of Jesus (the red-letters) but not accept the writers who penned them a few years after His death and resurrection.

More later...

[DRS]

You, DRS, are the one who uses that argument to support your view that Jesus cannot be God even though there are clear verses that show Jesus to be God.

You continually say that Moses was called God, but the Bible actually said he was made "a god." Likewise with the others you mentioned. They were "a god," not GOD.
• Ex. 7:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

If you can use that argument to discredit the Bible and Jesus, then why can't we use it to discredit your Arian view?

I can read quite well, thank you, and I have STUDIED the Bible most of my life, so why do you tell me that I need to "read the entire chapter and books"? Can you not resist the temptation to insult anyone who disagrees with you? Apparently not, since you seem to give in to that temptation repeatedly.


First off there is nothing I have stated here that has in anyway discredited the bible or Jesus


Next in order for it to be the same as John 1:1 you have to instances of the word God in that verse and and the definit article you do not have that there in the hebrew

What we have there is this

יְהוָה

and not this

e·aleim

Oh and that first word is not the lord

[DispensationalJim]

First off there is nothing I have stated here that has in anyway discredited the bible or Jesus


Next in order for it to be the same as John 1:1 you have to instances of the word God in that verse and and the definit article you do not have that there in the hebrew

What we have there is this

יְהוָה

and not this

e·aleim

Oh and that first word is not the lord

Yes, DRS, IMO, you routinely discredit my Bible and Jesus when you say my Bible is wrong and that Jesus is not God.

Next, what does "to instances of the word" mean? Did you mean TWO instead of TO? If so, why in the world did you not check for typos and correct them (as many of us --even your buddy Warrior -- have often asked you to do)?

Following that, you have added some OPINIONS about John 1:1 which IMO matt and Constantine -- along with others -- have already refuted. If you want to demonstrate the problem you are claiming, please be more specific by showing the verses together to make your points clear, etc..

And again, which versions of the Hebrew and Greek are you comparing? Can you show that your versions are the correct ones, or is it just your way of supporting your Arian view?

[DRS]

No the only answer that can be given in John 1:1 is that the "the" should be left out in translation because it sounds bad and changes the meaning if the verse,

[Mathius]

(I am not quoting Mathius's complete post below for space reasons)

Wow, Mathius, you do not believe that Christ died for your sins??? I am so sorry to hear that. Obviously, you do not see what I see then, either, which is the most wonderful free gift ever given, the free gift of eternal life with Jesus Christ Himself in Heaven just by believing in His finished work on the cross and His resurrection.

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

No I don't. I believe that people have an agenda and in order to stop the spiritual growth of the people the leaders of the church they had to find things to stagnate the people. But i do not criticize your beliefs nor really care about what you believe to be true as in the grand scheme of things it means nothing. I only post my opinions for the sake of discussion.


But, Mathius, you seem to contradict yourself here:
You began, Mathius, by saying (I will call this Paragragh A):
"That maybe true but we don’t have what Jesus’ actual words were either. We have what people said that he said some 100+ years after the fact. I get all of my information on Buddhism out of the Pali Canon. Everything that you use to bash Buddha’s teaching could also be said about Jesus."

Then, Mathius, you later say this (I call this Paragraph B):
"I place much more emphasis on the teaching of Jesus and the path he laid out before us to return to the Father than on the resurrection of a man made god who even he claims he could never dream of becoming that which the true Father is."

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

So in paragraph A, Mathius, you seem to imply that the words of Jesus are not all that reliable, yet then in Paragraph B, you turn around and suggest that you accept that the writer's quotes of the words of Jesus are more authoritative than the same writers who put those words on paper. I would appreciate greatly if you would explain your justification for that kind of thinking.

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

Evidently your reading comprehension is bad or you are just confused. Just because you can't trace someones teaching back to the person through a tape recorder or by whatever means it means nothing to me. If a persons writings harmonize with my heart and help me find and return to the Father then I could care less who wrote them. The message is all that matters, not the messenger.

Finally, if you have read this entire thread (as many of us have), you would see that your "claims" above that Jesus may not have been resurrected and could "never dream of becoming that which the true Father is" have been explained repeatedly in some very long and detailed posts.

Here are some of Jesus' words about His resurrection:
• Matt. 20:17 And Jesus going up to Jerusalem took the twelve disciples apart in the way, and said unto them, 18 Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death,19 And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third day he shall rise again.
• Mark 8:31 And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.
• Mark 10:32 And they were in the way going up to Jerusalem; and Jesus went before them: and they were amazed; and as they followed, they were afraid. And he took again the twelve, and began to tell them what things should happen unto him, 33 Saying, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles: 34 And they shall mock him, and shall scourge him, and shall spit upon him, and shall kill him: and the third day he shall rise again.
• Luke 18:32 For he shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spitted on: 33 And they shall scourge him, and put him to death: and the third day he shall rise again.
• Luke 24:7 Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.

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

I never said that Jesus isn't spirit now or wasn't resurrected. What I said is that it was my opinion that Jesus is not the Father but an ascended master who was sent here to give us a set of possible truths to help us find and return to the Father.

So, Mathius, IMO, if you want to make such brief statements discrediting Jesus, please give us some more evidence of your reasoning for such conclusions. And, I must add that if your reasoning includes discrediting God's Word, as you seem to be implying, then please explain how you can accept the words of Jesus (the red-letters) but not accept the writers who penned them a few years after His death and resurrection.

More later...

I don't discredit Jesus and what HE said. What I discredit is what other think or thought he was. Jesus is the son of God, like we all are, and he is also the Son of Man, sent here to assist us complete our task for which we were originally sent. Jesus was a great man/soul, but was or is he God, no...no one can or will ever be equal to the Father.

[DispensationalJim]

No I don't. I believe that people have an agenda and in order to stop the spiritual growth of the people the leaders of the church they had to find things to stagnate the people. But i do not criticize your beliefs nor really care about what you believe to be true as in the grand scheme of things it means nothing. I only post my opinions for the sake of discussion.


Evidently your reading comprehension is bad or you are just confused. Just because you can't trace someones teaching back to the person through a tape recorder or by whatever means it means nothing to me. If a persons writings harmonize with my heart and help me find and return to the Father then I could care less who wrote them. The message is all that matters, not the messenger.


I never said that Jesus isn't spirit now or wasn't resurrected. What I said is that it was my opinion that Jesus is not the Father but an ascended master who was sent here to give us a set of possible truths to help us find and return to the Father.


I don't discredit Jesus and what HE said. What I discredit is what other think or thought he was. Jesus is the son of God, like we all are, and he is also the Son of Man, sent here to assist us complete our task for which we were originally sent. Jesus was a great man/soul, but was or is he God, no...no one can or will ever be equal to the Father.

I'll deal with your comments later (I've got a Rescue Mission program to do before the big game starts), but you might want to rethink your "reading comprehension" comments before a moderator decides that you are being disrespectful.

[matt1618]

If you would just include all the verses surrounding John 5:26 it brings everything into light

John 5:24-30
[24]Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes in the one who sent me has eternal life and will not come to condemnation, but has passed from death to life.

[25]Amen, amen, I say to you, the hour is coming and is now here when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.

[26]For just as the Father has life in himself, so also he gave to his Son the possession of life in himself.

[27]And he gave him power to exercise judgment, because he is the Son of Man.

[28]Do not be amazed at this, because the hour is coming in which all who are in the tombs will hear his voice

[29]and will come out, those who have done good deeds to the resurrection of life, but those who have done wicked deeds to the resurrection of condemnation.

[30]"I cannot do anything on my own; I judge as I hear, and my judgment is just, because I do not seek my own will but the will of the one who sent me.

Jesus is not God but a son of God. He was sent to spread the word to open the eyes of those of us who are asleep. Infact in the same chapter he himself claims he is not God but does the will of God, John 5:30.

But notice it his own judgment that he renders on all, and only God can do judgment on people. He does not do things on his own. Of course, He is in perfect harmony with His Father. The trinity, the essence is of one of perfect harmonay. There are different functions, now just a few verses earier:

5:18-23 18 This was why the Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God. 19 Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing; for whatever he does, that the Son does likewise. 20 For the Father loves the Son, and shows him all that he himself is doing; and greater works than these will he show him, that you may marvel. 21 For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will. 22 The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father.

Jesus also says he made himself equal to the Father. He does what the Father does. What the Father does, he does likewise. The Father raises the dead and gives life, something that only God does, so does Jesus vv. 18-20. Jesus does the same thing, only what God himself can do. The Father judges no one but all judgment is given to the Son. As has been reiterated time and time again by me,, who has the capacity to render judgment??

Psalm 9:7-8
7: But the LORD sits enthroned for ever, he has established his throne for judgment; 8: and he judges the world with righteousness, he judges the peoples with equity.

Romans 14:10 Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God;

Psalm 94: 1: O LORD, thou God of vengeance, thou God of vengeance, shine forth! 2: Rise up, O judge of the earth; render to the proud their deserts!

Psalm 75:2 At the set time which I appoint I will judge with equity.
Psalm 7:8: The LORD judges the peoples; judge me, O LORD, according to my righteousness and according to the integrity that is in me.

Only God can give judgement, according to Scripture. And Jesus himself makes the point that you JW's Buddhists, or whatever, don't seem to get. 22 The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. The Father gives him judgment so that all may honor the Son in the same way he honors the Father. If he is honored in the same way, He is thus, not less than God the Father in any way, shape or form. It seems like Jesus is making the point that you JW's Buddhists, whatever are not getting. Jesus is not a god, making God a polytheist, but He is God Himself. Only God can make judgment, and Jesus makes judgment on all, and thus Jesus is God Himself. It seems fairly clear to me.

[matt1618]

I'll make you red, when I quote you, I can't see it, so I'll make it so your words are visible.

That maybe true but we don’t have what Jesus’ actual words were either. We have what people said that he said some 100+ years after the fact. I get all of my information on Buddhism out of the Pali Canon. Everything that you use to bash Buddha’s teaching could also be said about Jesus.


Yes, those are Jesus' words, and we know they are. We have references to Jesus words throughout. Luke goes out of his way to say that everything he is writing is true and to be trusted (Lk 1:4). We have extra biblical writings like Clements letter to the Corinthians in about 70 ad quoting Jesus from the gospels, which would be quite hard to do if it wasn't written yet. Didache, first century makes reference to the gopels. Ignatius of Antioch, who had contact with John, trained by John, quoting from John's epistle, which would be quite hard if it hadn't been written yet.

Ah yes your most important teaching is not my most important teaching. That is why you can not see what I see. I prefer the teaching that relate to the following.

Matthew 6:5-8,
[5] "When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on street corners so that others may see them. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward.
[6] But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.
[7] In praying, do not babble like the pagans, who think that they will be heard because of their many words.
[8] Do not be like them. Your Father knows what you need before you ask him.

Matthew 15:1-20
[17] Do you not realize that everything that enters the mouth passes into the stomach and is expelled into the latrine?
[18] But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile.
[19] For from the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, unchastity, theft, false witness, blasphemy.
[20] These are what defile a person, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile."

I did not add 1-16 as it is the lead up to the climax which is 17-20 but those verses are still important.
Philippians 2:5-9
[5]Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,
[6]who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,
[7]but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
[8]Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
[9]For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,

I'll add a couple of verses:,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.


Ok, Jesus is exalted above every other single name. So thus, God is not higher than Him. His own name is not above Jesus'. That is the incarnation, the Word became Flesh and dwelt among us. Every knee shalll Bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord. So is Paul just making this up? I don't think so. He is declaring Jesus to be God.

Isaiah we see the same thing, Isaiah 45:22-23:

22: "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other. 23: By myself I have sworn, from my mouth has gone forth in righteousness a word that shall not return: `To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.'

So when we see that Paul uses language, being a scholar of the Old Testament, when he says no other name is higher than Jesus, and he says every knee shall bow before Jesus, and every tongue confess before Jesus, and we see Isaiah say that God says 'I am God, there is no other.' There is no 'a' god btw. What does that tell us about what Paul means in Philippians 2? That Jesus humbled himself, became flesh, but still is Himself God, and every knee shall bow and confess that Jesus is God Himself. How does Paul not mean that since that is his clear reference?

You could reflect on that as well....who was it that laid the ground work for the trinity in the first place and made it doctrine? Was it the council of Nicaea?

John writes that he was God. Jesus himself said that He was God in John 5, 8, & 10, Paul shows it in this passage of Philippians 2, titus 2:13. Hebrews 1:6, 8.

The early Fathers understood the concept of their being 3 person's but only one being, one essence, as can be noted by Clement's letter to the Corinthians. All the intricate details were not spelled out, but what Nicaea wrote about in detail was not a new concept, but an explication in more detail of what was already believed by not only Scripture, but also the early Fathers.

[matt1618]

I don't discredit Jesus and what HE said. What I discredit is what other think or thought he was. Jesus is the son of God, like we all are, and he is also the Son of Man, sent here to assist us complete our task for which we were originally sent. Jesus was a great man/soul, but was or is he God, no...no one can or will ever be equal to the Father.

John 5:22-23
22 The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.

Phil. 2:10-11 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Isaiah 45:22-23
22: "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.
23: By myself I have sworn, from my mouth has gone forth in righteousness a word that shall not return: `To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.'

These Scriptures seem to disagree with you.

Ok, bout time to get ready for Football.

[DRS]

But notice it his own judgment that he renders on all, and only God can do judgment on people. He does not do things on his own. Of course, He is in perfect harmony with His Father. The trinity, the essence is of one of perfect harmonay. There are different functions, now just a few verses earier:

5:18-23 18 This was why the Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God. 19 Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing; for whatever he does, that the Son does likewise. 20 For the Father loves the Son, and shows him all that he himself is doing; and greater works than these will he show him, that you may marvel. 21 For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will. 22 The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father.

Jesus also says he made himself equal to the Father. He does what the Father does. What the Father does, he does likewise. The Father raises the dead and gives life, something that only God does, so does Jesus vv. 18-20. Jesus does the same thing, only what God himself can do. The Father judges no one but all judgment is given to the Son. As has been reiterated time and time again by me,, who has the capacity to render judgment??

Psalm 9:7-8
7: But the LORD sits enthroned for ever, he has established his throne for judgment; 8: and he judges the world with righteousness, he judges the peoples with equity.

Romans 14:10 Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God;

Psalm 94: 1: O LORD, thou God of vengeance, thou God of vengeance, shine forth! 2: Rise up, O judge of the earth; render to the proud their deserts!

Psalm 75:2 At the set time which I appoint I will judge with equity.
Psalm 7:8: The LORD judges the peoples; judge me, O LORD, according to my righteousness and according to the integrity that is in me.

Only God can give judgement, according to Scripture. And Jesus himself makes the point that you JW's Buddhists, or whatever, don't seem to get. 22 The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. The Father gives him judgment so that all may honor the Son in the same way he honors the Father. If he is honored in the same way, He is thus, not less than God the Father in any way, shape or form. It seems like Jesus is making the point that you JW's Buddhists, whatever are not getting. Jesus is not a god, making God a polytheist, but He is God Himself. Only God can make judgment, and Jesus makes judgment on all, and thus Jesus is God Himself. It seems fairly clear to me.



So those who judge with Jesus are God also?

[Tucson Jim]

I said it was quick and dirty.

I then said that IN ESSENCE that is the way I see it.

I even went through a little dialogue of our "my pop is bigger than your pop" routines.

Trin's would say that, that was not his mission.

Fine, but Jesus did repeatedly say who he was, even when confronted with claiming to be GOD, he still said that he had said that "I am God's Son"


It does not get any clearer than that.

People thought he claimed to be God, He said I am God's Son.


The NT writers, trin's interpret to be claiming that Jesus was GOD.

So in my mind (quick and dirty) IT APPEARS TO BE THE SAME SCENARIO PLAYING OUT AGAIN, with others claiming to know something about Jesus, and yet Jesus' words ring out in my head saying "I SAID I AM GOD'S SON"


Now I personally do not think that, that is the case. I think that others have tweaked the definitions of a few certain key verses to fit their own belief system, and that this tradition has been finely honed and handed down for thousands of years.

So no insult intended, I tried to apologize for a blunt presentation, but no, I do not think in its bluntess sense that it is a mischaracterization.

I think you have artfully dodged my point, with all due respect.

Once more, none of us have ever claimed that Jesus knew less about His own nature than the NT writers and you know it.

It would be nice if you would just admit you exaggerated to make a point.

Cause you did. And you know it.

But if this is how it is, OK . . .

[Tucson Jim]

No, but honestly as I told him, I too am weary of retreading over the same ground (when nothing can be gained) . So I gave him the necessary info to look in to my blow hard explanations as little or as much as he desired.

He I guess felt put upon, as so instead of adding another 30 pages to the thread, I just gave him a bunch of posts that I thought would cover the first back and forth arguments we would have, and save some time.

OK. But my suggestion for a productive discussion still stands.

[Tucson Jim]

What kind of GOD does not possess life within itself? What kind of GOD has to be given all authority and power? What kind of GOD is given the glory of another?




The "kind of God" who loves us enough to become a man to save us from our sins.

[Tucson Jim]

I hope you do!

But as far as the above goes, Every time some one comes in contact with GOD, they fall on their face, or need to be reassured, to not be afraid.

No imagine Jesus claiming to be GOD. His disciples say nothing. The Jews were right, that unless you are GOD, to claim to be GOD would be blasphemy. And yet scripture plainly shows us that the disciples did not believe that Jesus was God.

For right after John 8's big "I am " statement this is what the disciples say :


John 9

1As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth. 2His disciples asked him, "Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?"

Can you imagine Jesus just claiming to be God, and then his disciples call him Rabbi?

Not buying it.

Simple.

At that point, the disciples did not quite get it.

Kind of like some people today . . . :razz:

[Tucson Jim]

Bring 'em on. I aint skeered.

:)) I bet you're not!! But since we're a hairs breadth apart I aint skeered either!

[Tucson Jim]

But that is really a weak point, because people throughout history have been willing to die for things which were patriotic, religious (not just christian), and just plain crazy.


So just because you would die for your belief does that give me pause to think you may be right?


Not for a second.

I'll give you that one . . .

[Tucson Jim]

That's what I figured. (I feel the same way)

So, there really is no difference in your zeal, from that of the followers of Jesus (his contemporaries, not those of us removed by a couple thousand years or so).

The main difference is not in the conviction of our beliefs....but in the fact that the followers of Jesus that the old timer spoke of (Jesus' contemporaries) claimed that Jesus was God in the flesh -- God incarnate. They had walked with Him, been taught directly by Him, had seen and heard all the things He said and did that are not recorded in the scriptures.

Hard to believe any of them would have gone to their death for a lie.

True, true . . .

[Tucson Jim]

18 For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.

It seems to me that John is indeed saying that Jesus is/claimed to be equal with God.


He was, obviously.

To most people, anyway . . .

[Tucson Jim]

I agree.

Truly.

The point that I would make is that I do not think that any of them thought that, let alone claimed it.

I think they thought that he was the Christ, God's chosen one, and his unique Son.

I believe that this notion of Godhood, is the result of translation, interpretation, perhaps some old school politics, and power.

I do not condemn anyone now for these things, I think it is more a matter of tradition, in conjunction with loving memories, experiences, God's presence, etc... that continues it.

Do not read too much into that "God's presence" comment, suffice to say that I believe, God can get to people, be near them, and work in their lives, no matter where they are.

Absolutely!!

[Tucson Jim]

Of course not.

But when the word theos is used, and someone says "It must mean THE GOD"

I just do not buy it, because nothing in scripture, (if I let go of tradition, and the trin scholars in my head) suggest that that must be so, nor even really supports it.


I could not disagree more! We have tried to show you the overwhelming sciptural support for Christ being called "God" and possessing all the attributes of God.

But you will have none of it.

You "do not buy it". But not for lack of scriptural support.

[Tucson Jim]

Jesus himself said if you see me, you have seen the Father.


I keep telling you guys that we truly do agree on more than we disagree.


I once used an example of a mirror, and you guys got so caught up on the whole inanimate object aspect of it, that I hesitate to bring it up again, but alas, I will risk it. Please do not think that I am lowering Jesus to the level of a mirror, do not go there, this is my human brain just trying to convey an idea that is about GOD, so a little slack please.


Ex.

Just as a mirror is "equal" to the object it reflects, does all that it does, says all that it says, etc...

That does not mean that the mirror IS the object that it reflects.

But if I could not see the object itself, but I could see the mirror, then in essence, I could "see" the object itself.


Hence Jesus can be God's Son, "be equal"/"reflect" the Father perfectly, and yet not be GOD.

That COULD be true, were it not for the fact that God said there is
"None like me".

If a mere creature were a perfect reflection of God, as you suggest, it would invalidate the word of God.

[Tucson Jim]

Great to have you on this thread, too, terri! You somehow kinda snuck in and I didn't notice until now. :redface:


AMEN to that!!!

I hope to see more of Terri on this thread!

I really appreciate her posts!

[Tucson Jim]

I peek in.

The discussions get a bit heated at times, and I find I have to leave for a while.

But the amazing thing about this particular thread is that I can go away and come back 40 pages later....and the "evidence" from each viewpoint hasn't changed! :))

I find it fascinating, though.....

:)) So true!!

[Tucson Jim]

My computer does not have a Greek typing program so I will have to splain this as best I can. In John 1:1 The Word is called God, and God, is called The Word. Some groups say the Word is "a" god. This translation simply is not supported in the Greek text. In the Greek it say's "God was, THE Word". In John1:14 it say's " The Word flesh became and tabernacled among us. If Jesus isn't God, who is this talking about.
In 1tim 3;16 "he appeared in a body", Gr.( "who was manifested in flesh"). Taken within context it is clearly God they are talking about. So who appeared in the flesh???? Jesus
Do I know Greek? NO. But, my Pastor has a Masters degree, and my son has four years of study at Moody Bible College so it is not to hard to get answers to my questions.
By the way, earlier I read the Greek word "theos" means "The God". That would be true only, if it had a mark that looks like an "O" with a funny little mark above it placed in front, or behind the word. I think the mark is pronounced "Ho"
My Pastor say's " it is a waste of time to study the Trinity until, you have a clear picture of who Jesus is, because it would have no meaning to those who reject Him.

That seems to be borne out in abundance in this thread!

[Tucson Jim]

But only God is judge. Nothing about whoa. Let us look again at John 5:18-24:

18 This was why the Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God. 19 Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing; for whatever he does, that the Son does likewise. 20 For the Father loves the Son, and shows him all that he himself is doing; and greater works than these will he show him, that you may marvel. 21 For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will. 22 The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. 24 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears my word and believes him who sent me, has eternal life; he does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.


Ok, John the author says He made himself equal with God, and the context shows this. Now I understand you can say 'well in the first part, it says he broke the Sabbath and you can say 'well are you saying Jesus broke the Sabbath if you say he is equal to God.?'' I'd say, no, but the context shows that the 2nd part of v. 18, goes along with this. That He 'makes himself equal with he Father'. The Trnity is perfect unity, but there are different roles and functions. So He is not going to do anything that the Father does, but only does what the Father does. So if he does what the Father does, He thus, must have ALL the capabilities, of the Father, right? For as the Father does He does, vs. 20. The Father raises the dead and gives life, in the exact same way the Son gives life to whom he wills. That is the fleshing out of verse 19, in action. How in the world does that show inferiority in any way at all?


Then we go on to vs. 22, The Father judges no one but has given all judgment to the Son. Hmm, but who is the Judge of the World but God?

Thus, there is a delegation, but to say that Jesus is lesser but he is given delegation that makes him less of a person? Not so. After all, what does Scripture say about who is judge?

Psalm 9:7-8
7: But the LORD sits enthroned for ever, he has established his throne for judgment; 8: and he judges the world with righteousness, he judges the peoples with equity.

Romans 14:10 Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God;

Psalm 94: 1: O LORD, thou God of vengeance, thou God of vengeance, shine forth! 2: Rise up, O judge of the earth; render to the proud their deserts!


Who has this role of judging the earth? Is it not God? Does that make God the Father not God? And who is it but Jesus? Doesn't matter if there are roles. Jesus is the God of vengeance, he is the judge of all the earth. Jesus is the one who judges with equity. Any idea of Jesus being judge, shows that he is Yahweh, Jehovah himself.


Now, moving along it says that all may honor the Son even as he honors the Father, v. 23? He is thus equal with God? Thus, this explication, shows that what John wrote in John 5:18, is shown to be absolutely correct. How does that not say he is equal? You diminish Jesus you diminish the Father. He is due the exact same worship that is due the Father, does it not? To me it is a stupendous tearing out of context of verse 19, to say anything else than that Jesus, judge of all the earth, who is not only declared by John to be equal to God the Father v. 18, is due the exact same regard as the Father. Who cares if it is delegated role,it still in Scripture says that He is judge over all the Earth. If Jesus is judge, he is equal, and is God himself!!

This time, I will interact in the evening. Going to work now.

Truly an excellent exegesis of these verses Matt!

Thank you!

[Tucson Jim]

I think you are stretching it because Jesus was GIVEN authority to judge from his God.

Joh 5:26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;
Joh 5:27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.


If he were God then he would not need to be GIVEN the authority...............he would already have it, IMO.


Had Almighty God not given the authority then he could not judge anything.

Right?.................. Or wrong?

Wrong, of course!! :D

Jesus became Man, remember??

As man, he lived in dependence on the Father, just as we do. MUCH less perfectly, of course!

[Tucson Jim]

Well in order to fulfill prophecy he had to be son to someone in the line of David born at a certain time

Nothing in prophecy said he had to be God, just anointed by God and a servant of God

The only problem is . . . He IS God, as stated in the NT.

[Tucson Jim]

Romans 3:10 "There is no righteous, not even one".
Romans 3:23 "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God". . In a logical line of reasoning would this not have to include Jesus?
Many places in the Bible state that God is the only one who is sinless. Therefore, if Jesus is not "God come in the flesh", then how would he be the perfect sacrifice, The spotless lamb? To help me try to follow your line of reasoning, Do you personally believe Jesus to be a sinner.
In Isaiah 9:6 " and He will be called, Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace" And there are more than enough places in the Greek ,to show that there is no difference in this context between," Mighty God", "Almighty God", "Alpha and Omega", "Everlasting Father". And Jesus, throughout scripture is called by ALL these titles. So, who is He. Is He the Lord, a liar, or a lunatic. If he isn't God come in the flesh than who do you say He is.

:clap:

[Tucson Jim]

I'll have to address this in portions for the sake of brevity.
I'll go with the low hanging fruit first.



Except Thomas addresses Christ as "my Lord and my God". To make it even clearer, the Greek text is:

και απεκριθη ο θωμας και ειπεν αυτω ο κυριος μου και ο θεος μου

There is nothing exclamatory in the Greek as a kinda "Oh my God" moment. If it were, the original Greek would have been Thee (two short "e", not one long "e" sound) Mou. Thomas here is literally calling Christ "his God". It is clearly the possessive form of the Greek and not the exclamatory colloquiallism. In English, the two are the same. Not in the Greek.

THANK YOU CTG!!

I hereby claim victory in our discussion of this Point Rock and AA!!

You don't have to bow before me.

A simple kiss of my ring will be sufficient . . .

[Tucson Jim]

To address a few of your points;
Trinitarians believe Christ was fully God, and fully man. Two natures. Now, part of Christ's mission was to live the human existence up to a certain extent. He was born of a woman, as all humans are. He was tempted by Satan, as all humans are. He was struck with sorrow at the prospect of losing His life, as most humans are, unless they are suicidal. And even though Christ knew, KNEW He would be risen again in glory, His human nature was still greatly grieved at the prospect of dying. However, Christ also states that His Father loves Him because He (Christ) willingly would be laying down His life, and willingly taking it up again. So the fact He possessed a human nature is undeniabe I think by both you and I up to this point. So I think so far we are in agreement.
Now, having possessed a human nature that manifested itself quite explicitly, it is not too big of a stretch to also show that Christ was teaching (or trying to teach though many did not follow) subordination to God (or for us Trinitarians Himself). God had tried to instruct the Israelites to submit to His will through Moses and other prophets and always something would go wrong. So God takes it upon Himself, taking human form, to save mankind from death and preach subjection to His will by giving them a more perfect example to follow and He provided the ultimate example; crucifixion even though His human will wished to avoid it.
Now in John 1:1, St. John says that in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word WAS God. John is quite specific here. As Chrysostom states and makes the case quite nicely;

"Then, as he advances, he has more clearly revealed it, by adding, that this “Word” also “was God.”
“But yet created,” it may be said. What then hindered him from saying, that “In the beginning God made the Word”? at least Moses speaking of the earth says, not that “in the beginning was the earth,” but that “He made it,” and then it was. What now hindered John from saying in like manner, that “In the beginning God made the Word”? For if Moses feared lest any one should assert that the earth was uncreated,52 (javascript:toggle('fnf_iv.v-p26.1');)52 ἀ γένητον. much more ought John to have feared this respecting the Son, if He was indeed created. "
This is quite the point being made. John becomes very purposeful in his language in writing this verse and there was no reason for him to say the Word was God, instead of saying the Word was created by God. Also, John opens the Gospel with this very phrase. He lays the foundation for everything else to follow; that Jesus was the Word of God, but is also God.

Excellent CTG. I have never heard it explained quite this way before. I appreciate your teaching on this point.

[drmilo]

Jesus himself said if you see me, you have seen the Father.


I keep telling you guys that we truly do agree on more than we disagree.


I once used an example of a mirror, and you guys got so caught up on the whole inanimate object aspect of it, that I hesitate to bring it up again, but alas, I will risk it. Please do not think that I am lowering Jesus to the level of a mirror, do not go there, this is my human brain just trying to convey an idea that is about GOD, so a little slack please.


Ex.

Just as a mirror is "equal" to the object it reflects, does all that it does, says all that it says, etc...

That does not mean that the mirror IS the object that it reflects.

But if I could not see the object itself, but I could see the mirror, then in essence, I could "see" the object itself.


Hence Jesus can be God's Son, "be equal"/"reflect" the Father perfectly, and yet not be GOD.


The mirror itself is not equal to the object it reflects; the mirror itself does not do all that does, and say all that it says. The reflection in the mirror is equal to the object being reflected; the reflection in the mirror does all it does and says all it says. This is because the reflection in the mirror IS the object being reflected.

[Tucson Jim]

Ok,how is this stretching. You are missing the point. One thing about the Trinity is that the One being in Three work in perfect unity. And that the Father can delegate the Son to do stuff does not make Jesus inferior at all, in the Trinitarian understanding. You seem to think that the fact that the Father delegates makes Jesus a lesser person. That can be an opinion I respect, but that is not the opinion of Jesus Himself, since in the context, he says he must be honored in the same way as the Father. You missed the point in reference to judgment. Here are just a few Scriptures that I already gave & you ignored to show the importance of Jesus being the Judge of the World:

Psalm 9:7-8
7: But the LORD sits enthroned for ever, he has established his throne for judgment; 8: and he judges the world with righteousness, he judges the peoples with equity.

Romans 14:10 Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God;

Psalm 94: 1: O LORD, thou God of vengeance, thou God of vengeance, shine forth! 2: Rise up, O judge of the earth; render to the proud their deserts!

It says God is the judge of the world!!! Who judges the world? Oh, Jesus, i.e. Jesus is God!! The Psalmist & David & Paul didn't say 'well, O Lord, thou God of judge of the earth, unless you are given authority from the Father.' Not 'The Lord judges the world with equity, unless he is delegated' then he is not the Lord.' Jesus = judge, = Jesus = God.

And this is in the context of him one must honor the Son, in the exact same way of one must honor the Father. Jesus = God.

The fact that he is given authority to execute judgment, means he is God himself. In Matthew 25:31-46, Jesus is the one making judgment again, on the separation of the sheep & the goats. I.E. Jesus, is judging the world with righteousness & equity (Psalm 9), He is God himself.

Thus, this goes back to show that Jesus is making himself equal with God, 5:18, in the same way he proclaimed it in John 8:58.




Excellent Matt!! This also goes along with all the scriptures showing Jesus posseses ALL the attributes of God! (scriptures we have posted numerous times on this thread, with no apparent effect on the antitrinitarians).

[Tucson Jim]

Sure, but the main point of the incarnation was 'The Word was made flesh' and dwelt among us. He became a person, just like you and me in one sense, the whole point of the incarnation. He talked with people as a regular person, so even though he made this outlandish declaration of him being God (as he did in John 5), they had walked with him over a period of time, that they could approach Him. I didn't see a statement from any disciple saying that He wasn't God. We do have Scriptures written by apostles noting that He is God (Heb. 1:6, 8, Co. 1:16, Tit. 2:13)

John 20:28 Thomas does so declare Him to be so. They understood him, there was no need to proclaim it. The people picked up the stones on those occasions I noted ( Jn 10:30-31, John 8:58-59, Mt. 26:64, noting that He was God, & it would have been blasphemy. Ultimately the disciples accepted him. So they called him teacher. Why can't he be an ultimate teacher? There is one ultimate teacher, that teacher is God, Mt. 23:7.

Amen Brother!

[Tucson Jim]

One other thing, somebody mentioned no one was awed by Jesus, they didn't fall down, or worshiped or whatever. The incarnation in some sense of appearance, shielded his awesomeness. But in Glory, we will all fall down before Jesus. John himself, who walked & talked with him, and heard Jesus talk, when saw him in glory, did exactly that in Revelation 1:7-8, 17-18. Jesus appears to John in Revelation 1:

5 To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood 6 and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. 7 Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, every one who pierced him; and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Even so. Amen. 8 "I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.

13 and in the midst of the lampstands one like a son of man, clothed with a long robe and with a golden girdle round his breast; 14 his head and his hair were white as white wool, white as snow; his eyes were like a flame of fire, 15 his feet were like burnished bronze, refined as in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters; 16 in his right hand he held seven stars, from his mouth issued a sharp two-edged sword, and his face was like the sun shining in full strength. 17 When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand upon me, saying, "Fear not, I am the first and the last, 18 and the living one; I died, and behold I am alive for evermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades.


Okay, so Jesus says that he himself is the Alpha and the Omega in Revelation, which is the first and last. When Jesus appears in his glory, John shows the deference that you asked for. Who is the first & last except God himself? The Alpha & Omega (means first & last) is God himself, God almighty, vs. 7 & 8. And who is that one? The one who is coming on the clouds, the one who is pierced, Jesus himself. He is the same one who is the first & the last. He repeats the same thing as the Son of Man (vv. 13-14), the first and the last.


John sees him in his glory and then falls dead at his feet v. 17, what you said you'd expect the disciples to do. Jesus comforts him, by saying, repeating what was referred to earlier, I am the First and the Last. I was dead, and am alive forevermore. Isaiah confirms what Jesus again is proclaiming to John in Revelation:

Isaiah 44:6: Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.

Isaiah 48:12: "Hearken to me, O Jacob, and Israel, whom I called! I am He, I am the first, and I am the last.

In case somehow we don't get it, John spells this out one more time near the end of his book, Jesus is the first & the last, the Alpha, the Omega, Rev: 22:13

12 "Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense, to repay every one for what he has done. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."

Now, So who is Jesus saying He is when He says 'I am the First and the Last?' The Alpha & the Omega, The Lord God Himself!!!!!

Going to work, will respond to feedback late tonight.

Thanks Matt! Excellent!

[Tucson Jim]

Not buying it.

That sums it up, doesn't it?

[Tucson Jim]

And besides, Just because I use a word that has multiple definitions more than once in the same thought, does not AUTOMATICALLY mean that they MUST have the same definition.

missed the rule on that one.....

Boy, that was a real non-answer!

[drmilo]

Revelation 1:1 A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place. And he sent forth his angel and presented [it] in signs through him to his slave John,


Still insisting on using the word "by" are you?

My Bible says:

Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

The revelation "of" Jesus Christ. "Of" can have two meanings: "belonging to" and "about" In this context, "belonging to" does not fit. Therefore the word "of" must mean "about." Thus, this is the revelation "about" Jesus Christ. It is a revelation of who Jesus Christ is (the savior of human kind, the judge of the world, the conquerer of death and evil) by showing us what events will come to pass. This revelation was given to Jesus by God, given to the Son by the Father; Jesus then sends this revelation to John by giving it to an angel.

[Tucson Jim]

Okay, you are ignoring the fact that only Jehova is judge of the whole world, he judges with equity. He is God himself. Jesus is judge of the world. Even if it is delegated to Jesus, Scripture attests that only God can give that judgment. John relates that he makes himself equal with God, because he is, in John 5:18, as shown in John 5:23, when he says one must honor the Son in the same way as He honors the Father.

Now, in reference to life, and Jesus we can see John 5:26 saying about the Son having life in Himself granted by the Father. Sure, but that can't be seen in isolation of what scripture attests to Jesus in the beginning of John's gospel.

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God; 3 all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. 4 In him was life, and the life was the light of men.

Okay, I did it in orange, you said you needed something visible, white wasn't good enough. He was in the beginning, created alll things, not going into debate about God, a god, etc, but the fact that in Himself was life. In him, in and of itself, He was life. He created all things, and He is the source of life.

Now, on to John 5:26:

For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself,

You can not read John 5:26 in opposition to Jesus being called the source of all things, and He is the life.


Now, it says that as the Father has life in Himself, in the same way, the Son has life in Himself. Ok, so no difference, whether it was granted or not. It does not say that He gave him life, it says the Son Has life Himself in the same way as the Father. So if 'as the Father, 'as the Son'.

It is not that he was given life. It isn 't noted as though He was without life, and then he received life. For if He received life, He would not have it in Himself. For indeed, what is in Himself? That He should Himself be the very life.


Now what has happened is though He's shared life with His Father from all eternity, He brings this life into the World into the world as the gift of the Father who He reveals to men (Jn 1:4).


Again, I continue to stress this is in the midst of Jesus proclaiming that He is executing judgment, which only God Himself can do.

Amen Matt! Thanks for your perspective on this! We have been trying to make a similar point for a long time.

[Tucson Jim]

If you would just include all the verses surrounding John 5:26 it brings everything into light

John 5:24-30
[24]Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes in the one who sent me has eternal life and will not come to condemnation, but has passed from death to life.

[25]Amen, amen, I say to you, the hour is coming and is now here when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.

[26]For just as the Father has life in himself, so also he gave to his Son the possession of life in himself.

[27]And he gave him power to exercise judgment, because he is the Son of Man.

[28]Do not be amazed at this, because the hour is coming in which all who are in the tombs will hear his voice

[29]and will come out, those who have done good deeds to the resurrection of life, but those who have done wicked deeds to the resurrection of condemnation.

[30]"I cannot do anything on my own; I judge as I hear, and my judgment is just, because I do not seek my own will but the will of the one who sent me.

Jesus is not God but a son of God. He was sent to spread the word to open the eyes of those of us who are asleep. Infact in the same chapter he himself claims he is not God but does the will of God, John 5:30.

He is actually THE Son of God.

Big difference!

[drmilo]

He used the word theos. What I was trying to point out is that even if Thomas said my theos, that that does not mean that he was using the word theos to refer to Jesus as GOD.

But he also said "My Lord"

Let us not forget that. If you want to translate "theos" to mean other than the one true God, then it must either mean a false god, a pagan god, or a person of authority. Since Thomas was a Jew, and he, at this point, was now believing that Jesus was alive even after he saw him die, then we know Thomas was not calling Jesus a false god, nor a pagan god -- Thomas did not come to believe in multiple gods or in other gods aside from the one true God, would you not agree -- then we must assume that the only definitions for theos (the only things Thomas could have meant to mean by using theos) is the One True God, or a person of authority. Do we agree here?

I assume we do, so far.

We now must look at what Thomas said. He did not say, "My God" nor did he say "My Lord" he said "My Lord and My God."

What did he mean when he said "Lord"? The definition for Lord is a title refering to the One true God, a person of authority.

If we are going to say that Thomas did not mean to call Jesus the One True God, then we must come to the conclusion that "Lord" in this context is the title of a person in authority. And if we are to believe that Thomas did not call Jesus the One True God, then we also must conclude that "theos" also means a "person of authority."

So aren't you now asking us to believe that what Thomas said, essentially is: "My person of authority, and my person of authority"

That is not what he said.

He gives Jesus the title of a person of authority when he says "My Lord" and he further clarifies what that authority is when he says, "My God." Therefore, in the context, we must conclude that "theos" MUST be referring to the One True God, for otherwise, it is Thomas being redundant and not really saying anything significant.

[Tucson Jim]

It is a combination of Catholicism, Buddhism, and esoteric thoughts/beliefs.

Syncretism. :rolleyes:

[Tucson Jim]

“As,” saith Christ, “the Father hath life in Himself, so hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself.” ( Ver. 26 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.John.5.html#John.5.26).) “What then? Did he first beget and then give Him life? For he who giveth, giveth to something which is. Was He then begotten without life?” Not even the devils could imagine this, for it is very foolish as well as impious. As then “hath given life” is “hath begotten Him who is Life,” so, “hath given judgment” is “hath begotten Him who shall be Judge.” That thou mayest not when thou hearest that He hath the Father for His cause imagine any difference of essence or inferiority of honor, He cometh to judge thee, by this proving His Equality.” For He who hath authority to punish and to honor whom He will, hath the same Power with the Father. Since, if this be not the case, if having been begotten He afterwards received the honor, how came it that He was afterwards [thus] honored, by what mode of advancement reached He so far as to receive and be appointed to this dignity? Are ye not ashamed thus impudently to apply to that Pure Nature which admitteth of no addition these carnal and mean imaginations?
“Why then,” saith some one, “doth Christ so speak?” That His words may be readily received, and to clear the way for sublime sayings; therefore He mixeth these with those, and those with these. And observe how (He doth it); for it is good to see this from the beginning. He said, “My Father worketh, and I work” ( c. v. 17 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.John.5.html#John.5.17) , &c.): declaring by this their Equality and Equal honor. But they “sought to kill Him.” What doth He then? He lowereth His form of speech indeed, and putteth the same meaning when He saith, “The Son can do nothing of Himself.” Then again He raiseth His discourse to high matters, saying, “What things soever the Father doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.” Then He returneth to what is lower, “For the Father loveth the Son, and showeth Him all things that Himself doeth; and He will show Him greater things than these.” Then He riseth higher, “For as the Father raiseth up the dead and quickeneth them, even so the Son quickeneth whom He will.” After this again He joineth the high and the low together, “For neither doth the Father judge any one, but hath given all judgment to the Son”; then riseth again, “That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father.” Seest thou how He varieth the discourse, weaving it both of high and low words and expressions, in order that it might be acceptable to the men of that time, and that those who should come after might receive no injury, gaining from the higher part a right opinion of the rest? For if this be not the case, if these sayings were not uttered through condescension, wherefore were the high expressions added? Because one who is entitled to utter great words concerning himself, hath, when he saith anything mean and low, this reasonable excuse, that he doth it for some prudential purpose; but if one who ought to speak meanly of himself saith anything great, on what account doth he utter words which surpass his nature? This is not for any purpose at all, but an act of extreme impiety. We are therefore able to assign a reason for the lowly expressions, a reason sufficient, and becoming to God, namely, His condescension, His teaching us to be moderate, and the salvation which is thus wrought for us. To declare which He said Himself in another place, “These things I say that ye might be saved.” For when He left His own witness, and betook Himself to that of John, (a thing unworthy of His greatness,) He putteth the reason of such lowliness of language, and saith, “These things I say that ye might be saved.” And ye who assert that He hath not the same authority and power with Him who begat Him, what can ye say when ye hear Him utter words by which He declareth His Authority and Power and Glory equal in respect of the Father? Wherefore, if He be as ye assert very inferior, doth He claim the same honor? Nor doth He stop even here, but goeth on to say,
“He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father which hath sent Him.” Seest thou how the honor of the Son is connected with that of the Father? “What of that?” saith one. “We see the same in the case of the Apostles; ‘He,’ saith Christ, ‘who receiveth you receiveth Me.’” ( Matt. x. 40 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.Matt.10.html#Matt.10.40).) But in that place He speaketh so, because He maketh the concerns of His servants His own; here, because the Essence and the Glory is One (with that of the Father). Therefore it is not said of the Apostles “that they may honor,” but rightly He saith, “He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father.” For where there are two kings, if one is insulted the other is insulted also, and especially when he that is insulted is a son. He is insulted even when one of his soldiers is maltreated; not in the same way as in this case, but as it were in the person of another while here it is as it were in his own. Wherefore He beforehand said, “That they should honor the Son even as they honor the Father,” in order that when He should say, “He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father,” thou mightest understand that the honor is the same. For He saith not merely, “he that honoreth not the Son,” but “he that honoreth Him not so as I have said” “honoreth not the Father.”
“And how,” saith one, “can he that sendeth and he that is sent be of the same essence?” Again, thou bringest down the argument to carnal things, and perceivest not that all this has been said for no other purpose, but that we might know Him to be The Cause, and not fall into the error of Sabellius, and that in this manner the infirmity of the Jews might be healed, so that He might not be deemed an enemy of God; For from their extreme senselessness He was counted among them an enemy of God. Morel. for they said, “This man is not of God” ( c. ix. 16 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.John.9.html#John.9.16) ), “This man hath not come from God.” Now to remove this suspicion, high sayings did not contribute so much as the lowly, and therefore continually and everywhere He said that He had been “sent”; not that thou mightest suppose that expression to be any lessening of His greatness, but in order to stop their mouths. And for this cause also He constantly betaketh Himself to the Father, interposing moreover mention of His own high Parentage. For had He said all in proportion to His dignity, the Jews would not have received His words, since because of a few such expressions, they persecuted and oftentimes stoned Him; and if looking wholly to them He had used none but low expressions, many in after times might have been harmed. Wherefore He mingleth and blendeth generally of mixing wine with water. His teaching, both by these lowly sayings stopping, as I said, the mouths of the Jews, and also by expressions suited to His dignity banishing from men of sense any mean notion of what He had said, and proving that such a notion did not in any wise apply to Him at all.
The expression “having been sent” denoteth change of place—but God is everywhere present. Wherefore then saith He that He was “sent”? He speaketh in an earthly way, declaring His unanimity with the Father. At least He shapeth His succeeding words with a desire to effect this.
Ver. 24 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.John.5.html#John.5.24). “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth My word, and believeth on Him that sent Me, hath everlasting life.”
Seest thou how continually He putteth the same thing to cure that feeling of suspicion, both in this place and in what follows by fear and by promises of blessings removing their jealousy of Him, and then again condescending greatly in words? For He said not, “he that heareth My words, and believeth on Me,” since they would have certainly deemed that to be pride, and a superfluous pomp of words; because, if after a very long time, and ten thousand miracles, they suspected this when He spake after this manner, much more would they have done so then. It was on this account that at that later period they said to Him, “Abraham is dead, and the prophets are dead, how sayest Thou, If a man keep My saying, he shall never taste of death?” ( c. viii. 52 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.John.8.html#John.8.52).) In order therefore that they may not here also become furious, see what He saith, “He that heareth My word, and believeth on Him that sent Me, hath everlasting life.” This had no small effect in making His discourse acceptable, when they learned that those who hear Him believe in the Father also; for after having received this with readiness, they would more easily receive the rest. So that the very speaking in a humble manner contributed and led the way to higher things;"


St. John Chrysostom

Very thought-provoking CTG!! Thanks!

[Tucson Jim]

I'll make you red, when I quote you, I can't see it, so I'll make it so your words are visible.

That maybe true but we don’t have what Jesus’ actual words were either. We have what people said that he said some 100+ years after the fact. I get all of my information on Buddhism out of the Pali Canon. Everything that you use to bash Buddha’s teaching could also be said about Jesus.


Yes, those are Jesus' words, and we know they are. We have references to Jesus words throughout. Luke goes out of his way to say that everything he is writing is true and to be trusted (Lk 1:4). We have extra biblical writings like Clements letter to the Corinthians in about 70 ad quoting Jesus from the gospels, which would be quite hard to do if it wasn't written yet. Didache, first century makes reference to the gopels. Ignatius of Antioch, who had contact with John, trained by John, quoting from John's epistle, which would be quite hard if it hadn't been written yet.

Ah yes your most important teaching is not my most important teaching. That is why you can not see what I see. I prefer the teaching that relate to the following.

Matthew 6:5-8,
[5] "When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on street corners so that others may see them. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward.
[6] But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.
[7] In praying, do not babble like the pagans, who think that they will be heard because of their many words.
[8] Do not be like them. Your Father knows what you need before you ask him.

Matthew 15:1-20
[17] Do you not realize that everything that enters the mouth passes into the stomach and is expelled into the latrine?
[18] But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile.
[19] For from the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, unchastity, theft, false witness, blasphemy.
[20] These are what defile a person, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile."

I did not add 1-16 as it is the lead up to the climax which is 17-20 but those verses are still important.
Philippians 2:5-9
[5]Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,
[6]who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,
[7]but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
[8]Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
[9]For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,

I'll add a couple of verses:,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.


Ok, Jesus is exalted above every other single name. So thus, God is not higher than Him. His own name is not above Jesus'. That is the incarnation, the Word became Flesh and dwelt among us. Every knee shalll Bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord. So is Paul just making this up? I don't think so. He is declaring Jesus to be God.

Isaiah we see the same thing, Isaiah 45:22-23:

22: "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other. 23: By myself I have sworn, from my mouth has gone forth in righteousness a word that shall not return: `To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.'

So when we see that Paul uses language, being a scholar of the Old Testament, when he says no other name is higher than Jesus, and he says every knee shall bow before Jesus, and every tongue confess before Jesus, and we see Isaiah say that God says 'I am God, there is no other.' There is no 'a' god btw. What does that tell us about what Paul means in Philippians 2? That Jesus humbled himself, became flesh, but still is Himself God, and every knee shall bow and confess that Jesus is God Himself. How does Paul not mean that since that is his clear reference?

You could reflect on that as well....who was it that laid the ground work for the trinity in the first place and made it doctrine? Was it the council of Nicaea?

John writes that he was God. Jesus himself said that He was God in John 5, 8, & 10, Paul shows it in this passage of Philippians 2, titus 2:13. Hebrews 1:6, 8.

The early Fathers understood the concept of their being 3 person's but only one being, one essence, as can be noted by Clement's letter to the Corinthians. All the intricate details were not spelled out, but what Nicaea wrote about in detail was not a new concept, but an explication in more detail of what was already believed by not only Scripture, but also the early Fathers.

You truly have a spiritual gift of Teaching Matt. Thank you for this excellent explanation of Trinitarian belief!

[Tucson Jim]

John 5:22-23
22 The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.

Phil. 2:10-11 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Isaiah 45:22-23
[FONT=Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman][FONT=Verdana][COLOR=white]22: "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.
23: By myself I have sworn, from my mouth has gone forth in righteousness a word that shall not return: `To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.'

[FONT=Verdana]These Scriptures seem to disagree with you.


A master of the understatement!

[Tucson Jim]

So those who judge with Jesus are God also?

Don't be silly!

[Tucson Jim]

The mirror itself is not equal to the object it reflects; the mirror itself does not do all that does, and say all that it says. The reflection in the mirror is equal to the object being reflected; the reflection in the mirror does all it does and says all it says. This is because the reflection in the mirror IS the object being reflected.

Hey drmilo, great to see you here! I miss you! :hug:

[drmilo]

Hey drmilo, great to see you here! I miss you! :hug:

Been really busy as of late. So much time so little to do ... strike that, reverse it...

[matt1618]

So those who judge with Jesus are God also?

God is the only one who judges where people go, to heaven, or to hell, to their eternal destiny (or as you don't believe in hell, separation from God). Those passages in the Psalm is talking about ultimate judgment. John 5:21, 'For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will.' All judgment is to the Son. People like you and I don't determine eternal destiny. God does, and that is Jesus.

[matt1618]

Syncretism. :rolleyes:

No kidding, I see the 'Buddishm & Esoteric stuff', at least of what I've read of him, so far I fail to see the Catholic elements. Maybe more like a syncretism 'Buddhism, Estoteric stuff, Jehovah Witness', at least in Christology.

[matt1618]

You truly have a spiritual gift of Teaching Matt. Thank you for this excellent explanation of Trinitarian belief!

Thanks for the complements.

[Angryamerican]

Boy, this is getting exciting for me. Some of us have been looking for some "expert" help. Constantine just joined up with us and now Matt, you are here too. Two of the best "posters" on Hannity!

Now, all of us Trinitarians can finally be on the SAME TEAM for a change! :)

But, please don't let God is My Rock, Warrior4God, or DRS get to you. They can be kinda harsh at times. :redface:


The more the merrier eh ?

And really dj, what is it to worry, if you have God and the truth on your side ?

[Angryamerican]

18 For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.

It seems to me that John is indeed saying that Jesus is/claimed to be equal with God.

Wait ,did Jesus make this claim, when he was just a man ?that God was his father, So you are saying Jesus is contradicting himself , is that really what Jesus was saying he is equal to his father?

If this is not a contradiction, i don't know what is by your reasoning of course.

Joh 5:18 Then, because of this, the Jews sought the more to kill Him, because He not only had broken the sabbath, but also said that God was His father, making Himself equal with God

Joh 14:28 You have heard how I said to you, I go away and I am coming to you again. If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, I go to the Father, for My Father is greater than I.

[Angryamerican]

Lets go with you favorite verse that "proves" the trinity.

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

In the footnotes from the New American Bible.
[1] In the beginning: also the first words of the Old Testament (Genesis 1:1). Was: this verb is used three times with different meanings in this verse: existence, relationship, and predication. The Word (Greek logos): this term combines God's dynamic, creative word (Genesis), personified preexistent Wisdom as the instrument of God's creative activity (Proverbs), and the ultimate intelligibility of reality (Hellenistic philosophy). With God: the Greek preposition here connotes communication with another. Was God: lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification.

They define the Word(Jesus) as the tool of God.
"The Word (Greek logos): this term combines God's dynamic, creative word (Genesis), personified preexistent Wisdom as the instrument of God's creative activity (Proverbs), and the ultimate intelligibility of reality (Hellenistic philosophy). "

In the beginning (when God spoke he created the Word) was the Word. (Now we have two entities.) The Word was with God. (meaning exactly that) And the Word was God (Was God: lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification.)

God is so powerful that his very Word can create the universes. hence John 1:3-14.

Jesus is an instrument of God much like Moses, the prophets, the Holy Spirit, the burning bush, and other items. These instruments rank differently in importance but they still not God. But as Christians we don't worship Moses and the prophets now do we? God used Mary to borne Jesus into this world but we don't worship her. I know you guys are just going to say that I am spinning this but this is how I interpret the scripture and why I don't worship Jesus but only God.

Philippians 2:5-9
[5]Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,
[6]who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,
[7]but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
[8]Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
[9]For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,
Jesus existed in the form of God. Means exactly what it says. God has no “form” but is a Spirit. If you take out “, although He existed in the form of God,” the verse will read “who did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,” which is a lesson that no man can possibly be equal to God in any shape or form and Jesus knew this. Verse 7-8 just states what the gospels do. Then with verse 9 the light really shines on this subject. “ [9]For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,” Now with this very verse God “promoted” Jesus to a status higher than any other being. The question that should be asked is, why would God promote himself if he is already the big guy on the block?

John 10:30
The Father and I are one."

is the statement that got him in trouble with the Pharases. And Jesus follows with John 10:32-38 where he tries to explain that he is one with the Father in thoughts, words, and deeds but he is not God.

John 10:32-36
[32]Jesus answered them, "I have shown you many good works from my Father. For which of these are you trying to stone me?" [33]The Jews answered him, "We are not stoning you for a good work but for blasphemy. You, a man, are making yourself God." [34Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, "You are gods"'? [35]If it calls them gods to whom the word of God came, and scripture cannot be set aside, [36]can you say that the one whom the Father has consecrated and sent into the world blasphemes because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?

Jesus is using scripture to debunk the Pharisees as usual and in verse 36 refers to himself as the Son of God not God. When Jesus sees that this is too much for them he moves onto something a little easier to comprehend.

John 10:37-38
[37]If I do not perform my Father's works, do not believe me; [38]but if I perform them, even if you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may realize (and understand) that the Father is in me and I am in the Father."

As you can see Jesus distinguishes as being a separate entity from God instead of being one distinct entity. Jesus was trying to teach us that we need to be in the Father, become one with the Father, and become like the Father. We all have the Father within us, whether you want to call it conscience or the Holy Spirit, but now it is our turn to be in the Father. That is called unconditional love where 2 beings can "become one" and can never be separated no matter what.

Hi mathius, long time no talk.

To add to this, trinitarians can't see the reason Jesus is called the word in JOHN 1:1.

Jesus delivered the word to man, that is why he is called the word of God. But really God is the actual word not Jesus.

Now Jesus clears this up.

Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.

Why do not trinitarians, trust in the words Jesus says about himself ?

[DRS]

God is the only one who judges where people go, to heaven, or to hell, to their eternal destiny (or as you don't believe in hell, separation from God). Those passages in the Psalm is talking about ultimate judgment. John 5:21, 'For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will.' All judgment is to the Son. People like you and I don't determine eternal destiny. God does, and that is Jesus.

First off God gives the Son the authority to judge

And others share with him in this judgement


4*And I saw thrones, and there were those who sat down on them, and power of judging was given them. Yes, I saw the souls of those executed with the ax for the witness they bore to Jesus and for speaking about God, and those who had worshiped neither the wild beast nor its image and who had not received the mark upon their forehead and upon their hand. And they came to life and ruled as kings with the Christ for a thousand years

6 Does anyone of YOU that has a case against the other dare to go to court before unrighteous men, and not before the holy ones? 2*Or do YOU not know that the holy ones will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by YOU, are YOU unfit to try very trivial matters? 3*Do YOU not know that we shall judge angels? Why, then, not matters of this life

[DRS]

No kidding, I see the 'Buddishm & Esoteric stuff', at least of what I've read of him, so far I fail to see the Catholic elements. Maybe more like a syncretism 'Buddhism, Estoteric stuff, Jehovah Witness', at least in Christology.

I see the influence of buddism and hinduism on the trinity and a lot of Platonic thought on man and God

[DRS]

Something interesting I just noticed in Matthew 4 in the greek when recording the account of the devil coming to tempt Jesus the devil says if you are son of the God

This term son of the God is used in the OT

Genesis 6:1,4

and Job : and 2:1

[Angryamerican]

Trinitarians why can't you see the reason Jesus is called the word in JOHN 1:1.

Jesus delivered the word to man, that is why he is called the word of God. But really God is the actual word not Jesus.

Now Jesus clears this up.

Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.

Act 6:7 And the Word of God was increasing. And the number of the disciples in Jerusalem was multiplying exceedingly; even a great crowd of the priests obeyed the faith.

Act 8:14 And the apostles in Jerusalem hearing that Samaria had received the Word of God, they sent Peter and John to them;


Act 12:24 But the Word of God grew and increased.

Now we know why Jesus was called"the word" he came and preached the words of God to man. But the words Jesus spoke was not his words, but his fathers words.

If Jesus was God ,how come Jesus words were not his ? Because the words Jesus spoke was Gods words.

Once again,lets hear it from Christ.


Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.


Joh 12:48 He who rejects Me and does not receive My Words has one who judges him; the Word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

So now we see that it was God that was saying that he is greater then his son.

It was God that said that he is the only one that knows the day and hour.

Ect Ect.

[DispensationalJim]

Trinitarians why can't you see the reason Jesus is called the word in JOHN 1:1.

Jesus delivered the word to man, that is why he is called the word of God. But really God is the actual word not Jesus.

Now Jesus clears this up.

Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.

Act 6:7 And the Word of God was increasing. And the number of the disciples in Jerusalem was multiplying exceedingly; even a great crowd of the priests obeyed the faith.

Act 8:14 And the apostles in Jerusalem hearing that Samaria had received the Word of God, they sent Peter and John to them;


Act 12:24 But the Word of God grew and increased.

Now we know why Jesus was called"the word" he came and preached the words of God to man. But the words Jesus spoke was not his words, but his fathers words.

If Jesus was God ,how come Jesus words were not his ? Because the words Jesus spoke was Gods words.

Once again,lets hear it from Christ.


Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.


Joh 12:48 He who rejects Me and does not receive My Words has one who judges him; the Word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

So now we see that it was God that was saying that he is greater then his son.

It was God that said that he is the only one that knows the day and hour.

Ect Ect.

AA, I think we ALL know that Jesus IS the Word of God, but we also can see that the Word WAS GOD!!! Did you forget that part, or just ignore it? :)

I like to say that we have the LIVING WORD OF GOD (which would be the Risen Jesus Christ) and the WRITTEN WORD OF GOD (our Bible, which was given to us by Jesus Christ).

• John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

[Angryamerican]

My trinitarian friends, I would really like one of you to explain this to me.

Mat 12:17 so that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaiah the prophet, saying,
Mat 12:18 "Behold My Child whom I have chosen; My Beloved, in whom My soul is well pleased. I will put My Spirit on Him, and He shall declare judgment to the nations.

How was Jesus chosen by God ?

[Angryamerican]

AA, I think we ALL know that Jesus IS the Word of God, but we also can see that the Word WAS GOD!!! Did you forget that part, or just ignore it? :)

I like to say that we have the LIVING WORD OF GOD (which would be the Risen Jesus Christ) and the WRITTEN WORD OF GOD (our Bible, which was given to us by Jesus Christ).

• John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

You still put limits on God why ?

[Angryamerican]

AA, I think we ALL know that Jesus IS the Word of God, but we also can see that the Word WAS GOD!!! Did you forget that part, or just ignore it? :)

I like to say that we have the LIVING WORD OF GOD (which would be the Risen Jesus Christ) and the WRITTEN WORD OF GOD (our Bible, which was given to us by Jesus Christ).

• John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Then you should be able to give a better explanation to this scripture.

Jesus was called the word of God, he was not the word.

Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.

Rev 19:13 And He had been clothed in a garment dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God.

[Ron Jon]

Wait ,did Jesus make this claim, when he was just a man ?that God was his father, So you are saying Jesus is contradicting himself , is that really what Jesus was saying he is equal to his father?

If this is not a contradiction, i don't know what is by your reasoning of course.

Joh 5:18 Then, because of this, the Jews sought the more to kill Him, because He not only had broken the sabbath, but also said that God was His father, making Himself equal with God

Joh 14:28 You have heard how I said to you, I go away and I am coming to you again. If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, I go to the Father, for My Father is greater than I.
What does it mean to be "greater"?

[Ron Jon]

You still put limits on God why?Putting limits on God? You mean like saying God can't be Jesus nor Jesus God?

[Angryamerican]

AA, I think we ALL know that Jesus IS the Word of God, but we also can see that the Word WAS GOD!!! Did you forget that part, or just ignore it? :)

I like to say that we have the LIVING WORD OF GOD (which would be the Risen Jesus Christ) and the WRITTEN WORD OF GOD (our Bible, which was given to us by Jesus Christ).

• John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Is this Jesus ?

1Sa 9:27 They were going down to the end of the city, and Samuel said to Saul, Tell the servant to pass on before us and pass on. And you stand still awhile, so that I may cause you to hear the Word of God.

Is this Jesus ?

1Ki 12:22 But the Word of God came to Shemaiah the man of God, saying,

Is this Jesus ?

1Ch 17:3 And it happened the same night the Word of God came to Nathan, saying,


What is the word of God ?

Luk 5:1 And it happened that the crowd pressed on Him to hear the Word of God, He stood by the lake of Gennesaret.

Luk 8:11 And the parable is this: The seed is the Word of God.
Luk 8:12 Those by the roadside are the ones who hear; then the Devil comes and takes the Word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.
Luk 8:13 Those on the rock are the ones who, when they hear, receive the Word with joy. And these have no root, who for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away.
Luk 8:14 And those which fell among thorns are the ones who, when they have heard, go forth and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of life, and do not bear to maturity.
Luk 8:15 But those on the good ground are the ones who, in an honest and good heart, having heard the Word, keep it and bring forth fruit with patience.


Very interesting.

Luk 8:21 And He answered and said to them, My mother and My brothers are those who hear the Word of God and do it.


Luk 11:28 But He said, No; rather, blessed are they who hear the Word of God and keep it.

Act 4:31 And when they had prayed, the place where they were assembled was shaken. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and they spoke the Word of God with boldness.

Act 13:5 And when they were at Salamis, they announced the Word of God in the synagogues of the Jews. And they also had John as an assistant.

Act 13:7 who was with the proconsul of the country, Sergius Paulus, a prudent man. He called for Barnabas and Saul and asked to hear the Word of God.

The word is a name given to him, because he was the one chosen to deliver Gods word to man.

The word of God is just that ,the word of God. Who did the words of God originate with Jesus or God ?

[Angryamerican]

What does it mean to be "greater"?

Not equal with, in any manner.

[Angryamerican]

Putting limits on God? You mean like saying God can't be Jesus nor Jesus God?

I never said God couldn't do it,i say he didn't do it, according to his word.

[Tucson Jim]

Not equal with, in any manner.

Absolutely untrue! And tailored to fit your point exactly - how convenient!

If we say one man is "greater" than another we cannot POSSIBLY mean "in any manner" as you stated for there are literally millions of aspects of men that we may compare - their physical size, income, achievements in life, number of children, longevity, morality, fame, and on and on and on. When we say one man is greater than another, we are typically alluding to a specific dimension of interest, such as career achievements, NOT to every conceivable aspect of a man, as your self-serving definition implies.

Germane to the present discussion, however, and a point routinely ignored by those on your side of the fence, is that we would never argue that one man was more of a "human" than another. We are all equally "of the human race".

The Father was greater in position than Christ, who was humbled as a man at the time he uttered those words.

The Father may be considered greater in "function" than the Son, since he never became a human like the Son did, since He is the "Father", a position connoting authority over a "Son".

But the Father is not greater in "Being" than the Son - both share the nature of Deity- any more than one man is greater in "Being" than another - both share the nature of Man.

[Angryamerican]

Absolutely untrue! And tailored to fit your point exactly - how convenient!

If we say one man is "greater" than another we cannot POSSIBLY mean "in any manner" as you stated for there are literally millions of aspects of men that we may compare - their physical size, income, achievements in life, number of children, longevity, morality, fame, and on and on and on. When we say one man is greater than another, we are typically alluding to a specific dimension of interest, such as career achievements, NOT to every conceivable aspect of a man, as your self-serving definition implies.

Germane to the present discussion, however, and a point routinely ignored by those on your side of the fence, is that we would never argue that one man was more of a "human" than another. We are all equally "of the human race".

The Father was greater in position than Christ, who was humbled as a man at the time he uttered those words.

The Father may be considered greater in "function" than the Son, since he never became a human like the Son did, since He is the "Father", a position connoting authority over a "Son".

But the Father is not greater in "Being" than the Son - both share the nature of Deity- any more than one man is greater in "Being" than another - both share the nature of Man.

All you gave was an opinion,if you believe that then fine ,but to say Jesus is equal to God, i am still waiting for that scripture.

And i ask you, can one part of God be greater then the other ?

Those are Gods words saying he is greater,not mine.

So i ask you to ,why would it matter that he uttered those words when he was a man, they were not his words to begin with.

Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.

[Angryamerican]

Absolutely untrue! And tailored to fit your point exactly - how convenient!

If we say one man is "greater" than another we cannot POSSIBLY mean "in any manner" as you stated for there are literally millions of aspects of men that we may compare - their physical size, income, achievements in life, number of children, longevity, morality, fame, and on and on and on. When we say one man is greater than another, we are typically alluding to a specific dimension of interest, such as career achievements, NOT to every conceivable aspect of a man, as your self-serving definition implies.

Germane to the present discussion, however, and a point routinely ignored by those on your side of the fence, is that we would never argue that one man was more of a "human" than another. We are all equally "of the human race".

The Father was greater in position than Christ, who was humbled as a man at the time he uttered those words.

The Father may be considered greater in "function" than the Son, since he never became a human like the Son did, since He is the "Father", a position connoting authority over a "Son".

But the Father is not greater in "Being" than the Son - both share the nature of Deity- any more than one man is greater in "Being" than another - both share the nature of Man.

Greater does it mean they are equal ?

Gen 1:16 And God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day and the smaller light to rule the night, and the stars also.


Exo 18:11 Now I know that Jehovah is greater than all gods; for in the thing in which they were proved against them.


Num 14:12 I will strike them with the pestilence and will disinherit them, and will make of you a greater nation and mightier than they.


Are you getting the picture yet?

1Ki 4:30 And Solomon's wisdom was greater than the wisdom of all the sons of the east, and all the wisdom of Egypt.

1Ki 10:23 And King Solomon was greater than all the kings of the earth in riches and in wisdom.

1Ch 11:9 And David became greater and greater, for Jehovah of Hosts was with him.


Mat 11:11 Truly I say to you, Among those who have been born of women there has not risen a greater one than John the Baptist. But the least in the kingdom of Heaven is greater than he.


Joh 10:29 My Father who gave them to me is greater than all, and no one is able to pluck them out of My Father's hand.

Joh 13:16 Truly, truly, I say to you, A servant is not greater than his master, neither is he who is sent greater than he who sent him.

Joh 14:28 You have heard how I said to you, I go away and I am coming to you again. If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, I go to the Father, for My Father is greater than I.

You were saying ?

2Pe 2:11 Where angels, who are greater in power and might, do not bring a reproaching accusation against them before the Lord

1Jn 5:9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater. For this is the witness of God which He has testified about His Son.

[ralittlefield]

I am interested in what you have to say, because it seems to me, that the Word of John 1 is clearly Jesus.


John 1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning.
3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.
6 There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John. 7 He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. 8 He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. 9 The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world.
10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12 Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.
14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
15 John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’” 16 From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another. 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.

If the Word is not a person, why is he referred to with the personal pronoun he in verse 2, 3, & 4?

Verse 7 says that John (the Baptist) came to testify about “that light”. That light is the light referred to in the previous verses. In other words this passage tells us that John the Baptist came to testify about “The Word”. It is well known that it was Jesus that John The Baptist came to testify about.

Verse 11 tells us that He came to His own, but was rejected. This is also a clear picture of Jesus who was rejected by the Jews.

Verse 12 tells us that He give the right to become children of God to those that believe in Him. Eph 1:5 tells us that this happens through Jesus.

Verse 14 says that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Another clear picture of Jesus.

Bump for angry.

Would you please address these points?

[ralittlefield]

Been really busy as of late. So much time so little to do ... strike that, reverse it...

Well, I for one hope that you are able to find time to visit. I very much appreciate your input here.

[ralittlefield]

Trinitarians why can't you see the reason Jesus is called the word in JOHN 1:1.

Jesus delivered the word to man, that is why he is called the word of God. But really God is the actual word not Jesus.

Now Jesus clears this up.

Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.

Act 6:7 And the Word of God was increasing. And the number of the disciples in Jerusalem was multiplying exceedingly; even a great crowd of the priests obeyed the faith.

Act 8:14 And the apostles in Jerusalem hearing that Samaria had received the Word of God, they sent Peter and John to them;


Act 12:24 But the Word of God grew and increased.

Now we know why Jesus was called"the word" he came and preached the words of God to man. But the words Jesus spoke was not his words, but his fathers words.

If Jesus was God ,how come Jesus words were not his ? Because the words Jesus spoke was Gods words.

Once again,lets hear it from Christ.


Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.


Joh 12:48 He who rejects Me and does not receive My Words has one who judges him; the Word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

So now we see that it was God that was saying that he is greater then his son.

It was God that said that he is the only one that knows the day and hour.

Ect Ect.

Are you now saying that the word in John 1:1 IS Jesus?


It seems to me that earlier you were saying that the word is NOT Jesus:

Ok the main support of the trinity in the nt is John 1:1, It has to be, because whenever trinitarians are confronted with something that contradicts what they believe or something they don't understand, They quote that scripture.

What if i tell you trinitarians, the word is not Jesus, and can show it with scripture ?

Then will you finally face the fact, that you could be wrong ?

Well i am telling you guys,the word is not Jesus.

[Angryamerican]

Bump for angry.

Would you please address these points?

Jesus is called the word, And the word became flesh, Jesus preached the word of God to man.

The word is a name for Jesus, But the word of God is what Jesus preached.

But the word originated from God.

Joh 14:23 Jesus answered and said to him, If a man loves Me, he will keep My Word. And My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him.
Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.
Joh 14:25 I have spoken these things to you, being present with you.

[Angryamerican]

Are you now saying that the word in John 1:1 IS Jesus?


It seems to me that earlier you were saying that the word is NOT Jesus:

Both Jesus and God are the word.

God is the word because it originated with him.

Jesus is the word because he preached it to man.

Not what i meant.

But who would you say the true word is by this scripture ?

Joh 14:23 Jesus answered and said to him, If a man loves Me, he will keep My Word. And My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him.
Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.
Joh 14:25 I have spoken these things to you, being present with you.

[ralittlefield]

Jesus is called the word, And the word became flesh, Jesus preached the word of God to man.

The word is a name for Jesus, But the word of God is what Jesus preached.

But the word originated from God.

Joh 14:23 Jesus answered and said to him, If a man loves Me, he will keep My Word. And My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him.
Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.
Joh 14:25 I have spoken these things to you, being present with you.

Do you believe that John 1:3 is talking about Jesus?

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

[Angryamerican]

Do you believe that John 1:3 is talking about Jesus?

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


That is how the word became flesh is through Jesus.

I believe all things excluding himself, he had something to do with.but i still believe he was created by God then he created all other things.

[ralittlefield]

That is how the word became flesh is through Jesus.

I believe all things excluding himself, he had something to do with.but i still believe he was created by God then he created all other things.

How do you exclude Him?

The verse says "without him nothing was made that has been made."

The NWT puts it this way: "All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence."

[Angryamerican]

How do you exclude Him?

The verse says "without him nothing was made that has been made."

The NWT puts it this way: "All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence."

It's pretty easy, knowing that he did not create himself. All things some times is not all things.

But how many times does Jesus have to give an example that he is not equal to his Father before it is accepted?


Joh 13:16 Truly, truly, I say to you, A servant is not greater than his master, neither is he who is sent greater than he who sent him.

Was Jesus excluding himself here ?
Joh 10:29 My Father who gave them to me is greater than all, and no one is able to pluck them out of My Father's hand


Joh 14:28 You have heard how I said to you, I go away and I am coming to you again. If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, I go to the Father, for My Father is greater than I.

[ralittlefield]

It's pretty easy, knowing that he did not create himself. All things some times is not all things.

But how many times does Jesus have to give an example that he is not equal to his Father before it is accepted?


Joh 13:16 Truly, truly, I say to you, A servant is not greater than his master, neither is he who is sent greater than he who sent him.

Joh 10:29 My Father who gave them to me is greater than all, and no one is able to pluck them out of My Father's hand


Joh 14:28 You have heard how I said to you, I go away and I am coming to you again. If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, I go to the Father, for My Father is greater than I.

Whether or not He is equal is a different question. We have discussed it many times. Phil 2 says that He willingly humbled himself and took the role of a servant.

What I am trying to point out is that John 1:3 says that He created EVERYTHING that was created. Without exception. It defines what all means by saying that He created everything that was created.

[terri910]

All things some times is not all things...
:confused:

[Angryamerican]

Whether or not He is equal is a different question. We have discussed it many times. Phil 2 says that He willingly humbled himself and took the role of a servant.

What I am trying to point out is that John 1:3 says that He created EVERYTHING that was created. Without exception. It defines what all means by saying that He created everything that was created.

Was Jesus repeating what his Father said or not ?

Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.

Eph 3:9 and to bring to light what is the fellowship of the mystery which from eternity has been hidden in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ;


Col 1:16 For all things were created in Him, the things in the heavens, and the things on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers, all things were created through Him and for Him.

[Angryamerican]

Whether or not He is equal is a different question. We have discussed it many times. Phil 2 says that He willingly humbled himself and took the role of a servant.

What I am trying to point out is that John 1:3 says that He created EVERYTHING that was created. Without exception. It defines what all means by saying that He created everything that was created.

That may be a different question, but if Jesus is not equal to God he can't be God can he ?

[Ron Jon]

Not equal with, in any manner.So, by that same reasoning, you must also believe that Jesus was not equal with, in any manner with the angels either?

[Ron Jon]

That may be a different question, but if Jesus is not equal to God he can't be God can he ?
Do you believe Jesus was equal to the angels? Or was do you believe He was above or below them rather than equal to them?

[Tucson Jim]

All you gave was an opinion,if you believe that then fine ,but to say Jesus is equal to God, i am still waiting for that scripture.

Mere deflection . . . I gave you the FACT that your "definition" of "greater" was grossly inaccurate and created to fit your point of view about the Trinity.!

I see no rebuttal of the points I made, but instead, a rapid change of topic!

And i ask you, can one part of God be greater then the other ?

Jesus isn't one "part" of the Trinity - God is One! I guess you have missed us saying that 1,000+ times in the past 10,000 posts . . .

This again serves to illustrate a point I have made repeatedly - Those who criticize the Trinity the most harshly and consistently are typically those who do not even comprehend the doctrine!

You illustrate this point perfectly . . . there are no "parts" to the Trinity.

God is one.

Those are Gods words saying he is greater,not mine.

Freudian slip, AA? You are exactly correct - Jesus, Who spoke those words, is God! Hence, as you said, "God's words".

So i ask you to ,why would it matter that he uttered those words when he was a man, they were not his words to begin with.

Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.

"But refuse foolish and ignorant speculations, knowing that they produce quarrels." 2 Tim 2:23

[Tucson Jim]

Greater does it mean they are equal ?

No, the fact that the Father and Son both share the nature of God means they are equal in nature, equal as God.

As we have told you repeatedly, but you will not listen.

Gen 1:16 And God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day and the smaller light to rule the night, and the stars also.


Exo 18:11 Now I know that Jehovah is greater than all gods; for in the thing in which they were proved against them.


Num 14:12 I will strike them with the pestilence and will disinherit them, and will make of you a greater nation and mightier than they.


Are you getting the picture yet?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I am getting a strong picture - a picture that you don't appear to have any idea WHAT you're talking about!! :))

And also that you have hastily retreated from your sweeping statement of only a few posts ago that "greater" means "Not equal with, in any manner".

None of your comparisons above support your definition of "greater"!

Not one.

Please, do continue . . .

1Ki 4:30 And Solomon's wisdom was greater than the wisdom of all the sons of the east, and all the wisdom of Egypt.

1Ki 10:23 And King Solomon was greater than all the kings of the earth in riches and in wisdom.

1Ch 11:9 And David became greater and greater, for Jehovah of Hosts was with him.


Mat 11:11 Truly I say to you, Among those who have been born of women there has not risen a greater one than John the Baptist. But the least in the kingdom of Heaven is greater than he.


Joh 10:29 My Father who gave them to me is greater than all, and no one is able to pluck them out of My Father's hand.

Joh 13:16 Truly, truly, I say to you, A servant is not greater than his master, neither is he who is sent greater than he who sent him.

Joh 14:28 You have heard how I said to you, I go away and I am coming to you again. If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, I go to the Father, for My Father is greater than I.

You were saying ?

:))

Sorry . . Ahem . . . I was saying you don't seem to know what you're talking about and that none of your examples support your definition of "greater".

It would seem nothing has changed . . .

2Pe 2:11 Where angels, who are greater in power and might, do not bring a reproaching accusation against them before the Lord

1Jn 5:9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater. For this is the witness of God which He has testified about His Son.


So, let's summarize.

Your definition of "greater" was tailored to suit your preconceived notion of the relationship between the Father and Son and was shown to be absolutely inaccurate.

You could not defend your definition, so you then proceeded to change the topic, to no avail.

Now, you did a word search on "greater" and have succeeded in posting numerous examples of the word "greater" in scripture, NONE of which illustrate your point even remotely.

It's been a bad day in the world of Trinity-criticizing AA.

I think you should call it a day!

[Tucson Jim]

:confused:

:)) You're not alone Terri!

I think I'm getting a headache!

[Tucson Jim]

That may be a different question, but if Jesus is not equal to God he can't be God can he ?

Oh, but he IS equal to God in Nature . . .

[Tucson Jim]

Was Jesus repeating what his Father said or not ?

Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.

Eph 3:9 and to bring to light what is the fellowship of the mystery which from eternity has been hidden in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ;


Col 1:16 For all things were created in Him, the things in the heavens, and the things on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers, all things were created through Him and for Him.

Funny . . . my Bible says all things were created BY Jesus and FOR Jesus . . .

[Tucson Jim]

But notice it his own judgment that he renders on all, and only God can do judgment on people. He does not do things on his own. Of course, He is in perfect harmony with His Father. The trinity, the essence is of one of perfect harmonay. There are different functions, now just a few verses earier:

5:18-23 18 This was why the Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God. 19 Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing; for whatever he does, that the Son does likewise. 20 For the Father loves the Son, and shows him all that he himself is doing; and greater works than these will he show him, that you may marvel. 21 For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will. 22 The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father.

Jesus also says he made himself equal to the Father. He does what the Father does. What the Father does, he does likewise. The Father raises the dead and gives life, something that only God does, so does Jesus vv. 18-20. Jesus does the same thing, only what God himself can do. The Father judges no one but all judgment is given to the Son. As has been reiterated time and time again by me,, who has the capacity to render judgment??

Psalm 9:7-8
7: But the LORD sits enthroned for ever, he has established his throne for judgment; 8: and he judges the world with righteousness, he judges the peoples with equity.

Romans 14:10 Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God;

Psalm 94: 1: O LORD, thou God of vengeance, thou God of vengeance, shine forth! 2: Rise up, O judge of the earth; render to the proud their deserts!

Psalm 75:2 At the set time which I appoint I will judge with equity.
Psalm 7:8: The LORD judges the peoples; judge me, O LORD, according to my righteousness and according to the integrity that is in me.

Only God can give judgement, according to Scripture. And Jesus himself makes the point that you JW's Buddhists, or whatever, don't seem to get. 22 The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. The Father gives him judgment so that all may honor the Son in the same way he honors the Father. If he is honored in the same way, He is thus, not less than God the Father in any way, shape or form. It seems like Jesus is making the point that you JW's Buddhists, whatever are not getting. Jesus is not a god, making God a polytheist, but He is God Himself. Only God can make judgment, and Jesus makes judgment on all, and thus Jesus is God Himself. It seems fairly clear to me.


This post reminded me of some of the scriptures talking about God and Jesus that I posted before.

Once more, for your reading pleasure:

God: From everlasting to everlasting thou art God – Ps. 90:2
Jesus: Whose goings forth have been from old, from everlasting – Micah 5:2

God: Thy throne is established of old: thou art from everlasting – Ps 93:2
Jesus: Unto the Son He saith, Thy throne O God, is for ever and ever – Heb 1:8

God: I am the first, and I am the last and besides me there is no God – Isa 44:6
Jesus: I am the first and the last : I am he that liveth and was dead – Rev 1:17-18

God: Do I not fill heaven and earth? Saith the Lord - Jer 23:24
Jesus: He that descended is the same also that ascended up, far above all heavens, that he might fill all things. - Eph 4:10

God: I am Jehovah, I change not. - Malachi 3:6
Jesus: Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today and forever. - Heb 13:8

God: Canst thou by searching find out God? - Job 11:7
Jesus: No man knoweth the Son but the Father. Matt. 11:27

God: O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God, his ways past finding out. - Rom 11:33
Jesus: The unsearchable riches of Christ. - Eph 3:8

God: Thy footsteps are not known - Ps 77:19
Jesus: The love of Christ which passeth knowledge - Eph 3:19

God: I am Jehovah thy God, the Holy One of Israel - Isa 43:3
Jesus: Ye denied the Holy One and the Just - Acts 3:14

God: A God of truth and without iniquity - Deut 32:4
Jesus: I am the truth - John 14:6 Without sin - Heb 4:15

God: In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth - Gen 1:1
Jesus: In the beginning was the Word. All things were made by Him. - John 1:1, 3

God: I am Jehovah, that maketh all things; that stretched forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself - Isa 44:24.
Jesus: By him were all things created, that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities or powers - Col. 1:16

God: The Lord hath made all things for himself - Prov. 16:4
Jesus: All things were created by him and for him - Col 1:16

God: Thou preservest them all - Neh 9:6
Jesus: By him all things consist - Col 1:17

God: The King of Kings and Lord of lords - 1 Tim 6:15
Jesus: King of Kings and Lord of Lords.- Rev 19:16.

God: Thy Kingdom is an everlasting Kingdom, and thy dominion endureth thoughout all generations - Psalm 145:13
Jesus: His dominion is an everlasting dominion . . . And His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed - Dan. 7:14

God: Thou, even thou only, knowest the hearts of all the children of men - 1 Kings 8:39.
Jesus: All the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts. Rev 2:23

God: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? - Gen 18:25
Jesus: We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ. - 2 Cor 5:10

God: His Kingdom ruleth over all. - Psalm 103:19
Jesus: He is Lord of all. - Acts 10:36

God: Vengeance is Mine; I will repay, saith the Lord - Rom. 12:19
Jesus: Taking vengeance on them that know not God. - 2 Thess 1:7-8

God: To whom then will ye liken God? - Isaiah 40:18
Jesus: . . . . The image of the invisible God. - Col 1:15;
He who has seen Me has seen the Father . . . John 14:9

God: "This is what the LORD says— your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself,” – Isa 44:24
Jesus: For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 1 - Col 1:16

God: I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. - Isa 43:11
Jesus: And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. - Matt 1:21

God: I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. - Isa 43:11
Jesus: But we believe that through the grace of the LORD Jesus Christ we shall be saved, - Acts 15:11[/QUOTE]

[Angryamerican]

Mere deflection . . . I gave you the FACT that your "definition" of "greater" was grossly inaccurate and created to fit your point of view about the Trinity.!

I see no rebuttal of the points I made, but instead, a rapid change of topic!



Jesus isn't one "part" of the Trinity - God is One! I guess you have missed us saying that 1,000+ times in the past 10,000 posts . . .

This again serves to illustrate a point I have made repeatedly - Those who criticize the Trinity the most harshly and consistently are typically those who do not even comprehend the doctrine!

You illustrate this point perfectly . . . there are no "parts" to the Trinity.

God is one.



Freudian slip, AA? You are exactly correct - Jesus, Who spoke those words, is God! Hence, as you said, "God's words".



"But refuse foolish and ignorant speculations, knowing that they produce quarrels." 2 Tim 2:23

If as you say God is one,which i agree with,then why would God be greater then Jesus ? Why would God know things that Jesus don't know ?

Jesus was the one that said his Father is greater, Jesus is the one that said only His Father knows the day and the hour of the second coming.

How is what i brought up to you ignorant ? Does not the scriptures, say what i said ?

The rebuttal on greater was posted. So by your reasoning we were created in the image and likeness to God correct ?are we equal to God ?

Angels were created in the image of God, And they to, are called sons of God . So are they equal to God ?

No one is equal to God,but yet with Christ saying he was not equal to God .why do you believe Jesus is equal to God?

I am not starting arguments with you guys, i simply do not understand why trinitarians believe as they do concerning God.

[Angryamerican]

Funny . . . my Bible says all things were created BY Jesus and FOR Jesus . . .

Col 1:16

(ASV) for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;


(KJV+) ForG3754 byG1722 himG846 were all thingsG3956 created,G2936 thatG3588 are inG1722 heaven,G3772 andG2532 thatG3588 are inG1909 earth,G1093 visibleG3707 andG2532 invisible,G517 whetherG1535 they be thrones,G2362 orG1535 dominions,G2963 orG1535 principalities,G746 orG1535 powers:G1849 all thingsG3956 were createdG2936 byG1223 him,G846 andG2532 forG1519 him:G846

(MKJV) For all things were created in Him, the things in the heavens, and the things on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers, all things were created through Him and for Him.

(RV) for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;

[Angryamerican]

Oh, but he IS equal to God in Nature . . .

Was he an angel before ?


For no one is like God in comparison. But we are like God,but not equal to God.

Heb 2:16 For truly He did not take the nature of angels, but He took hold of the seed of Abraham.
Heb 2:17 Therefore in all things it behoved him to be made like His brothers, that He might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of His people.
Heb 2:18 For in that He Himself has suffered, having been tempted, He is able to rescue those who are being tempted.

Notice it behoved Jesus to be made like his brothers.

Zec 12:8 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.

[Ron Jon]

That may be a different question, but if Jesus is not equal to God he can't be God can he ?
Do you believe Jesus was equal to the angels? Or do you believe He was above or below them rather than equal to them?

[God is My Rock]

We (including DRS) would do well to leave the Greek to those that are qualified to talk about it. My point is that verses 6, 12, 13, and 18 seem to be written the same as the second instance of theos in verse 1. Why would they not be translated "a god"?

Because of the context of the entire book of Matthew. Because of the context of the entire rest of the book of John. Because of the context in which the phrase is included which says that the word was WITH GOD.

[God is My Rock]

Okay, you are ignoring the fact that only Jehova is judge of the whole world, he judges with equity. He is God himself. Jesus is judge of the world. Even if it is delegated to Jesus, Scripture attests that only God can give that judgment. John relates that he makes himself equal with God, because he is, in John 5:18, as shown in John 5:23, when he says one must honor the Son in the same way as He honors the Father.

Now, in reference to life, and Jesus we can see John 5:26 saying about the Son having life in Himself granted by the Father. Sure, but that can't be seen in isolation of what scripture attests to Jesus in the beginning of John's gospel.

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God; 3 all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. 4 In him was life, and the life was the light of men.

Okay, I did it in orange, you said you needed something visible, white wasn't good enough. He was in the beginning, created alll things, not going into debate about God, a god, etc, but the fact that in Himself was life. In him, in and of itself, He was life. He created all things, and He is the source of life.

Now, on to John 5:26:

For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself,

You can not read John 5:26 in opposition to Jesus being called the source of all things, and He is the life.


Now, it says that as the Father has life in Himself, in the same way, the Son has life in Himself. Ok, so no difference, whether it was granted or not. It does not say that He gave him life, it says the Son Has life Himself in the same way as the Father. So if 'as the Father, 'as the Son'.

It is not that he was given life. It isn 't noted as though He was without life, and then he received life. For if He received life, He would not have it in Himself. For indeed, what is in Himself? That He should Himself be the very life.


Now what has happened is though He's shared life with His Father from all eternity, He brings this life into the World into the world as the gift of the Father who He reveals to men (Jn 1:4).


Again, I continue to stress this is in the midst of Jesus proclaiming that He is executing judgment, which only God Himself can do.

:hand:

But that is most certainly what John 5:26 says!!!!

You just completely ignored the Greek word didomi

Definition :

1) to give

2) to give something to someone

a) of one's own accord to give one something, to his advantage

1) to bestow a gift

b) to grant, give to one asking, let have

c) to supply, furnish, necessary things

d) to give over, deliver

1) to reach out, extend, present

2) of a writing

3) to give over to one's care, intrust, commit

a) something to be administered

b) to give or commit to some one something to be religiously observed

e) to give what is due or obligatory, to pay: wages or reward

f) to furnish, endue

3) to give

a) to cause, profuse, give forth from one's self

1) to give, hand out lots

b) to appoint to an office

c) to cause to come forth, i.e. as the sea, death and Hell are said to give up the dead who have been engulfed or received by them

c) to give one to someone as his own

1) as an object of his saving care

2) to give one to someone, to follow him as a leader and master

3) to give one to someone to care for his interests

4) to give one to someone to whom he already belonged, to return

4) to grant or permit one

a) to commission



If you overlook or ignore this word, then perhaps I can see your point.

Response?

[God is My Rock]

For DRS, and God is my rock. I think that you and I, would agree that we do not, have the same meaning when we use the same term, "Son of God" I believe that Jesus is equal to "Almighty God" in every way. You do not. Now, and I really am not, trying to be disrespectful, or antagonistic in any way, but, I would ask you to give me your reasoning of , John 3:18, John3:36, 2 John: 7, and 1 John 2: 22 & 23. If I were to follow your theology I think reading those verses would jump out as red flags to me and cause me to rethink my position, but they don't seem to bother you, and I am curious why not.
:flag:

I have absolutely no problem with any of those verses. As a a matter of fact Warrior, AA, myself and others would say that IT IS Jesus that we are trusting, and trusting him more than the early fathers who did not know him physically, more than the later translators, more than scholars, more than tradition, more than the modern "church", etc...

[Angryamerican]

No, the fact that the Father and Son both share the nature of God means they are equal in nature, equal as God.

As we have told you repeatedly, but you will not listen.



Yes, as a matter of fact, I am getting a strong picture - a picture that you don't appear to have any idea WHAT you're talking about!! :))

And also that you have hastily retreated from your sweeping statement of only a few posts ago that "greater" means "Not equal with, in any manner".

None of your comparisons above support your definition of "greater"!

Not one.

Please, do continue . . .



:))

Sorry . . Ahem . . . I was saying you don't seem to know what you're talking about and that none of your examples support your definition of "greater".

It would seem nothing has changed . . .




So, let's summarize.

Your definition of "greater" was tailored to suit your preconceived notion of the relationship between the Father and Son and was shown to be absolutely inaccurate.

You could not defend your definition, so you then proceeded to change the topic, to no avail.

Now, you did a word search on "greater" and have succeeded in posting numerous examples of the word "greater" in scripture, NONE of which illustrate your point even remotely.

It's been a bad day in the world of Trinity-criticizing AA.

I think you should call it a day!

I gave you plenty of scripture to support what Greater means ,might, power, reasoning,knowing things Jesus don't know,I would say that means greater. Because you see similarities Between Jesus and God and read a few scriptures that you turn and twist to make them fit to your view of God,you then draw the conculsion Well Jesus must be God.

I have asked you to show me where Jesus said he is God,or that he is equal to God. You have been shown scripture stating what i believe. It don't take a genius to understand what Jesus says about himself, but yet you spin what Jesus says to hold on to your view.

Lets go through it again.

Jesus said.

Joh 5:36 But I have greater witness than that of John, for the works which the Father has given Me that I should finish them, the works which I do themselves witness of Me, that the Father has sent Me

Joh 10:29 My Father who gave them to me is greater than all, and no one is able to pluck them out of My Father's hand.

Joh 13:16 Truly, truly, I say to you, A servant is not greater than his master, neither is he who is sent greater than he who sent him.


Joh 14:28 You have heard how I said to you, I go away and I am coming to you again. If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, I go to the Father, for My Father is greater than I.


Joh 15:20 Remember the word that I said to you, The servant is not greater than his master. If they have persecuted Me, they will also persecute you. If they have kept My saying, they will also keep yours.

Mat 24:36 But of that day and hour no one knows, no, not the angels of Heaven, but only My Father.

Mar 13:32 But of that day and hour no one knows, no, not the angels in Heaven, nor the Son, but the Father.

Notice what kind of respect cornelius showed for an angel of God, He called him lord. truly he has more respect for angels then people on your side show them.

Act 10:3 About the ninth hour of the day he saw plainly in a vision an angel of God coming to him and saying to him, Cornelius!
Act 10:4 And he was gazing at him, and becoming terrified, he said, What is it, lord? And he said to him, Your prayers and your merciful deeds have come up for a memorial before God.


Now things his followers said about Jesus.

1Co 15:28 But when all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subject to Him who has subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all things in all.

Heb 2:8 You subjected all things under his feet." For in subjecting all things to Him, He did not leave anything not subjected to Him. But now we do not see all things having been subjected to him.

Mat 7:21 Not everyone who says to Me, Lord! Lord! shall enter the kingdom of Heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in Heaven.

Mat 10:32 Then everyone who shall confess Me before men, I will confess him before My Father who is in Heaven.

Mat 10:33 But whoever shall deny Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father in Heaven.

Mat 11:27 All things are delivered to Me by My Father. And no one knows the Son except the Father. Nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and the one to whom the Son will reveal Him

Hmm this is very interesting.

Mat 12:18 "Behold My Child whom I have chosen; My Beloved, in whom My soul is well pleased. I will put My Spirit on Him, and He shall declare judgment to the nations.

Hmm God claiming man to be his brother?
Mat 12:50 For whoever shall do the will of My Father in Heaven, the same is My brother and sister and mother.

My Fathers kingdom eh.

Mat 26:29 But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on, until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom.

He prays to himself ?

Mat 26:39 And He went a little further and fell on His face, and prayed, saying, O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me. Yet not as I will, but as You will.

Wow you mean these things were not in subjection to Jesus before he came to the earth ?

1Pe 3:22 who is at the right hand of God, having gone into Heaven, where the angels and authorities and powers are being subjected to Him.

Clearly Jesus is Not God. :whistle:

[Angryamerican]

Do you believe Jesus was equal to the angels? Or do you believe He was above or below them rather than equal to them?

I believe Jesus was greater then angels, but not sure to what extent.

He who creates is greater then the thing created.

[Reeder]

Col 1:16

(ASV) for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;


(KJV+) ForG3754 byG1722 himG846 were all thingsG3956 created,G2936 thatG3588 are inG1722 heaven,G3772 andG2532 thatG3588 are inG1909 earth,G1093 visibleG3707 andG2532 invisible,G517 whetherG1535 they be thrones,G2362 orG1535 dominions,G2963 orG1535 principalities,G746 orG1535 powers:G1849 all thingsG3956 were createdG2936 byG1223 him,G846 andG2532 forG1519 him:G846

(MKJV) For all things were created in Him, the things in the heavens, and the things on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers, all things were created through Him and for Him.

(RV) for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;

The G3754, G1519 coding cleared it all up for me.

[God is My Rock]

[QUOTE=Constantine the Great;47955331then riseth again, “That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father.” Seest thou how He varieth the discourse, weaving it both of high and low words and expressions, in order that it might be acceptable to the men of that time, and that those who should come after might receive no injury, gaining from the higher part a right opinion of the rest? For if this be not the case, if these sayings were not uttered through condescension, wherefore were the high expressions added? Because one who is entitled to utter great words concerning himself, hath, when he saith anything mean and low, this reasonable excuse, that he doth it for some prudential purpose; but if one who ought to speak meanly of himself saith anything great, on what account doth he utter words which surpass his nature? This is not for any purpose at all, but an act of extreme impiety. We are therefore able to assign a reason for the lowly expressions, a reason sufficient, and becoming to God, namely, His condescension, His teaching us to be moderate, and the salvation which is thus wrought for us. To declare which He said Himself in another place, “These things I say that ye might be saved.” For when He left His own witness, and betook Himself to that of John, (a thing unworthy of His greatness,) He putteth the reason of such lowliness of language, and saith, “These things I say that ye might be saved.” And ye who assert that He hath not the same authority and power with Him who begat Him, what can ye say when ye hear Him utter words by which He declareth His Authority and Power and Glory equal in respect of the Father? Wherefore, if He be as ye assert very inferior, doth He claim the same honor? Nor doth He stop even here, but goeth on to say,
“He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father which hath sent Him.” Seest thou how the honor of the Son is connected with that of the Father? “What of that?” saith one. “We see the same in the case of the Apostles; ‘He,’ saith Christ, ‘who receiveth you receiveth Me.’” ( Matt. x. 40 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.Matt.10.html#Matt.10.40).) But in that place He speaketh so, because He maketh the concerns of His servants His own; here, because the Essence and the Glory is One (with that of the Father). Therefore it is not said of the Apostles “that they may honor,” but rightly He saith, “He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father.” For where there are two kings, if one is insulted the other is insulted also, and especially when he that is insulted is a son. He is insulted even when one of his soldiers is maltreated; not in the same way as in this case, but as it were in the person of another while here it is as it were in his own. Wherefore He beforehand said, “That they should honor the Son even as they honor the Father,” in order that when He should say, “He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father,” thou mightest understand that the honor is the same. For He saith not merely, “he that honoreth not the Son,” but “he that honoreth Him not so as I have said” “honoreth not the Father.”
“And how,” saith one, “can he that sendeth and he that is sent be of the same essence?” Again, thou bringest down the argument to carnal things, and perceivest not that all this has been said for no other purpose, but that we might know Him to be The Cause, and not fall into the error of Sabellius, and that in this manner the infirmity of the Jews might be healed, so that He might not be deemed an enemy of God; For from their extreme senselessness He was counted among them an enemy of God. Morel. for they said, “This man is not of God” ( c. ix. 16 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.John.9.html#John.9.16) ), “This man hath not come from God.” Now to remove this suspicion, high sayings did not contribute so much as the lowly, and therefore continually and everywhere He said that He had been “sent”; not that thou mightest suppose that expression to be any lessening of His greatness, but in order to stop their mouths. And for this cause also He constantly betaketh Himself to the Father, interposing moreover mention of His own high Parentage. For had He said all in proportion to His dignity, the Jews would not have received His words, since because of a few such expressions, they persecuted and oftentimes stoned Him; and if looking wholly to them He had used none but low expressions, many in after times might have been harmed. Wherefore He mingleth and blendeth generally of mixing wine with water. His teaching, both by these lowly sayings stopping, as I said, the mouths of the Jews, and also by expressions suited to His dignity banishing from men of sense any mean notion of what He had said, and proving that such a notion did not in any wise apply to Him at all.
The expression “having been sent” denoteth change of place—but God is everywhere present. Wherefore then saith He that He was “sent”? He speaketh in an earthly way, declaring His unanimity with the Father. At least He shapeth His succeeding words with a desire to effect this.
Ver. 24 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.John.5.html#John.5.24). “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth My word, and believeth on Him that sent Me, hath everlasting life.”
Seest thou how continually He putteth the same thing to cure that feeling of suspicion, both in this place and in what follows by fear and by promises of blessings removing their jealousy of Him, and then again condescending greatly in words? For He said not, “he that heareth My words, and believeth on Me,” since they would have certainly deemed that to be pride, and a superfluous pomp of words; because, if after a very long time, and ten thousand miracles, they suspected this when He spake after this manner, much more would they have done so then. It was on this account that at that later period they said to Him, “Abraham is dead, and the prophets are dead, how sayest Thou, If a man keep My saying, he shall never taste of death?” ( c. viii. 52 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.John.8.html#John.8.52).) In order therefore that they may not here also become furious, see what He saith, “He that heareth My word, and believeth on Him that sent Me, hath everlasting life.” This had no small effect in making His discourse acceptable, when they learned that those who hear Him believe in the Father also; for after having received this with readiness, they would more easily receive the rest. So that the very speaking in a humble manner contributed and led the way to higher things;"


St. John Chrysostom[/QUOTE]

Yada Yada Yada.

Not to disrespect St John, but last time i checked this is not considered to be an inspired writing. It is not the mind of GOD otherwise it would be in the BIBLE. But alas, it is not, and having said that we then should proceed to see exactly what his interpretations are based upon.

It is based upon suppositions not stated in the bible anywhere. He claims to speak for Christ as to why he said this or that, but he does not stop there. He then proceeds to speak for the crowd and states how they would have responded had Jesus said other than what he did!


This is amazing!!!! This man can speak for EVERYONE and tell you their motivations, and thoughts, etc....


IF that is the case, and he posesses this knowledge, it would HAVE to be of GOD.

But wait, this IS NOT considered to be OF GOD, for it is not in the BIBLE.


So where does that leave us?


It leaves us with the cold hard fact that this is MAN'S opinion.


And a wrong one , IMHO.

[Reeder]

Yada Yada Yada.

Not to disrespect St John, but last time i checked this is not considered to be an inspired writing. It is not the mind of GOD otherwise it would be in the BIBLE.

Does the Bible suggest that inspired writing can only be found within the Bible, itself? :naughty:

[Angryamerican]

Does the Bible suggest that inspired writing can only be found within the Bible, itself? :naughty:

How would you know if it was inspired by God ?

Luk 4:4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written that "man shall not live by bread alone, but by every Word of God."

[Marleysdaddy]

But wait, this IS NOT considered to be OF GOD, for it is not in the BIBLE.


And who considered the things in the Bible to be OF GOD?

[God is My Rock]

That COULD be true, were it not for the fact that God said there is
"None like me".

If a mere creature were a perfect reflection of God, as you suggest, it would invalidate the word of God.

And the point that trin's here continually overlook is that I have never said that Jesus is a creature.

I do not try to define God.

I do not try to define Jesus.

I leave them both as what they have said about themselves.

God has said that he is God.

Jesus has said that he is the Son of God.

What do those definitions mean exactly?

I do not claim to know exactly, I just leave them as they are presented in scripture.

[God is My Rock]

THANK YOU CTG!!

I hereby claim victory in our discussion of this Point Rock and AA!!

You don't have to bow before me.

A simple kiss of my ring will be sufficient . . .

Assuming that this is true, I will concede, I am not a master in greek.

I am not unreasonable, but I still say that the other point of the argument still is rock solid, which is that there is no reason to interpret theos as GOD here.

[Angryamerican]

And the point that trin's here continually overlook is that I have never said that Jesus is a creature.

I do not try to define God.

I do not try to define Jesus.

I leave them both as what they have said about themselves.

God has said that he is God.

Jesus has said that he is the Son of God.

What do those definitions mean exactly?

I do not claim to know exactly, I just leave them as they are presented in scripture.

No but their good ol kjv does.

COL 1:15

(KJV+) WhoG3739 isG2076 the imageG1504 of theG3588 invisibleG517 God,G2316 the firstbornG4416 of everyG3956 creature:G2937

[Angryamerican]

Assuming that this is true, I will concede, I am not a master in greek.

I am not unreasonable, but I still say that the other point of the argument still is rock solid, which is that there is no reason to interpret theos as GOD here.

So where was the post that Mr. CTG was claiming victory ? He sounds just like a patriot fan to me, claiming victory before the game has been played :))

[God is My Rock]

Putting limits on God? You mean like saying God can't be Jesus nor Jesus God?

God can be whatever he is, and man's opinion means nothing.

Having said that though, the limitation on this side of the fence, is not on God, but on the interpretations by trin's of his word.


Again, for all trins' the limitation is not on God, but upon man's interpretations.

[God is My Rock]

Absolutely untrue! And tailored to fit your point exactly - how convenient!

If we say one man is "greater" than another we cannot POSSIBLY mean "in any manner" as you stated for there are literally millions of aspects of men that we may compare - their physical size, income, achievements in life, number of children, longevity, morality, fame, and on and on and on. When we say one man is greater than another, we are typically alluding to a specific dimension of interest, such as career achievements, NOT to every conceivable aspect of a man, as your self-serving definition implies.

Germane to the present discussion, however, and a point routinely ignored by those on your side of the fence, is that we would never argue that one man was more of a "human" than another. We are all equally "of the human race".

The Father was greater in position than Christ, who was humbled as a man at the time he uttered those words.

The Father may be considered greater in "function" than the Son, since he never became a human like the Son did, since He is the "Father", a position connoting authority over a "Son".

But the Father is not greater in "Being" than the Son - both share the nature of Deity- any more than one man is greater in "Being" than another - both share the nature of Man.


But the word God is not used to denote a species.

THE GOD is the ultimate in authority, power, self orginating in thought and action, posesses life as a part of it's essence, etc...

None of these things did Jesus have.

I know, you would say "incarnation", but that really isn't explained in the Bible now is it, that is speculation based upon interpretation.

A conclusion twice removed from the actual words of scripture.

Do not miss that point!!!

Not only does it require a particular interpretation of scripture, but a speculation must be then placed upon that interpretation!

[Angryamerican]

God can be whatever he is, and man's opinion means nothing.

Having said that though, the limitation on this side of the fence, is not on God, but on the interpretations by trin's of his word.


Again, for all trins' the limitation is not on God, but upon man's interpretations.

Well put rock.

[God is My Rock]

Whether or not He is equal is a different question. We have discussed it many times. Phil 2 says that He willingly humbled himself and took the role of a servant.

What I am trying to point out is that John 1:3 says that He created EVERYTHING that was created. Without exception. It defines what all means by saying that He created everything that was created.

And I would like to interject here, the one thought (which I hold to be true, but cannot prove) is that there is a third option.

Perhaps Jesus was not created, but is just what he says, which is the Son of God?

What if God did not create him, but Jesus is of God?

Everything falls neatly into place....

[Reeder]

How would you know if it was inspired by God ?

Luk 4:4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written that "man shall not live by bread alone, but by every Word of God."

How do you know the Bible is inspired by God?

James 1: 5

5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

[God is My Rock]

:confused:

Duh?

John 12:19

John 12:19
So the Pharisees said to one another, "See, this is getting us nowhere. Look how the whole world has gone after him!"


Do you honestly think that literally the whole world had gone after Jesus?

[Angryamerican]

How do you know the Bible is inspired by God?

James 1: 5

5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

Because of the prophecy that was fulfilled in it.

Gotcha, you thought i was gonna say by faith,but that to. :))

[God is My Rock]

Does the Bible suggest that inspired writing can only be found within the Bible, itself? :naughty:

This is not a commentary on what you believe to be inspired writings.

For there are writings that you include in your Bible.

That cannot be said to be true of the trin's and St. John.

He is clearly quoting something that is not considered inspired, even by his own camp!

So I stand by my post.

[Angryamerican]

And I would like to interject here, the one thought (which I hold to be true, but cannot prove) is that there is a third option.

Perhaps Jesus was not created, but is just what he says, which is the Son of God?

What if God did not create him, but Jesus is of God?

Everything falls neatly into place....

When you said that rock this came to mind.

Mar 5:7 and cried with a loud voice, and said, What is to me and to You, Jesus, son of the Most High God? I adjure You by God not to torment me.

Was the bad angel suggesting he was a god ?

[God is My Rock]

And who considered the things in the Bible to be OF GOD?

Already know where you stand on this, so I politely refuse to play :)

[God is My Rock]

So where was the post that Mr. CTG was claiming victory ? He sounds just like a patriot fan to me, claiming victory before the game has been played :))

I could not find it, my computer is reacting very slowly today.

Somewhere around the mid to high teens as far as pages back.

[Reeder]

This is not a commentary on what you believe to be inspired writings.

For there are writings that you include in your Bible.

That cannot be said to be true of the trin's and St. John.

He is clearly quoting something that is not considered inspired, even by his own camp!

So I stand by my post.

You stand by this:


Not to disrespect St John, but last time i checked this is not considered to be an inspired writing. It is not the mind of GOD otherwise it would be in the BIBLE.

<snip>.......IF that is the case, and he posesses this knowledge, it would HAVE to be of GOD.

But wait, this IS NOT considered to be OF GOD, for it is not in the BIBLE.

So where does that leave us?


It leaves us with the cold hard fact that this is MAN'S opinion.


And a wrong one , IMHO.

(Emphasis is mine)


Over and over you suggest that because something is not found in the Bible, it cannot be inspired by God. Unless the Bible itself suggests such a thing, then you have no leg to stand on, and your comments cannot refute what CtG posted. Its one thing if you disagree with a writing found outside of the Bible, but you cannot claim that it is not inspired simply because it is NOT found in the Bible. That would be sheer ignorance.

[God is My Rock]

When you said that rock this came to mind.

Mar 5:7 and cried with a loud voice, and said, What is to me and to You, Jesus, son of the Most High God? I adjure You by God not to torment me.

Was the bad angel suggesting he was a god ?

I think that the word "god" (which I include the definition GOD) is a word that is used and in a sense understood by all, but not FULLY understood or grasped as to what is meant by the concept of God.


The trin's here use it like it is a type of species, granted a unique species, but that the word god is what YHWH is, instead of who he is.

god whether big G or little, is all about authority, power, leadership, honor, etc...

When we look at scripture we can easily see that our Father posesses life, all authority, power, orginates is own thoughts and actions, etc...

This cannot be said to be true of Jesus pre , during, or post incarnation.

While the trin's claim "incarnation (as to is humbled state)

They do not explain the concept of Jesus being sent.

The fact that he was sent, commands were given, etc, by default state things done, thoughts thought, PRE incarnation.

The fact that he was given the name above all names, authority, power, etc. is POST incarnation.

And then we and trin's agree as far as during.

My point here is that Jesus is equal as far as what GOD gave him.

He is lesser because he did not posess these things in and of himself.

AND he did not have the ability to make them his own, ON HIS OWN.


Perhaps this will clarify what I believe.

Jesus is the Son of the one who is called GOD.

[Angryamerican]

You stand by this:



(Emphasis is mine)


Over and over you suggest that because something is not found in the Bible, it cannot be inspired by God. Unless the Bible itself suggests such a thing, then you have no leg to stand on, and your comments cannot refute what CtG posted. Its one thing if you disagree with a writing found outside of the Bible, but you cannot claim that it is not inspired simply because it is NOT found in the Bible. That would be sheer ignorance.

That is why you believe what you do , and we believe what we believe.

[God is My Rock]

You stand by this:



(Emphasis is mine)


Over and over you suggest that because something is not found in the Bible, it cannot be inspired by God. Unless the Bible itself suggests such a thing, then you have no leg to stand on, and your comments cannot refute what CtG posted. Its one thing if you disagree with a writing found outside of the Bible, but you cannot claim that it is not inspired simply because it is NOT found in the Bible. That would be sheer ignorance.

Funny?

Why the emphasis on the Bible then?

Why not just turn to truth in other religions?

Why not turn to the truth in all writings?

Why the emphasis on God's word?

Why the emphasis by Jesus on the harmful effects of the traditions of man?

Just out of curiousity Reeder, how do you personally discern what is true and what is not? Do you have a foundation? Something by which you judge all other thoughts?

Would it happen to be your Bible?

If so, why is that?


I judge that particular quote of St John by the Bible, not the Bible by St. John.

Call if ignorance it you wish.

[God is My Rock]

That is why you are mormon, and we are not.

I would edit this AA.

I too was agitated by the post, but peace my friend.

[Angryamerican]

I think that the word "god" (which I include the definition GOD) is a word that is used and in a sense understood by all, but not FULLY understood or grasped as to what is meant by the concept of God.


The trin's here use it like it is a type of species, granted a unique species, but that the word god is what YHWH is, instead of who he is.

god whether big G or little, is all about authority, power, leadership, honor, etc...

When we look at scripture we can easily see that our Father posesses life, all authority, power, orginates is own thoughts and actions, etc...

This cannot be said to be true of Jesus pre , during, or post incarnation.

While the trin's claim "incarnation (as to is humbled state)

They do not explain the concept of Jesus being sent.

The fact that he was sent, commands were given, etc, by default state things done, thoughts thought, PRE incarnation.

The fact that he was given the name above all names, authority, power, etc. is POST incarnation.

And then we and trin's agree as far as during.

My point here is that Jesus is equal as far as what GOD gave him.

He is lesser because he did not posess these things in and of himself.

AND he did not have the ability to make them his own, ON HIS OWN.


Perhaps this will clarify what I believe.

Jesus is the Son of the one who is called GOD.

Makes sense to me, i can't ,and will not go against, what Jesus has said, about himself. Because at the time he said it he was a man.

That absolutely is the worst explanation i have ever heard.

[Reeder]

That is why you are mormon, and we are not.

Why? Because you're trying to make a claim about the Bible which even the Bible cannot support?

[Angryamerican]

I would edit this AA.

I too was agitated by the post, but peace my friend.

Thanks, i took your advice sorry reeder.

[Constantine the Great]

I gave you plenty of scripture to support what Greater means ,might, power, reasoning,knowing things Jesus don't know,I would say that means greater. Because you see similarities Between Jesus and God and read a few scriptures that you turn and twist to make them fit to your view of God,you then draw the conculsion Well Jesus must be God.

I have asked you to show me where Jesus said he is God,or that he is equal to God.
Clearly Jesus is Not God. :whistle:


Revelations 1:8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,” says the Lord, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”
(This verse speaks of God).

Revelations 1:9-12: I, John, both your brother and companion in the tribulation and kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was on the island that is called Patmos for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ. 10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day, and I heard behind me a loud voice, as of a trumpet, 11 saying, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last,”and, “What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia: to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamos, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.”
12 Then I turned to see the voice that spoke with me. And having turned I saw seven golden lampstands, 13 and in the midst of the seven lampstands One like the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the feet and girded about the chest with a golden band. 14 His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and His eyes like a flame of fire; 15 His feet were like fine brass, as if refined in a furnace, and His voice as the sound of many waters; 16 He had in His right hand seven stars, out of His mouth went a sharp two-edged sword, and His countenance was like the sun shining in its strength. 17 And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me, saying to me,[h (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%201;&version=50;#fen-NKJV-30709h)] “Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last. 18 I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death.
(The above refers to Christ. Both God and Jesus are the Alpha and Omega? There cannot be two beginnigs and ends, two firsts and two lasts can there? :think: )

Revelations 3:21: To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.
(How is it a subordinate can sit on the throne of God?)

Revelations 4:8-11 The four living creatures, each having six wings, were full of eyes around and within. And they do not rest day or night, saying:


“ Holy, holy, holy,
Lord God Almighty,
Who was and is and is to come!”

9 Whenever the living creatures give glory and honor and thanks to Him who sits on the throne, who lives forever and ever, 10 the twenty-four elders fall down before Him who sits on the throne and worship Him who lives forever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying:
11 “ You are worthy, O Lord,
To receive glory and honor and power;
For You created all things,
And by Your will they exist and were created.”
(This refers to God, since yet from John we know it was Christ who created all things and without Christ was not a thing Created :think: )

There are many more paralleles in Revelations but I don
t have the time right now to give an exposition on the entire book.

[Angryamerican]

Why? Because you're trying to make a claim about the Bible which even the Bible cannot support?

Sorry reeder, i did not mean that the way it came out.

How am i doing that if it's not in the bible ?

[Constantine the Great]

So where was the post that Mr. CTG was claiming victory ? He sounds just like a patriot fan to me, claiming victory before the game has been played :))

You won't find a post of mine claiming victory, but keep looking anyway. I present my views and evidence, and you can accept or reject them, understand them or refuse to. In the realm of the theoretical there never is a victory which is why this thread is still alive.
So keep looking, while I keep :)) at your misguided behavior.

ETA: Another thing you're wrong about is that this game hasn't been played. This game has been going on for millennia, continuing to this day on this forum and in denominations throughout the world, it's not my fault you've been sleeping through it until recently but hey, if ignorance is bliss then you must be one very blissful individual.

[Angryamerican]

Revelations 1:8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,” says the Lord, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”
(This verse speaks of God).

Revelations 1:9-12: I, John, both your brother and companion in the tribulation and kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was on the island that is called Patmos for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ. 10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day, and I heard behind me a loud voice, as of a trumpet, 11 saying, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last,”and, “What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia: to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamos, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.”
12 Then I turned to see the voice that spoke with me. And having turned I saw seven golden lampstands, 13 and in the midst of the seven lampstands One like the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the feet and girded about the chest with a golden band. 14 His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and His eyes like a flame of fire; 15 His feet were like fine brass, as if refined in a furnace, and His voice as the sound of many waters; 16 He had in His right hand seven stars, out of His mouth went a sharp two-edged sword, and His countenance was like the sun shining in its strength. 17 And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me, saying to me,[h (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%201;&version=50;#fen-NKJV-30709h)] “Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last. 18 I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death.
(The above refers to Christ. Both God and Jesus are the Alpha and Omega? There cannot be two beginnigs and ends, two firsts and two lasts can there? :think: )

Revelations 3:21: To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.
(How is it a subordinate can sit on the throne of God?)

Revelations 4:8-11 The four living creatures, each having six wings, were full of eyes around and within. And they do not rest day or night, saying:


“ Holy, holy, holy,
Lord God Almighty,
Who was and is and is to come!”

9 Whenever the living creatures give glory and honor and thanks to Him who sits on the throne, who lives forever and ever, 10 the twenty-four elders fall down before Him who sits on the throne and worship Him who lives forever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying:
11 “ You are worthy, O Lord,
To receive glory and honor and power;
For You created all things,
And by Your will they exist and were created.”
(This refers to God, since yet from John we know it was Christ who created all things and without Christ was not a thing Created :think: )

There are many more paralleles in Revelations but I don
t have the time right now to give an exposition on the entire book.

Like i said in an earlier post, There is four different characters speaking in the book of revelation, God Almighty, The Angel of the lord, Jesus,and john. If you are incorrect about who is speaking, and what is being spoken about, you can be way off base.

You can get 100 different views on the book of revelation, I would suggest making your point somewhere else in the scriptures.

I know neither of us, can prove, what is for sure is being said in the book of revelation.

And i don't think for a second ,Jesus would contradict himself, or mislead readers of the scriptures.

[Angryamerican]

You won't find a post of mine claiming victory, but keep looking anyway. I present my views and evidence, and you can accept or reject them, understand them or refuse to. In the realm of the theoretical there never is a victory which is why this thread is still alive.
So keep looking, while I keep :)) at your misguided behavior.

ETA: Another thing you're wrong about is that this game hasn't been played. This game has been going on for millennia, continuing to this day on this forum and in denominations throughout the world, it's not my fault you've been sleeping through it until recently but hey, if ignorance is bliss then you must be one very blissful individual.

Because you stubborn trinitarians :))

[Constantine the Great]

Like i said in an earlier post, There is four different characters speaking in the book of revelation, God Almighty, The Angel of the lord, Jesus,and john. If you are incorrect about who is speaking, and what is being spoken about, you can be way off base.

You can get 100 different views on the book of revelation, I would suggest making your point somewhere else in the scriptures.

Yet in the passages I quoted, it is clear who is being referred to, and in those instances, both Christ and God are given the same attributes.


And i don't think for a second ,Jesus would contradict himself, or mislead readers of the scriptures.

Which leads to only 1 other possibility and conclusion; Christ is God.

[Reeder]

Sorry reeder, i did not mean that the way it came out.

How am i doing that if it's not in the bible ?

How are you doing what?

[DRS]

Revelations 1:9-12: , 11 saying, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last,”and, “What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia: to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamos, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.”


Which version besides the JPS inserts the words Alpha and Omega there?

[Angryamerican]

Which version besides the JPS inserts the words Alpha and Omega there?

Can you elaborate a little more on this Drs ?

[Angryamerican]

How are you doing what?

Oops.

[God is My Rock]

which version besides the jps inserts the words alpha and omega there?

jps?

[Angryamerican]

Yet in the passages I quoted, it is clear who is being referred to, and in those instances, both Christ and God are given the same attributes.




Which leads to only 1 other possibility and conclusion; Christ is God.

God and Jesus do share titles, but that does not make them the same being.

For example.

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

So we can agree that both Jesus and God are called the word correct ?

Then we read verse two, and this verse implies there are two beings,and this is repeated again why ?

Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.

Now that two beings is established they are both called the word.

But later Jesus says this.

Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.

So we know why God is called the word,because the words Jesus spoke originated with the Father, and the reason Jesus is called the word is because he spoke the word to man.

So they do share titles and i don't see that as a problem.

But if you want to talk about the book of revelation, lets talk about about the two different visions , one being of Jesus and one of them is God.


The vision of Jesus,

Rev 1:10 I came to be in the Spirit in the Lord's day and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,
Rev 1:11 saying, I am the Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last. Also, What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia: to Ephesus, and to Smyrna, and to Pergamos, and to Thyatira, and to Sardis, and to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.
Rev 1:12 And I turned to see the voice that spoke with me.
Rev 1:13 And having turned, I saw seven golden lampstands. And in the midst of the seven lampstands I saw One like the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the feet, and tied around the breast with a golden band.
Rev 1:14 His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow. And His eyes were like a flame of fire.
Rev 1:15 And His feet were like burnished brass having been fired in a furnace. And His voice was like the sound of many waters.
Rev 1:16 And He had seven stars in His right hand, and out of His mouth went a sharp two-edged sword. And His face was like the sun shining in its strength.


The vision of God,

Rev 4:1 After these things I looked, and behold, a door was opened in Heaven. And the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me, saying, Come up here, and I will show you what must occur after these things.
Rev 4:2 And immediately I became in spirit. And behold, a throne was set in Heaven, and One sat upon the throne.
Rev 4:3 And He who sat there looked like a jasper stone and a sardius. And a rainbow was around the throne, looking like an emerald.
Rev 4:4 And around the throne I saw twenty-four thrones. And on the thrones I saw twenty-four elders sitting, clothed in white clothing. And they had crowns of gold on their heads.
Rev 4:5 And out of the throne came lightnings and thunderings and voices. And seven lamps of fire were burning in front of the throne, which are the seven spirits of God.
Rev 4:6 And a sea of glass was in front of the throne, like crystal. And in the midst of the throne, and around the throne, were four living creatures, full of eyes in front and behind.
Rev 4:7 And the first living creature was like a lion, and the second living creature like a calf, and the third living creature had the face of a man, and the fourth living creature like a flying eagle.
Rev 4:8 And each one of the four living creatures had six wings about him, and within being full of eyes. And they had no rest day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God, the Almighty, who was and is and is to come.
Rev 4:9 And whenever the living creatures gave glory and honor and thanks to Him who sat on the throne, who lives forever and ever,
Rev 4:10 the twenty-four elders fell down before the One sitting on the throne. And they worshiped Him who lives for ever and ever, and threw their crowns before the throne, saying,
Rev 4:11 O Lord, You are worthy to receive glory and honor and power, because You created all things, and for Your will they are and were created.

And in all this, where is the vision of the Holy Spirit ?

[DRS]

jps?

Wrong translation yet again we see the KJV inserting words

[Angryamerican]

Wrong translation yet again we see the KJV inserting words

What translations don't have the alpha and omega in those verses ?

Can you show how the kjv added the alpha and omega ?

[DRS]

Can you elaborate a little more on this Drs ?

I looked into a greek interlinear and there was no alpha and omega in verse 11

[DRS]

What translations don't have the alpha and omega in those verses ?

Can you show how the kjv added the alpha and omega ?

11which said: "Write on a scroll what you see and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea."-NIV

11saying, "(A)Write in a book what you see, and send it to the (B)seven churches: to (C)Ephesus and to (D)Smyrna and to (E)Pergamum and to (F)Thyatira and to (G)Sardis and to (H)Philadelphia and to (I)Laodicea." -NASB

11 It said, “Write in a book[a] everything you see, and send it to the seven churches in the cities of Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea.”-NLT

11saying, (A) "Write what you see in a book and send it to the seven churches, to Ephesus and to Smyrna and to Pergamum and to Thyatira and to Sardis and to Philadelphia and to Laodicea-ESV

11 saying, What thou seest, write in a book and send it to the seven churches: unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamum, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea-ASV

11saying, What thou seest write in a book, and send to the seven assemblies: to Ephesus, and to Smyrna, and to Pergamos, and to Thyatira, and to Sardis, and to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.-Darby

Now you may find it in Young's as this was one of the translations used for the KJV

[DispensationalJim]

I looked into a greek interlinear and there was no alpha and omega in verse 11

Well, DRS, you kept telling me I should get an Hebrew/Greek Interlinear, so I got one, and guess what!!!

Rev. 1:11 DOES have the Greek of "Alpha and Omega"...

As I have said so many times, it all depends on which Greek VERSION you are using, and as I have suspected, you are probably using the Wescott and Hort Greek and I am using the Textus Receptus Greek. They are absolutely and positively different, so I pick the TR and you can have the WH.

[Angryamerican]

11which said: "Write on a scroll what you see and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea."-NIV

11saying, "(A)Write in a book what you see, and send it to the (B)seven churches: to (C)Ephesus and to (D)Smyrna and to (E)Pergamum and to (F)Thyatira and to (G)Sardis and to (H)Philadelphia and to (I)Laodicea." -NASB

11 It said, “Write in a book[a] everything you see, and send it to the seven churches in the cities of Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea.”-NLT

11saying, (A) "Write what you see in a book and send it to the seven churches, to Ephesus and to Smyrna and to Pergamum and to Thyatira and to Sardis and to Philadelphia and to Laodicea-ESV

11 saying, What thou seest, write in a book and send it to the seven churches: unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamum, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea-ASV

11saying, What thou seest write in a book, and send to the seven assemblies: to Ephesus, and to Smyrna, and to Pergamos, and to Thyatira, and to Sardis, and to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.-Darby

Now you may find it in Young's as this was one of the translations used for the KJV

But in verse 8 it says the alpha and the omega .

So please explain what you are trying to say ?

I do see that the kjv does have alpha and omega in verse eleven though.

And i am curious as to why the kjv would have that and not the other versions.

You are right the good ol kjv seems to be biased in their translation.

Rev 1:11

(ASV) saying, What thou seest, write in a book and send it to the seven churches: unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamum, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.




(KJV+) Saying,G3004 IG1473 amG1510 (G3588) AlphaG1 andG2532 (G3588) Omega,G5598 theG3588 firstG4413 andG2532 theG3588 last:G2078 and,G2532 WhatG3739 thou seest,G991 writeG1125 inG1519 a book,G975 andG2532 sendG3992 it unto theG3588 sevenG2033 churchesG1577 whichG3588 are inG1722 Asia;G773 untoG1519 Ephesus,G2181 andG2532 untoG1519 Smyrna,G4667 andG2532 untoG1519 Pergamos,G4010 andG2532 untoG1519 Thyatira,G2363 andG2532 untoG1519 Sardis,G4554 andG2532 untoG1519 Philadelphia,G5359 andG2532 untoG1519 Laodicea.G2993

(MKJV) saying, I am the Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last. Also, What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia: to Ephesus, and to Smyrna, and to Pergamos, and to Thyatira, and to Sardis, and to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.

(RV) saying, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it to the seven churches; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamum, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.

[DRS]

Well, DRS, you kept telling me I should get an Hebrew/Greek Interlinear, so I got one, and guess what!!!

Rev. 1:11 DOES have the Greek of "Alpha and Omega"...

As I have said so many times, it all depends on which Greek VERSION you are using, and as I have suspected, you are probably using the Wescott and Hort Greek and I am using the Textus Receptus Greek. They are absolutely and positively different, so I pick the TR and you can have the WH.

What do the oldest many scripts say

[DRS]

But in verse 8 it says the alpha and the omega .

So please explain what you are trying to say ?

I do see that the kjv does have alpha and omega in verse eleven though.

And i am curious as to why the kjv would have that and not the other versions.

You are right the good ol kjv seems to be biased in their translation.

Rev 1:11

(ASV) saying, What thou seest, write in a book and send it to the seven churches: unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamum, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.




(KJV+) Saying,G3004 IG1473 amG1510 (G3588) AlphaG1 andG2532 (G3588) Omega,G5598 theG3588 firstG4413 andG2532 theG3588 last:G2078 and,G2532 WhatG3739 thou seest,G991 writeG1125 inG1519 a book,G975 andG2532 sendG3992 it unto theG3588 sevenG2033 churchesG1577 whichG3588 are inG1722 Asia;G773 untoG1519 Ephesus,G2181 andG2532 untoG1519 Smyrna,G4667 andG2532 untoG1519 Pergamos,G4010 andG2532 untoG1519 Thyatira,G2363 andG2532 untoG1519 Sardis,G4554 andG2532 untoG1519 Philadelphia,G5359 andG2532 untoG1519 Laodicea.G2993

(MKJV) saying, I am the Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last. Also, What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia: to Ephesus, and to Smyrna, and to Pergamos, and to Thyatira, and to Sardis, and to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.

(RV) saying, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it to the seven churches; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamum, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.

Verse 8 is God speaking

9 is John and after that Jesus is speaking to him

I always find 1:1 of Revelation very interesting, if Jesus was God then why not say and God gave the Revaltion to God

[Angryamerican]

Well, DRS, you kept telling me I should get an Hebrew/Greek Interlinear, so I got one, and guess what!!!

Rev. 1:11 DOES have the Greek of "Alpha and Omega"...

As I have said so many times, it all depends on which Greek VERSION you are using, and as I have suspected, you are probably using the Wescott and Hort Greek and I am using the Textus Receptus Greek. They are absolutely and positively different, so I pick the TR and you can have the WH.

Why do you prefer one over the other DJ ?

[Angryamerican]

Verse 8 is God speaking

9 is John and after that Jesus is speaking to him

I always find 1:1 of Revelation very interesting, if Jesus was God then why not say and God gave the Revaltion to God

Why wouldn't it say Gods revelation.

But don't you find it interesting, that the visions of God and Jesus are different visions ?

[DRS]

Why wouldn't it say Gods revelation.

But don't you find it interesting, that the visions of God and Jesus are different visions ?

That and people can always see Jesus in full glory and keep living

[Angryamerican]

That and people can always see Jesus in full glory and keep living

I am very thankful to you, and the trinitarians here in this thread. It really made me study much harder on who Jesus and God are.

I have removed all doubt, that i had about the nt, and the story of Jesus.

Without a doubt i believe Jesus is the Christ the messiah and the teacher , oh and more importantly he is the actual son of God.

And that he came to this earth to die for me and many others.

I really feel blessed.

[DRS]

I am very thankful to you, and the trinitarians here in this thread. It really made me study much harder on who Jesus and God are.

I have removed all doubt, that i had about the nt, and the story of Jesus.

Without a doubt i believe Jesus is the Christ the messiah and the teacher , oh and more importantly he is the actual son of God.

And that he came to this earth to die for me and many others.

I really feel blessed.

It is always nice to see people gain knowledge and appreciate what God has done

[DispensationalJim]

What do the oldest many scripts say

Which Greek manuscripts is the "oldest" is still a great debate, but as i have said many times, I sincerely am convinced that the Wescott and Hort Greek lexicon of 1870 is from the CORRUPTED Vaticanus/Sanaiticus groups of Greek manuscripts as compared with the Textus Receptus group of over 5,000 sets of copies variously dated from the 2nd through the 4th centuries.

If you wish to debate that topic, though, then we need to "resurrect" the "Is the Bible the Inerrant Word God?" thread and resume this discussion there, please.

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

I do have at least four Bible versions with the "Alpha and Omega" portion in verse 11.

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

And, I would challenge DRS that Rev. 1:8 is Jesus speaking, not God the Father.

Supper time, back later ...

[DRS]

Which Greek manuscripts is the "oldest" is still a great debate, but as i have said many times, I sincerely am convinced that the Wescott and Hort Greek lexicon of 1870 is from the CORRUPTED Vaticanus/Sanaiticus groups of Greek manuscripts as compared with the Textus Receptus group of over 5,000 sets of copies variously dated from the 2nd through the 4th centuries.

If you wish to debate that topic, though, then we need to "resurrect" the "Is the Bible the Inerrant Word God?" thread and resume this discussion there, please.

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

I do have at least four Bible versions with the "Alpha and Omega" portion in verse 11.

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

And, I would challenge DRS that Rev. 1:8 is Jesus speaking, not God the Father.

Supper time, back later ...

Where is Jesus ever called the Almighty?

Wescott and Hort would compare a number of manuscipts in an effort to find the one that was the best checking and double and checking when things seem to say one thing in one manuscript and something different in another

[DRS]

Something some may find interesting

THE Codex Sinaiticus has been described as “the most important, exciting, and valuable book in existence.” This is not just because it is at least 1,600 years old but because it forms a vital link in our catalog of Bible manuscripts. Its rediscovery, by Tischendorf just over a hundred years ago, is a fascinating story.

Konstantin von Tischendorf was born in Saxony, northern Europe, in the year 1815 and educated in Greek at the University of Leipzig. During his studies, he was disturbed by higher criticism of the Bible, voiced by famous German theologians seeking to prove that the Christian Greek Scriptures were not authentic. Tischendorf became convinced, however, that a study of early manuscripts would prove the genuineness of the Bible text. As a result, he determined to research for himself all known manuscripts, hoping to discover others in the course of his travels.

After four years spent searching through Europe’s finest libraries, Tischendorf, in May 1844, reached the Monastery of St.*Catherine, situated 4,500 feet [1,400*m] above the Red Sea in Sinai. Access to the monks’ fortresslike retreat was by a basket suspended on a rope through a small wall opening.

REWARDING FINDS

For some days he was permitted to search through their three libraries, without success. Then, just as he was about to leave, he spotted what he had been looking for—ancient parchments! They filled a large basket standing in the hall of the main library. The librarian told him that they were to be burned, just as two full baskets had already been. Among these parchments, Tischendorf was amazed to find 129 leaves from the oldest manuscript he had ever seen, a Greek translation of parts of the Hebrew Scriptures. He was given 43 sheets, but the rest were denied him.

Tischendorf revisited the monastery in 1853 to discover only a fragment of Genesis from the same fourth-century manuscript. He was convinced “that the manuscript originally contained the entire Old Testament, but that the greater part had been long since destroyed.” The complete manuscript probably consisted of 730 leaves. It was written in Greek uncial (capital) letters on vellum, fine sheep and goat skins.

Six years later Tischendorf made his third visit to the monks at Sinai. On the eve of his departure, he was casually shown not only the leaves he had saved from the fire 15 years earlier but many others as well. They contained the entire Christian Greek Scriptures plus part of the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Tischendorf was permitted to take the manuscript to Cairo, Egypt, to copy it, and eventually to carry it to the czar of Russia as a gift from the monks. Today it reposes in the British Museum, exhibited alongside the Codex Alexandrinus. The earlier 43 sheets are in the University Library of Leipzig, in the German Democratic Republic.

We should be grateful to Tischendorf for devoting his life and talents to searching for ancient Bible manuscripts and particularly for rescuing the great Codex Sinaiticus from destruction. But our highest thanks go to Jehovah God, who has seen to it that his Word has been so accurately preserved for our benefit today.

[Angryamerican]

Where is Jesus ever called the Almighty?

Wescott and Hort would compare a number of manuscipts in an effort to find the one that was the best checking and double and checking when things seem to say one thing in one manuscript and something different in another

Jesus has never been called the Almighty, good point.

But we know Jesus refers to man as his brothers.

The only place the Almighty appears in the nt is in the book of revelations,and one scripture in 2co 6:18
and look what God Almighty says about man here.

2Co 6:18 and I will be a Father to you, and you shall be My sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty.

But look what Jesus says.

Joh 20:17 Jesus said to her, Do not touch Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father. But go to My brothers and say to them, I ascend to My Father and Your Father, and to My God and your God.



2Co 6:18 and I will be a Father to you, and you shall be My sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty.

[God is My Rock]

Wrong translation yet again we see the KJV inserting words


I do not understand?

What is JPS, and how does it relate to the KJV?

[ralittlefield]

I do not understand?

What is JPS, and how does it relate to the KJV?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Publication_Society_of_America_Version

[God is My Rock]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Publication_Society_of_America_Version

Thanks :)

[DispensationalJim]

Where is Jesus ever called the Almighty?


We've been through this a few times, already, DRS (as you surely know). Here is the Bible's answer:

• Rev. 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

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

Who is the Almighty?? In that verse, He is The Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.

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

Now, we should all agree that God the Father is not coming to earth, is He? As you Unitarians and Arians keep saying, "no man can see God and live," so that verse has to be Jesus speaking. Then, we look at these verses:

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

• Rev. 21:6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.

• Rev. 22:12 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.

• Rev. 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. 21 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

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

There it is, clear as a bell to me! Jesus is the ONE who is coming quickly, as Rev. 22:12 and 20 say. I believe there are over 50 verses speaking of "the coming of the Lord" in the NT and they are ALL speaking of Jesus Christ.

The One who is coming quickly then is clearly shown to be The Lord Jesus Christ, The Alpha and Omega, The first and the last, the beginning and the end, the Almighty!

Thanks for asking, DRS. :)

[ralittlefield]

Thanks :)

Your welcome!

Not sure why DRS was referencing a Jewish translation concerning a new testament verse.

[DispensationalJim]

Something some may find interesting

...


DRS, would it be asking too much to give your SOURCE, please?

[Angryamerican]

We've been through this a few times, already, DRS (as you surely know). Here is the Bible's answer:

• Rev. 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

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

Who is the Almighty?? In that verse, He is The Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.

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

Now, we should all agree that God the Father is not coming to earth, is He? As you Unitarians and Arians keep saying, "no man can see God and live," so that verse has to be Jesus speaking. Then, we look at these verses:

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

• Rev. 21:6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.

• Rev. 22:12 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.

• Rev. 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. 21 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

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

There it is, clear as a bell to me! Jesus is the ONE who is coming quickly, as Rev. 22:12 and 20 say. I believe there are over 50 verses speaking of "the coming of the Lord" in the NT and they are ALL speaking of Jesus Christ.

The One who is coming quickly then is clearly shown to be The Lord Jesus Christ, The Alpha and Omega, The first and the last, the beginning and the end, the Almighty!

Thanks for asking, DRS. :)

Who represents God dj ?

So is that not Like God coming to the earth ?

Did not also angels come in the name of God ?

And no Jesus is never called the Almighty.

Would you care to explain Why Jesus refers to us as brothers or sisters and yet God calls us sons and daughters ?

Does that not show the Father son relationship?

Heb 1:5 For to which of the angels did He say at any time, "You are My Son, this day I have begotten You?" And again, "I will be to Him a Father, and He shall be to Me a Son?"

2Co 6:18 and I will be a Father to you, and you shall be My sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty.

[DispensationalJim]

Why do you prefer one over the other DJ ?

I gave a partial answer to DRS, but just to be clear...

DRS just did a cut and paste about the Sanaiticus manuscripts (without giving his source, BTW). If you read that post carefully, you probably noticed that they were in a basket ready to be burned. In other words, they were in a waste basket. That should be a pretty fair hint as to why we believe that it was a corrupted text. I can show many examples of drastic differences in verses between the King James and almost all other Bibles, but instead, here is a web site for more info giving reasons for prefering the King James over the newer versions:
http://www.bibletexts.com/kjv-tr.htm

My short version is that the King James was translated from the Textus Receptus manuscripts (over 5,000 sets of closely matching Greek NT parchments dating from the 2nd through the 4th centuries) but all other modern Bible versions were translated from the 1870 Wescott and Hort Greek lexicon that they copied mostly from the Sanaiticus and Vaticanus manuscripts, (which some claim are the oldest) but which many believe were very much corrupted.

I can go on for hours, but this thread is about the Trinity, so if you would like to extend this discussion, I would recommend that we reopen the "Is the Bible the Inerrant Word of God?" thread and "hash it out" there.

But, I appreciate the question, AA. :)

[Constantine the Great]

Which version besides the JPS inserts the words Alpha and Omega there?

The 1550 Text by Desiderius Erasmus


λεγουσης εγω ειμι το α και το ω ο πρωτος και ο εσχατος και ο βλεπεις γραψον εις βιβλιον και πεμψον ταις εκκλησιαις ταις εν ασια εις εφεσον και εις σμυρναν και εις περγαμον και εις θυατειρα και εις σαρδεις και εις φιλαδελφειαν και εις λαοδικειαν

[Constantine the Great]

Like i said in an earlier post, There is four different characters speaking in the book of revelation, God Almighty, The Angel of the lord, Jesus,and john. If you are incorrect about who is speaking, and what is being spoken about, you can be way off base.
So because YOU are confused, I should disregard one of the books of the bIBLE? I think not. Revelations is part and parcel.

You can get 100 different views on the book of revelation, I would suggest making your point somewhere else in the scriptures.
No, sorry, Revelations is a book of the BIble.

I know neither of us, can prove, what is for sure is being said in the book of revelation.

And i don't think for a second ,Jesus would contradict himself, or mislead readers of the scriptures.
Which is why He revealed Himself to John as part of the Trinity equal to the Father and the Holy Spirit.

[DispensationalJim]

Who represents God dj ?

So is that not Like God coming to the earth ?

Did not also angels come in the name of God ?

And no Jesus is never called the Almighty.

Would you care to explain Why Jesus refers to us as brothers or sisters and yet God calls us sons and daughters ?

Does that not show the Father son relationship?

Heb 1:5 For to which of the angels did He say at any time, "You are My Son, this day I have begotten You?" And again, "I will be to Him a Father, and He shall be to Me a Son?"

2Co 6:18 and I will be a Father to you, and you shall be My sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty.

I am sure Fire Watch could answer those questions much better than I can, but IMO it always goes back to when Jesus (God the Son) MADE HIMSELF INTO A MAN SO HE COULD DIE FOR OUR SINS.

I know you keep saying you don't understand why that makes a difference, but it just HAS TO make a difference.

As I keep saying, AA, while Jesus was on the earth (which HE MADE, which IMO means He WAS GOD), He had GIVEN UP His Godly attributes. Thus, He was DEPENDING on His Holy Father BECAUSE HE WAS A MAN. When he was in the womb of Mary (whom He created), He had no Godly abilities. But, when He was resurrected, Jesus was THE GOD-MAN. As God the Son, He was THE CREATOR, but as the Son of MAN, He became our brother. Then, to His Holy Father, He is THE Son of God.
• Heb. 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

Jesus is the One who enables us to be called the sons of god:
• John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
• 1John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

Yes, Jesus is called the ALMIGHTY. I just showed in that long post that Jesus is The Lord, the Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end, the One who is coming quickly. As the God-man, we will be able to look upon Him and not die.

[Constantine the Great]

God and Jesus do share titles, but that does not make them the same being.
It does if you believe God does not share glory or space with anyone else. If God commands there are to be no other gods, then by the same sentiment Christ could never share any of the authority of God.

For example.

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

So we can agree that both Jesus and God are called the word correct ?

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Christ may be God, but the characterization of LOGOS applies to Christ alone.

Then we read verse two, and this verse implies there are two beings,and this is repeated again why ?

Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.

Now that two beings is established they are both called the word.

But later Jesus says this.
You skipped how John says the Word WAS GOD! See, the Logos (Word is aplied to Christ, but the Logos was God). That's the significance. In the Trinitarian doctrine, The Father is the Mind (Nous), Christ is the Word (Logos) and The Holy Spirit is the Spirit (Pneuma). So when John says that the Word (Logos) was God, that is SIGNIFICANT because ONLY CHRIST IS THE LOGOS!!!!!
So we have Mind, Word, Spirit that is God.l

[matt1618]

First off God gives the Son the authority to judge

And others share with him in this judgement


4*And I saw thrones, and there were those who sat down on them, and power of judging was given them. Yes, I saw the souls of those executed with the ax for the witness they bore to Jesus and for speaking about God, and those who had worshiped neither the wild beast nor its image and who had not received the mark upon their forehead and upon their hand. And they came to life and ruled as kings with the Christ for a thousand years

6 Does anyone of YOU that has a case against the other dare to go to court before unrighteous men, and not before the holy ones? 2*Or do YOU not know that the holy ones will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by YOU, are YOU unfit to try very trivial matters? 3*Do YOU not know that we shall judge angels? Why, then, not matters of this life

But Eternal Destiny is only determined by God. I have given many Scriptures earlier attesting to that. In your verses, none of them have eternal destiny determined by man. For example it said in John 5, that as the Father raises from the dead, so will the Father, and the Son is given authority to execute judgment. It is fine that it is delegated, that doesn't take away that Jesus does the ultimate determinatio of who goes to be with God, and those who don't go to Him. And in Matthew 25:31-46, for example, all the people are separated into sheeps and goats, all those people will get sent to their eternal destiny by Jesus himself. Not by other people. The judging that you note above, is quite different from that.

[matt1618]

This post reminded me of some of the scriptures talking about God and Jesus that I posted before.

Once more, for your reading pleasure:

God: From everlasting to everlasting thou art God – Ps. 90:2
Jesus: Whose goings forth have been from old, from everlasting – Micah 5:2

God: Thy throne is established of old: thou art from everlasting – Ps 93:2
Jesus: Unto the Son He saith, Thy throne O God, is for ever and ever – Heb 1:8

God: I am the first, and I am the last and besides me there is no God – Isa 44:6
Jesus: I am the first and the last : I am he that liveth and was dead – Rev 1:17-18

God: Do I not fill heaven and earth? Saith the Lord - Jer 23:24
Jesus: He that descended is the same also that ascended up, far above all heavens, that he might fill all things. - Eph 4:10

God: I am Jehovah, I change not. - Malachi 3:6
Jesus: Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today and forever. - Heb 13:8

God: Canst thou by searching find out God? - Job 11:7
Jesus: No man knoweth the Son but the Father. Matt. 11:27

God: O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God, his ways past finding out. - Rom 11:33
Jesus: The unsearchable riches of Christ. - Eph 3:8

God: Thy footsteps are not known - Ps 77:19
Jesus: The love of Christ which passeth knowledge - Eph 3:19

God: I am Jehovah thy God, the Holy One of Israel - Isa 43:3
Jesus: Ye denied the Holy One and the Just - Acts 3:14

God: A God of truth and without iniquity - Deut 32:4
Jesus: I am the truth - John 14:6 Without sin - Heb 4:15

God: In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth - Gen 1:1
Jesus: In the beginning was the Word. All things were made by Him. - John 1:1, 3

God: I am Jehovah, that maketh all things; that stretched forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself - Isa 44:24.
Jesus: By him were all things created, that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities or powers - Col. 1:16

God: The Lord hath made all things for himself - Prov. 16:4
Jesus: All things were created by him and for him - Col 1:16

God: Thou preservest them all - Neh 9:6
Jesus: By him all things consist - Col 1:17

God: The King of Kings and Lord of lords - 1 Tim 6:15
Jesus: King of Kings and Lord of Lords.- Rev 19:16.

God: Thy Kingdom is an everlasting Kingdom, and thy dominion endureth thoughout all generations - Psalm 145:13
Jesus: His dominion is an everlasting dominion . . . And His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed - Dan. 7:14

God: Thou, even thou only, knowest the hearts of all the children of men - 1 Kings 8:39.
Jesus: All the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts. Rev 2:23

God: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? - Gen 18:25
Jesus: We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ. - 2 Cor 5:10

God: His Kingdom ruleth over all. - Psalm 103:19
Jesus: He is Lord of all. - Acts 10:36

God: Vengeance is Mine; I will repay, saith the Lord - Rom. 12:19
Jesus: Taking vengeance on them that know not God. - 2 Thess 1:7-8

God: To whom then will ye liken God? - Isaiah 40:18
Jesus: . . . . The image of the invisible God. - Col 1:15;
He who has seen Me has seen the Father . . . John 14:9

God: "This is what the LORD says— your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself,” – Isa 44:24
Jesus: For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 1 - Col 1:16

God: I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. - Isa 43:11
Jesus: And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. - Matt 1:21

God: I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. - Isa 43:11
Jesus: But we believe that through the grace of the LORD Jesus Christ we shall be saved, - Acts 15:11[/quote]

Amen and Amen, great job there Tucson Jim!!!

[Constantine the Great]

Amen and Amen, great job there Tucson Jim!!![/quote]

Indeed

[matt1618]

:hand:

But that is most certainly what John 5:26 says!!!!

You just completely ignored the Greek word didomi

Definition :

1) to give

2) to give something to someone

a) of one's own accord to give one something, to his advantage

1) to bestow a gift

b) to grant, give to one asking, let have

c) to supply, furnish, necessary things

d) to give over, deliver

1) to reach out, extend, present

2) of a writing

3) to give over to one's care, intrust, commit

a) something to be administered

b) to give or commit to some one something to be religiously observed

e) to give what is due or obligatory, to pay: wages or reward

f) to furnish, endue

3) to give

a) to cause, profuse, give forth from one's self

1) to give, hand out lots

b) to appoint to an office

c) to cause to come forth, i.e. as the sea, death and Hell are said to give up the dead who have been engulfed or received by them

c) to give one to someone as his own

1) as an object of his saving care

2) to give one to someone, to follow him as a leader and master

3) to give one to someone to care for his interests

4) to give one to someone to whom he already belonged, to return

4) to grant or permit one

a) to commission



If you overlook or ignore this word, then perhaps I can see your point.

Response?
I'm not a scholar, I will grant that point, so I can't contest it as I'm not. There are many possible ways of saying what it means, it could be give, could be grant, or commission, to appoint an office.

The context of the verse, surrounding the whole gospel, can not put your interpretation. After all, if He is to be honored in the exact same way as the Father is to be honored, he wouldn't be given light, When he is llight himself (Jn 1:1-4)

He is to be honored in the exact same way as the Father is honored, 5:23. 23.

Jesus has life in Himself, in exactly the same way that the Father has live in Himself. So if it is the same, how can the Father be any superior. So the way the Father is, so is the Son. Remember in the Beginning was the Word the Word was with God, the Word was God. In v. 4 it says about Jesus, 'In Him was Life, and the life was the light of men.'


Here's Augustine take on the issue, which will even take into account your term 'give': http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf107.iii.xxiii.html

But when Thou speakest of the Father, “even as the Father hath life in Himself;” again, when Thou speakest of Thyself, Thou saidst, “So also hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself.” Even as He hath, so gave He to have. Where hath He? “In Himself.” Where gave He to have? “In Himself.” Where hath Paul life? Not in himself, but in Christ. Where hast thou, believer? Not in thyself, but in Christ. Let us see whether the apostle says this: “Now I live; but not I, but Christ liveth in me.”458 (javascript:toggle('fnf_iii.xxiii-p24.1');)458 Gal. ii. 20 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.Gal.2.html#Gal.2.20). Our life, as ours, that is, of our own personal will, will be only evil, sinful, unrighteous; but the life in us that is good is from God, not from ourselves; it is given to us by God, not by ourselves. But Christ hath life in Himself, as the Father hath, because He is the Word of God. With Him, it is not the case that He liveth now ill, now well; but as for man, he liveth now ill, now well. He who was living ill, was in his own life; he who is living well, is passed to the life of Christ. Thou art made a partaker of life; thou wast not that which thou hast received, but wast one who received: but it is not so with the Son of God as if at first He was without life, and then received life. For if thus He received life, He would not have it in Himself. For, indeed, what is in Himself? That He should Himself be the very life.

10. I may perhaps declare that matter more plainly still. One lights a candle: that candle, for example, so far as regards the little flame which shines there—that fire has light in itself; but thine eyes, which lay idle and saw nothing, in the absence of the candle, now have light also, but not in themselves. Further, if they turn away from the candle, they are made dark; if they turn to it, they are illumined. But certainly that fire shines so long as it exists: if thou wouldst take the light from it, thou dost also at the same time extinguish it; for without the light it cannot remain. But Christ is light inextinguishable and co-eternal with the Father, always bright, always shining, always burning: for if He were not burning, would it be said in the psalm, “Nor is there any that can hide himself from his heat?”459 (javascript:toggle('fnf_iii.xxiii-p26.1');)459 Ps. xix. 7 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.Ps.19.html#Ps.19.7). But thou wast cold in thy sin; thou turnest that thou mayest become warm; if thou wilt turn away, thou wilt become cold. In thy sin thou wast dark; thou turnest in order to be enlightened; if thou turnest away, thou wilt become dark. Therefore, because in thyself thou wast darkness, when thou shalt be enlightened, thou wilt be light, though in the light. For saith the apostle, “Ye were once darkness, but now light in the Lord.”460 (javascript:toggle('fnf_iii.xxiii-p27.2');)460 Eph. v. 8 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.Eph.5.html#Eph.5.8).

When he had said, “but now light,” he added, “in the Lord.” Therefore in thyself darkness, “light in the Lord.” In what way “light”? Because by participation of that light thou art light. But if thou wilt depart from the light by which thou art enlightened, thou returnest to thy darkness. Not so Christ, not so the Word of God. But how not? “As the Father hath life in Himself, so hath He given also to the Son to have life in Himself;” so that He lives, not by participation, but unchangeably, and is altogether Himself life. “So hath He given also to the Son to have life.” Even as He hath, so has He given. What is the difference? For the one gave, the other received. Was He already in being when He received? Are we to understand that Christ was at any time in being without light, when Himself is the wisdom of the Father, of which it is said, “It is the brightness of the eternal light?”461 (javascript:toggle('fnf_iii.xxiii-p28.2');)461 Wisd. vii. 26 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.Wis.7.html#Wis.7.26). Therefore what is said, “gave to the Son,” is such as if it were said, “begat the Son;” for by begetting He gave. As He gave Him to be, so He gave Him to be life, so also gave Him to be life in Himself. What is that, to be life in Himself? Not to need life from elsewhere, but to be Himself the plenitude of life, out of which others believing should have life while they lived. “Hath given Him,” then, “to have life in Himself.” Hath given as to whom? As to His own Word, as to Him who “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God.”
11.

Afterwards, because He was made man, what gave He to Him? “And hath given Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of man.” In that He is the Son of God, “As the Father hath life in Himself, so also hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself;” in that He is the Son of man, “He hath given Him authority of executing judgment.” This is what I ex 149 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf107/Page_149.html)plained to you yesterday, my beloved, that in the judgment man will be seen, but God will not be seen; but after the judgment, God will be seen by those who have prevailed in the judgment, but by the wicked He will not be seen. Since, therefore, the man will be seen in the judgment in that form in which He will so come as He ascended, for that reason He had said above, “The Father judgeth not any man, but hath given all judgment to the Son.” He repeats the same thing also in this place, when He says, “And hath given Him authority of executing judgment, because He is the Son of man.” As if thou wert to say, “hath given Him authority of executing judgment.” In what way? When He had not that authority of executing judgment? Since “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;” since “all things were made by Him,” did He not already have authority of executing judgment? Yes, but according to this, I say, “He gave Him authority of executing judgment, because He is the Son of man:” according to this, He received authority of judging “because He is the Son of man.” For in that He is the Son of God, He always had this authority. He that was crucified, received; He who was in death, is in life: the Word of God never was in death, but is always in life.

[matt1618]

Tucson Jim and CTG & myself have pointed out several times that Jesus himself is called First and Last, that is Alpha & Omega. For example, I don't see how there could be any dispute on this:

Rev. 1:17-18:

17 When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand upon me, saying, "Fear not, I am the first and the last, 18 and the living one; I died, and behold I am alive for evermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades.


Ok, who died, did God the Father die? Who was dead and came alive? Of course only Jesus, and talking in his person, He says that He is First, and He is Last.

Revelation 22:12-13:

." 12 "Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense, to repay every one for what he has done. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."

God the Father is not coming only Jesus is coming. He's the Alpha and the Omega, if you dispute that, ok, but He calls himself the First & the Last.

What does Scripture say who the First and Last is?


Isiaah 44:6:

6: Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god
Isaiah 48:11-12
11: For my own sake, for my own sake, I do it, for how should my name be profaned? My glory I will not give to another. 12: "Hearken to me, O Jacob, and Israel, whom I called! I am He, I am the first, and I am the last.

So who is Jesus calling Himself when he calls himself the First & Last?

[Tucson Jim]

If as you say God is one,which i agree with,then why would God be greater then Jesus ? Why would God know things that Jesus don't know ?

Not "God", AA, "the Father". The Father is greater than Jesus because of the incarnation and their different functions in relation to the creation.

Jesus was the one that said his Father is greater, Jesus is the one that said only His Father knows the day and the hour of the second coming.

Uh huh . . . no problem for the doctrine of the Trinity, as you would know if you only understood it . . .

How is what i brought up to you ignorant ? Does not the scriptures, say what i said ?

Your attacks display "ignorance" because you haven't even taken the time to try to understand the doctrine you so despise. I know this is true because you consistently bring up points you think are a problem for the trinity - but they aren't, and you would know that if you understood the doctrine as well as, say, the average 8th grade Catholic boy.

The rebuttal on greater was posted. So by your reasoning we were created in the image and likeness to God correct ?are we equal to God ?

Really?

I must have missed it.

Tell me then, what is your definition of "greater" now?

Angels were created in the image of God, And they to, are called sons of God . So are they equal to God ?

Well now you're just being proposterous.

No one is equal to God,but yet with Christ saying he was not equal to God .why do you believe Jesus is equal to God?

I am not starting arguments with you guys, i simply do not understand why trinitarians believe as they do concerning God.

If you "simply do not understand" you would take the time to actually study that which you criticize. Your responses demonstrate quite clearly to me that you haven't.

[Tucson Jim]

I gave you plenty of scripture to support what Greater means ,might, power, reasoning,knowing things Jesus don't know,I would say that means greater.

We all know what "greater" means, AA. But as I said, none of this supports the definition you gave in response to RonJon's simple question. Deal with that fairly and we can move on.

Outside of that issue, this is just the same old stuff. Yes, the Father is "greater" than Jesus in a sense - but that does NOT mean Jesus is not God.

Because you see similarities Between Jesus and God and read a few scriptures that you turn and twist to make them fit to your view of God,you then draw the conculsion Well Jesus must be God.

Yeah, I see "similarities" . . . :rolleyes:

Similarities such as:

The exact representation of His Nature

Creator of the Universe

Knows the hearts of men

Eternal

Omniscient

And so on.

"Similarities" indeed . . .



I have asked you to show me where Jesus said he is God,or that he is equal to God. You have been shown scripture stating what i believe. It don't take a genius to understand what Jesus says about himself, but yet you spin what Jesus says to hold on to your view.

"It don't take a genius" huh . . . :))

Well it don't take a genius to understand that God became man either . . .

Lets go through it again.

Jesus said.

Joh 5:36 But I have greater witness than that of John, for the works which the Father has given Me that I should finish them, the works which I do themselves witness of Me, that the Father has sent Me

Joh 10:29 My Father who gave them to me is greater than all, and no one is able to pluck them out of My Father's hand.

Joh 13:16 Truly, truly, I say to you, A servant is not greater than his master, neither is he who is sent greater than he who sent him.


Joh 14:28 You have heard how I said to you, I go away and I am coming to you again. If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, I go to the Father, for My Father is greater than I.


Joh 15:20 Remember the word that I said to you, The servant is not greater than his master. If they have persecuted Me, they will also persecute you. If they have kept My saying, they will also keep yours.

Mat 24:36 But of that day and hour no one knows, no, not the angels of Heaven, but only My Father.

Mar 13:32 But of that day and hour no one knows, no, not the angels in Heaven, nor the Son, but the Father.

Notice what kind of respect cornelius showed for an angel of God, He called him lord. truly he has more respect for angels then people on your side show them.

Act 10:3 About the ninth hour of the day he saw plainly in a vision an angel of God coming to him and saying to him, Cornelius!
Act 10:4 And he was gazing at him, and becoming terrified, he said, What is it, lord? And he said to him, Your prayers and your merciful deeds have come up for a memorial before God.


Now things his followers said about Jesus.

1Co 15:28 But when all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subject to Him who has subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all things in all.

Heb 2:8 You subjected all things under his feet." For in subjecting all things to Him, He did not leave anything not subjected to Him. But now we do not see all things having been subjected to him.

Mat 7:21 Not everyone who says to Me, Lord! Lord! shall enter the kingdom of Heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in Heaven.

Mat 10:32 Then everyone who shall confess Me before men, I will confess him before My Father who is in Heaven.

Mat 10:33 But whoever shall deny Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father in Heaven.

Mat 11:27 All things are delivered to Me by My Father. And no one knows the Son except the Father. Nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and the one to whom the Son will reveal Him

Hmm this is very interesting.

Mat 12:18 "Behold My Child whom I have chosen; My Beloved, in whom My soul is well pleased. I will put My Spirit on Him, and He shall declare judgment to the nations.

Hmm God claiming man to be his brother?
Mat 12:50 For whoever shall do the will of My Father in Heaven, the same is My brother and sister and mother.

My Fathers kingdom eh.

Mat 26:29 But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on, until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom.

He prays to himself ?

Mat 26:39 And He went a little further and fell on His face, and prayed, saying, O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me. Yet not as I will, but as You will.

Wow you mean these things were not in subjection to Jesus before he came to the earth ?

1Pe 3:22 who is at the right hand of God, having gone into Heaven, where the angels and authorities and powers are being subjected to Him.

Clearly Jesus is Not God. :whistle:

Nice eisegesis.

This is all the same old stuff we have explained before.

Still going with the "praying to Himself" deliberate misrepresentation of our beliefs, are you?

It seems you do not even try to understand.

You misrepresent. You mock.

That's fine . . . Jesus, whom you are fond of quoting, will judge between you and me.

[Tucson Jim]

I believe Jesus was greater then angels, but not sure to what extent.

He who creates is greater then the thing created.

Right, and if "all things came into existence through him and apart from him not even one thing came into existence" (John 1:3 NWT - a version I thought you would like) the He cannot, Himself, have "come into existence".

Think about it . . .

[Tucson Jim]

The G3754, G1519 coding cleared it all up for me.

:)) Classic Reeder!

[Tucson Jim]

Yada Yada Yada.


Well, now that we have established your objectivity and willingness to try to learn from others . . . :rolleyes:

[Tucson Jim]

So where was the post that Mr. CTG was claiming victory ? He sounds just like a patriot fan to me, claiming victory before the game has been played :))

You're confused.

I claimed victory based on CTGs post.

Please try to keep up . . .:razz:

[Tucson Jim]

And the point that trin's here continually overlook is that I have never said that Jesus is a creature.

I do not try to define God.

I do not try to define Jesus.

I leave them both as what they have said about themselves.

God has said that he is God.

Jesus has said that he is the Son of God.

What do those definitions mean exactly?

I do not claim to know exactly, I just leave them as they are presented in scripture.

And yet . . . despite your declared agnosis, you roundly criticize those who believe they DO know?

Weird . . .

[terri910]

This is all the same old stuff ...

Well....there's the thread summed up in seven words...
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a355/terri910/giggle.gif

[Tucson Jim]

Assuming that this is true, I will concede, I am not a master in greek.

I am not unreasonable, but I still say that the other point of the argument still is rock solid, which is that there is no reason to interpret theos as GOD here.

OK, OK, maybe we can still talk about this . . .

[Tucson Jim]

So where was the post that Mr. CTG was claiming victory ? He sounds just like a patriot fan to me, claiming victory before the game has been played :))

CTG is victorious,.

Anyone can see . . . :whistle:

[Tucson Jim]

But the word God is not used to denote a species.

But God still has a nature, just like man has a nature. The comparison is between natures and does not have anything to do with God being a "species".

THE GOD is the ultimate in authority, power, self orginating in thought and action, posesses life as a part of it's essence, etc...

None of these things did Jesus have.

He disguised Himself in human flesh to see if those who are His would recognize Him.

I know, you would say "incarnation", but that really isn't explained in the Bible now is it, that is speculation based upon interpretation.

A conclusion twice removed from the actual words of scripture.

Do not miss that point!!!

Not only does it require a particular interpretation of scripture, but a speculation must be then placed upon that interpretation!

Jesus was "with" God in the beginning, He "was" God, He did not hold on to equality with God but emptied Himself and became a servant.

The incarnation is absolutely Biblical.

It's a shame you deny it.

[Tucson Jim]

Yet in the passages I quoted, it is clear who is being referred to, and in those instances, both Christ and God are given the same attributes.


And in many other passages as well.

[Tucson Jim]

Amen and Amen, great job there Tucson Jim!!!

:hug:

Thanks to the Holy Spirit Who has provided us with such treasures as these, showing the Oneness of the Father and Son!

[Tucson Jim]

Amen and Amen, great job there Tucson Jim!!!

Indeed[/QUOTE]:hug:

[Tucson Jim]

Well....there's the thread summed up in seven words...
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a355/terri910/giggle.gif


True, true . . . :))

[matt1618]

But God still has a nature, just like man has a nature. The comparison is between natures and does not have anything to do with God being a "species".



He disguised Himself in human flesh to see if those who are His would recognize Him.



Jesus was "with" God in the beginning, He "was" God, He did not hold on to equality with God but emptied Himself and became a servant.

The incarnation is absolutely Biblical.

It's a shame you deny it.

Exactly, not only does John's gospel show it in the very beginning, which is also a clear reference to Genesis 1. But as we've shown elsewhere, about him emptying Himself, we see his Deity at the very end as well:

Phil. 2:10-11
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Paul obviously borrowing from Isaiah 45:22-23
22: "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other. 23: By myself I have sworn, from my mouth has gone forth in righteousness a word that shall not return: `To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.'

Amazing that people quote Phil 2 to say the exact opposite of Paul's point!! If Paul didn't mean to call him God,why in the world would when referencing Jesus refer to a quote that clearly refers to God Himself!!! He is God, there is no other, not some polygamous 'a god' either. Jesus Christ is the Lord himself who we all shall bow before.

[Angryamerican]

I am sure Fire Watch could answer those questions much better than I can, but IMO it always goes back to when Jesus (God the Son) MADE HIMSELF INTO A MAN SO HE COULD DIE FOR OUR SINS.

I know you keep saying you don't understand why that makes a difference, but it just HAS TO make a difference.

As I keep saying, AA, while Jesus was on the earth (which HE MADE, which IMO means He WAS GOD), He had GIVEN UP His Godly attributes. Thus, He was DEPENDING on His Holy Father BECAUSE HE WAS A MAN. When he was in the womb of Mary (whom He created), He had no Godly abilities. But, when He was resurrected, Jesus was THE GOD-MAN. As God the Son, He was THE CREATOR, but as the Son of MAN, He became our brother. Then, to His Holy Father, He is THE Son of God.
• Heb. 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

Jesus is the One who enables us to be called the sons of god:
• John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
• 1John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

Yes, Jesus is called the ALMIGHTY. I just showed in that long post that Jesus is The Lord, the Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end, the One who is coming quickly. As the God-man, we will be able to look upon Him and not die.

I really rather not assume Jesus is the Almighty, i would like to hear it from Jesus Or God Almighty that he is.

IMO there is just too much scripture by Jesus stating the opposite.

I would have to ignore scripture to accept the doctrine IMO.

[Angryamerican]

So because YOU are confused, I should disregard one of the books of the bIBLE? I think not. Revelations is part and parcel.


No, sorry, Revelations is a book of the BIble.


Which is why He revealed Himself to John as part of the Trinity equal to the Father and the Holy Spirit.

No i'm not confused, I did post my reason that Jesus can't be God in what you posted.

You see visions of Both God and Jesus and they are described differently, why if they are the same God ?

And i also i agree with Drs point on what you posted. Jesus was never called the Almighty.

Show me where Jesus is called the Almighty ?

[Angryamerican]

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Christ may be God, but the characterization of LOGOS applies to Christ alone.


You skipped how John says the Word WAS GOD! See, the Logos (Word is aplied to Christ, but the Logos was God). That's the significance. In the Trinitarian doctrine, The Father is the Mind (Nous), Christ is the Word (Logos) and The Holy Spirit is the Spirit (Pneuma). So when John says that the Word (Logos) was God, that is SIGNIFICANT because ONLY CHRIST IS THE LOGOS!!!!!
So we have Mind, Word, Spirit that is God.l

The word must be God because it originated from God.

And Jesus makes this clear.

Joh 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My Words, and the Word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.

So now you see why both are called,
'the word "simple really.

[Angryamerican]

We all know what "greater" means, AA. But as I said, none of this supports the definition you gave in response to RonJon's simple question. Deal with that fairly and we can move on.

Outside of that issue, this is just the same old stuff. Yes, the Father is "greater" than Jesus in a sense - but that does NOT mean Jesus is not God.



Yeah, I see "similarities" . . . :rolleyes:

Similarities such as:

The exact representation of His Nature

Creator of the Universe

Knows the hearts of men

Eternal

Omniscient

And so on.

"Similarities" indeed . . .





"It don't take a genius" huh . . . :))

Well it don't take a genius to understand that God became man either . . .



Nice eisegesis.

This is all the same old stuff we have explained before.

Still going with the "praying to Himself" deliberate misrepresentation of our beliefs, are you?

It seems you do not even try to understand.

You misrepresent. You mock.

That's fine . . . Jesus, whom you are fond of quoting, will judge between you and me.

I never met a trinitarian that didn't think he was a genius :))

IMO i have no doubts that Jesus words were accurate about himself.

Until he says otherwise i'll trust what he said.

And that is true Jesus will judge, who is right and who is wrong.

But really, i think how christianity is so divided, God will give those wrongly sucked in to a wrong belief, a chance by correcting them .he won't hold it against them unless they knowingly reject the truth.

I believe everyone accepting Jesus as the son of God, will be given a chance by, God correcting them where they are wrong in their views.

I don't think most Christians are gonna be destroyed do you ?

[Angryamerican]

Right, and if "all things came into existence through him and apart from him not even one thing came into existence" (John 1:3 NWT - a version I thought you would like) the He cannot, Himself, have "come into existence".

Think about it . . .

I did , and i came up with the same view.

[Angryamerican]

You're confused.

I claimed victory based on CTGs post.

Please try to keep up . . .:razz:

Yeah he corrected me.

[Angryamerican]

CTG is victorious,.

Anyone can see . . . :whistle:

I guess you thought that before you saw my response :))

[Angryamerican]

CTG is victorious,.

Anyone can see . . . :whistle:

There is one thing trinitarians have in common, They had to be taught Jesus was God by their parents, and then they needed someone like their pastor to further explain it to them. Until they reached a point, that every time they read a verse no matter what it says ,they already have the opinion, Jesus is God, thats why they don't have a problem with scriptures contradicting what they believe.

IMO of course.

[DispensationalJim]

There is one thing trinitarians have in common, They had to be taught Jesus was God by their parents, and then they needed someone like their pastor to further explain it to them. Until they reached a point, that every time they read a verse no matter what it says ,they already have the opinion, Jesus is God, thats why they don't have a problem with scriptures contradicting what they believe.

IMO of course.

That is quite a generalization you make about trinitarians, AA. My parents tried to tell me there was no God, so I guess you were wrong in one case, at least. I learned about the Trinity by studying the Bible for myself, thank you.

The only seeming "contradictions" I see are when you "Arians" try to create a contradiction by using the words of the MAN, Jesus, which He spoke while He was here on this earth in HUMAN FORM. IMO, until you see how wrong you are when you use that approach, you are simply repeating the same erroneous claims which will keep you in the darkness.

I believe that only God in the form of a man (a "God-man," if you will) could adequately pay for our sins by shedding His perfect blood in His death on the cross. And, I believe those who reject that full payment by Jesus alone are rejecting His free gift of salvation.