Is Jesus actually the same being as God?
I know that the holy trinity are all meant to be the same and one being. God is the father and the son and the holy spirit.
But, taking into account, this was decided by a group of men hundreds of years after Jesus, what is everyone's opinion on this?
If Jesus and God are the same? Why does Jesus pray to his Father, why does he ask him for things? If he was God, then surely this would be kind of a strange thing to do...
I know this seems rather simplistic, but I have never had someone give me a really good answer for this which has fully led me to understand how it is meant to work so your opinions will be much appreciated.The simplest way I know to tell you is that Jesus was a piece of God, and He is the Peace of God.
John 8: 42 says---
"Jesus said unto them, 'If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God: neither came I of myself, but he sent me.'"
Since God cannot die, and since He is Spirit and not human, and cannot become human in His entire essence, and since He knew mankind's inability to fully understand Himself, He sent that part of Himself to earth in a human body. It was for an example to mankind, to let us know that He understands our frailties, our sufferings, and our need for a Savior.
When Jesus prayed to the Father, it was for an example to us, that's all. The greatest, the sinless, example of what we are supposed to strive to be like.
When he raised Lazarus from the dead, he wouldn't have had to even say a word or pray to the Father because he was inseparable from the Father.
John 11 42, Jesus vocalizes this very reasoning---he says (speaking to God the Father)--"And I knew that thou hearest me always, but because of the people which stand by I said it that they may believe that thou hast sent me.
Everything God did, He did for the sake of mankind because He loved us!
Everything Jesus did, He did for the sake of mankind because He loved us!
The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are One God in three distinct but inseparable manifestations. Since Jesus's resurrection from the dead, I believe he is still inseparable from the Father. Nonbelievers needed to see God walk the earth, not to worship any form of mankind, but to see God's Love literally in action.Thank you Brenda, but I still seem to have an issue with this. Those quotations do not say that Jesus is God at all. The first said that he comes from God - we accept that because he is God's son - but that does not mean he is God. The second only suggests that he need he speaks his prayers so that others understand.
I was more referring to when Jesus prays in Gethsemane that God might, possibly not make him have to go through his task, although he is willing to accept it. And again on the cross when he cries out to his father. Those sort of things just do not make sense if Jesus actually is God.The first chapter of the book of John tells us who Jesus is. Verse 1 says the Word was God, Verse 2 tells us the Word was in the beginning with God, Verse 3 tells us he/it is the Creator, Verse 4 tells us he's the light, Verse 8 tells us that John was came to bear witness of that Light, Verse 10 says He (the Light/the Word) was in the world (and again reiterates that that's the Creator), yet the world knew Him not, Verses 11 and 12 and 13 tell us about being born again through Him, Verse 14 tells us the Word became flesh and dwelt among us and refers to Jesus as the only begotten of the Father, Verse 15 reminds us that John spoke of Him before, Verse 17 names Him as Jesus Christ.
And verse 18 tells us that "no man hath seen God", but that the Son hath declared Him. That verse, the way I see it, is telling us that the fleshly part of Jesus (His body) was not God, but refers to the Spirit of God that was within Christ, bringing us back to the first few Verses. Circular reasoning and illustration. Jesus came from the Father. It says he (Jesus) is "in the bosom of the Father". The following verses 19 thru 34 are necessary disclaimers (neither John nor John the Baptist nor Elijah, etc., were the Christ.) We have to know who we are NOT just as much as know who we are. Jesus's earthly body was not the body of God, because God doesn't have a physical body. Jesus was "begotten" of Mary in her physical body. This is why I say that Jesus often spoke as a man praying to the Father; once again, it was for our benefit, lest we decide to worship that physical body, for God is Spirit.
Of course Jesus felt pain and wasn't thrilled with the thought of undergoing the crucifixion! He had a physical body that could feel pain. He had a choice, just as all humans do. He could've denied God, refused to fulfill the purpose He was sent for. Conversely, He also knew He could've called legions of angels to keep him from the Cross. But He resisted temptation. It's interesting to note that (at least I believe this, someone can correct me if I'm wrong) that in the Garden of Gethsemane, none of the disciples were around when Jesus prayed if it be God's will to let the cup pass from Him. They were supposedly asleep. Yet He had asked them to stay and pray with him. Or perhaps it means that they left after Jesus had prayed the first time. But nevertheless, this confirms my belief that the Bible is truly inspired by the Holy Spirit; else we would not have that account of that event.
The disciples only truly realized how divine Jesus was after He ascended back to heaven. Then they "worshipped" Him.
And Jesus is now, once again, totally inseparable even physically from God the Father, since flesh cannot enter heaven.Brenda, the book of John does not support the trinity, hun.
Sorry.
Again, the link I supplied has a very well written exegesis of the Gospels and Torah as to the trinity. They say it a lot clearer than I could ever put it forth. So here is an excerpt on the preamble to John.
I think you would find the entire book very interesting... and you would be wise to pull out your bible and check all their facts as they put them forth. The trinity is a polytheistic perversion, and set up by the Catholics to continue their building of their true religion, the Chaldean Mysteries.
THE PROLOGUE TO JOHN'S GOSPEL
We now come to the passage above all which Trinitarians claim teaches the pre-existence of Jesus from eternity and supports unquestionably the concept of the incarnation: "In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God;
all things were made through him,
and without him was not anything made that was made.
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth;
We have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father" (John 1.1-3,14).
From this passage Trinitarians deduce the following about Jesus:
1. The Word was Jesus in person
2. He personally existed from the beginning.
3. He was God, i.e. the second person of the Trinity.
4. He was the creator of all things, confirming that he was
God existing from the beginning.
5. He came down to earth to be clothed in human flesh.
It is important to bear at least two points in mind as this passage is considered. First, it needs to be viewed from the standpoint of the first century Christian, untrammelled as he was with all the later arguments and discussions that were based upon these verses. By the fourth century, after seemingly interminable conferences and thousands of closely reasoned manuscripts, a whole edifice of doctrine had been built upon these few words. But what would first century people make of them?
Secondly, John must not be interpreted in such a way as to disagree with or contradict the rest of the New Testament writers. There are some who maintain that whilst (as we have already seen) the earliest Christian writers had no place for the pre-existence of Christ or the incarnation, these ideas were even then being formulated in the early church and toward the end of the first century were expressed by John. To this view the present writers cannot subscribe. The Christian message was "once for all (time) delivered to the saints" (Jude 3) and any subsequent variations were examples of the false doctrine that the apostles predicted would develop in their midst. (60) Development in Christian belief certainly did occur towards the end of the first century and during the two centuries that followed, but this was at the expense of the purity of the original message and was roundly condemned and combated by the apostles and their immediate successors. In the writings of the New Testament the apostles speak with an original single voice. If, as we believe, and the church today claims to believe, all the New Testament writers were inspired by the Holy Spirit, to guide them into "all truth" (John 16:13), then the message must be unanimous. One inspired writer cannot be interpreted so as to contradict another.
Thus in view of the absence of proof of the doctrine of the trinity in the rest of the New Testament John's introduction needs to be examined very closely before accepting that it is a departure from the then universally held belief in the unity of God and the subordination of His Son.
THE 'WORD' OR 'LOGOS'
For an understanding of this passage the meaning of the Greek Logos, translated 'Word', is crucial. It was the Logos that was with God in the beginning, indeed, was God. And it was this Logos that became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ.
Logos is a flexible word with a range of meanings. It has given rise to several of our everyday words. It is often combined with another term to mean 'words' or 'a treatise' about a particular subject. For example 'biology', the study of living things, literally means "words about life" (Greek bios = life and logos = word). We use the word 'logic' to describe the reasoning process. And 'word' and 'reason' are the primary meanings of the word as defined by a standard Greek lexicon (61) which contains the following entry for Logos:
I. The word by which the inward thought is expressed: also
II. The inward thought or reason itself.
Logos is therefore correctly translated 'word', but has the particular meaning of expressing an idea that is in the speaker's mind rather than referring merely to words as such (the Greek has a different term for a 'word' as a part of speech). In the New Testament logos occurs frequently, and is the regular term for the word of God as spoken or written by Jesus and the apostles. There are some three hundred occasions where logos occurs in the original of the New Testament, and it is translated 'word' on about two thirds of these. But logos is also variously translated by other terms which express the underlying idea of reason or spoken thoughts, as the following examples show (with the translation of logos in italics):
"Therefore let us leave the elementary doctrines of Christ" (Hebrews 6:1).
"Jesus said to them, I will ask you a question" (Mark 11:29).
"For here the saying holds true ..." (John 4:37).
"What is this conversation which you are holding with each other ..." (Luke 24:17).
"In the first book, O Theophilus ..." (Acts 1:1).
"You have neither part nor lot in this matter" (Acts 8:21).
"If it were a matter of wrong ... reason would that I should bear with you" (Acts 18:14, AV).
From this usage it can be seen that there are two ideas contained in the word logos: the unexpressed thought in the mind, and the thought expressed in speech.
'LOGOS' IN FIRST CENTURY CHRISTIAN THOUGHT
It is fortunate for our understanding of this word that we have the writings of Philo, a Jew who was contemporary with the early Christians. We learn from him that the logos, and especially the divine logos, was the subject of much discussion throughout the non-Christian world of the first century. He refers extensively to it in his writings and so we can gain the sense in which it was used in apostolic times. In one passage Philo writes:
"... 'logos' has two aspects, one resembling a spring, the other its outflow; 'logos' in the understanding resembles a spring, and is called 'reason', while utterance by mouth and tongue is like its outflow, and is called 'speech' (Migr. 70-85).
But, as this analogy suggests, the two meanings can merge into each other and the distinction between thought and speech can become blurred. Thus a comprehensive definition of logos is thought coming to expression in speech.
Philo also shows that the idea of the logos was developed further to include not only expression of thoughts by speech but by action as well. He expresses the idea that all created things were originally in the mind of God only, and this logos or plan was then put into effect by His creative acts. Because man (unaided by revelation) can see God only in a limited sense by viewing creation, the logos makes up the deficiency by describing what man can know of God. He uses another analogy from nature:
".. to use Philo's favourite sun and light symbolism, the Logos is to God as the corona is to the sun, the sun's halo which man can look upon when he cannot look directly on the sun itself. That is not to say that the logos is God as such, any more than the corona is the sun as such, but the Logos is that alone which may be seen of God" (62)
The same writer goes on to summarise Philo's understanding (and therefore probably the first century Jewish understanding) of the Logos:
"God is unknowable by man, except in a small degree by the creation, but the Logos expresses God's ideas to man. There is no idea of personality attached to the Logos." "The Logos seems to be nothing more for Philo than God himself in his approach to man, God himself insofar as he may be known by man" (63)
'LOGOS' AND THE OLD TESTAMENT
Philo was a Jew with an inevitably strict adherence to the monotheism of God and a devout belief in the Jewish scriptures, our Old Testament. It is far from surprising therefore that his views on the Logos, together with those of his Jewish contemporaries, are clearly based on that authority. There the Word of God is continually used to describe the inspired prophetic utterances by which God's thoughts were conveyed to His people. "The word of the Lord came unto me" is the almost standard introduction to the prophets' messages. The Word of God is also frequently equated not only with God's thoughts and speech, but also with the acts that follow from them. So we find that His creative acts, His control of creation, His purpose in creation, and His declaration of that purpose to man are all attributed to the Word. It is significant that in many of these instances when the Hebrew was translated into Greek Logos was used as the equivalent to word.
Thus it was the Word or Logos, the plan of God in action, that was instrumental in creation:
"By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and all their host by the breath of his mouth". "For he spoke, and it came to be; he commanded, and it stood forth." (Psalm 33:6,9).
The same Word controls the elements:
"He sends forth his command to the earth; his word runs swiftly. He casts forth his ice like morsels; who can stand before his cold? He sends forth his word and melts them; he makes his wind to blow, and the waters flow" (Psalm 147:15,17-18).
Isaiah expresses the relationship between the Word of God and His plan for the earth:
"For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and return not thither but water the earth, making it bring forth and sprout, giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater, so shall my word be that goes forth from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and prosper in the thing for which I sent it" (Isaiah 55:10-11).
The Word, then, is the thoughts and purpose of God in action, either by direct revelation through His prophets or in creating and maintaining the earth to achieve that purpose. Although at first sight it might be thought that the references above give the idea of a separate existence for the Word, closer examination shows that personality is in no way suggested; it is only an idiom of speech that speaks of the Word being sent or doing something.
THE SPIRIT OF GOD AND THE WISDOM OF GOD
Alongside the use of Word in the Old Testament to describe God's activity in creation or revelation are two other equivalent words: Spirit and Wisdom. These too are described as being the agents of creation. The Spirit is another term for the power of God, the 'power of the Most High' as it is called in Luke 1:35. In the Genesis record of the creation it was "the Spirit of God" that moved over the face of the waters, and then God's Word brought things into being:
"Darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. And God said, 'Let there be light'; and there was light" (Genesis 1:2-3).
This equivalence of Word and Spirit is seen in many instances. Whilst the psalmist could say "by the word of the Lord the heavens were made" (33:6), another psalm says "When thou sendest forth thy Spirit they are created; and thou renewest the face of the ground" (104:30). So the Spirit of God and the Word of God are often alternative terms.
The same can be said of the Wisdom of God. It was also termed the instrument of creation: "The Lord by wisdom founded the earth" (Proverbs 3:19). And this same Wisdom (or Spirit or Word) is personified in Proverbs and shown to be God's agent of creation. In Greek and Hebrew the words for wisdom are feminine, and so in personification is represented as a woman (on the other hand logos is masculine, hence the NT pronoun 'he'):
"Does not wisdom call, does not understanding raise her voice? ... I, wisdom, dwell in prudence ...
The Lord created me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of old. ...
When he established the heavens, I was there .. when he marked out the foundations of the earth,
then I was beside him, like a master workman,
and I was daily his delight,
rejoicing before him always,
rejoicing in his inhabited world, and delighting in the sons of men" (Proverbs 8:1,12,22f).
The language here is clearly personification, a figure of speech in which an abstract idea is given the attributes of a person. None would suggest that there was a female deity called Wisdom who was formed by God in the beginning and who then created the world. It is important not to confuse personification with personalisation.
Barclay, one of the most respected Greek scholars of our generation, sums up the first century relationship of logos, Word and Spirit in Jewish thought that formed the background to John's use of logos in his gospel:
"First, God's Word is not only speech; it is power. Second, it is impossible to separate the ideas of Word and Wisdom; and it was God's Wisdom which created and permeated the world which God made". (64)
To sum up so far. We have seen that the Word of God or Logos is a term used in scripture and by Jewish writers living in the first century to describe the thoughts and plan of God being put into action. It was applied to the original acts of creation and also to the redemptive purpose God has with the earth. The Logos through the ministry of the prophets supplied the essential understanding of God that was not available simply from perusal of his creative acts. The term is used alternatively with Spirit and Wisdom, and in no case is there a suggestion that any of these had a separate personality, i.e. were an actual person.
This is the essential setting of the prologue of John's gospel record. Any interpretation of the prologue must be incorrect if it fails to acknowledge this background and attempts to impose on John's words a meaning that his original readers probably would not have readily understood. To divorce the prologue from its Old Testament roots, let alone its New Testament contemporaries, is to set off on the wrong path to its understanding.
THE 'WORD' OF JOHN'S PROLOGUE
It is into this background of Old Testament teaching on the Word of God, and the first century Jewish understanding of it based on those sacred writings, that the prologue to John's gospel fits neatly into place:
"In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God;
All things were made through him, and
without him was not anything made that was made"
(John 1:1-3)
We can see how John draws on all the Old Testament teaching we have just considered. Wisdom is personified in Proverbs 8 (see above) as saying that she was in the beginning, that she was with God, and that she was His instrument in creation. The Word of God created the heavens (Psalm 33:6), so did the Spirit as described in Job 26:13. The language clearly is of figure and metaphor, of personification, not actual personality. And John is saying exactly the same of the Logos or Word. No Jewish reader brought up on the writings of the prophets would have deduced from John's introduction that he was alluding to a person who had existed with God from all time. They would see it instead as a continuation of the imagery by which the Word or Wisdom or the Spirit those manifestations of God which are inseparable from Him are described as putting God's intentions into effect.
Bearing in mind the meaning of Logos as the thoughts and intentions of God translated into action, we can see that what John is saying is that from the beginning God had a plan a plan that was as inseparable from Him as is a thought from the person thinking it thus, 'the Word was God'. That plan necessitated the creation of the world, and so it could be said, in line with the language of the Old Testament, that the Logos was the original creative force.
To some readers of the English translations the use of the pronoun 'he' in referring to the Logos indicates that a person is intended. But this is only a quirk of translation. Along with some modern languages ancient Greek and Hebrew had masculine or feminine nouns, with the pronoun being literally 'he' or 'she' respectively. In the majority of cases these pronouns are translated by the neuter 'it'. When Tyndale translated the passage in 1525 he used "it" rather than "he", but the translators of the AV did not follow him in this respect, as was their usual custom (about 90% of the AV is Tyndale's translation). (65) It is understandable that translators with a trinitarian bias should have taken the opportunity to render the pronoun as 'he' in the case of the masculine Word of John 1 and of the Comforter or Counsellor in John 14, but there is clearly no such intention in the original language. On this Dunn says of what he terms the 'poem' of the John 1 prologue:
".. we are dealing with personifications rather than persons, personified actions of God rather than an individual divine being as such. The point is obscured by the fact that we have to translate the masculine Logos as 'he' throughout the poem. But if we translated logos as 'God's utterance' instead, it would become clearer that the poem did not necessarily intend the Logos in vv1-13 to be thought of as a personal divine being" (66)
"THE WORD BECAME FLESH"
Until the time of Jesus the word of God had been revealed through God's prophets. But this was essentially an intermittent activity. The prophets were often raised up to meet an express need at the time and each concentrated on God's message of guidance or reproof, whilst at the same time looking to the future and giving glimpses of the overall plan of God with mankind. In this sense their ministry was fragmentary and partial. In none of the prophets could it be said that the word became flesh, but was rather manifested through flesh.
But in Jesus the Word became flesh God's plan materialised in all its fulness. Originally His plan to create a race of mighty beings in whom He could be perfectly manifested (67) had only been an idea, a concept in his mind. Then He put the first stages of this plan into action by creating the world and everything in it. But his plan necessitated a redeemer to come in the likeness of humanity. So the Plan, the Word, became flesh in the person of Jesus.
Jesus is the very centre of God's plan for the earth. All God's intentions come to a focus in him. There was no question with him of a partial manifestation of God's word as had occurred through the prophets, but Jesus became a complete manifestation of his Father's thoughts and intentions: the "Logos became flesh". Note the use of 'became' Jesus was not the word from the beginning in the sense that he pre-existed as a person, but he was the 'word made flesh'. He was God's Plan coming into action. He was the complete expression of all the saving attributes of the Father "full of grace and truth".
Looked at in this way the way of the first century Jew or Gentile to whom John was writing there was no hint of the personal pre-existence of Jesus, no suggestion that he was Very God clothed in human flesh. The simplest and most straightforward view of Jesus that such a reader would gain from this introduction was that Jesus was the realisation of God's plan for the earth. He would see that Christ's being the Word made flesh is no reason for suggesting his personal divinity any more than it would be correct to say that the prophets were God because the Logos was revealed through them. This understanding of the Word made Flesh becomes all the more acceptable because it is completely in harmony with the rest of the early Apostolic writings about Jesus. The greatest apparent anomaly is removed and all the apostles are seen to speak with one voice. It was only later, when influences outside of original Christianity began to obtrude that John 1:1-18 began to be taken as evidence of the personal pre-existence of the Messiah and the incarnation.
Barclay confirms this understanding in passages in which he expounds John's use of logos without giving it the trinitarian slant that for centuries has been attached to its meaning:
"Logos has two meanings, which no one English word can express. Logos means word, and Logos means mind. A word is the expression of thought. Therefore Jesus is the expression of the thought of God. Or to take the other meaning, in Jesus we see the mind of God ... In Jesus the mind of God becomes a person". (68)
"In Greek logos means two things it means word and it means reason ... The Logos of God, the mind of God, is responsible for the majestic order of the world .... He (John) said to the Greeks, "All your lives you have been fascinated by this great, guiding, controlling mind of God. The mind of God has come to earth in the man Jesus. Look at him and you will see what the mind and thought of God are like" (69)
"By calling Jesus the logos, John said two things about Jesus. (a) Jesus is the creating power of God come to men. He does not only speak the word of knowledge; he is the word of power. He did not come so much to say things to us, as to do things for us. (b) Jesus is the incarnate mind of God. We might well translate John's words, 'The mind of God became a man'. A word is always 'the expression of a thought' and Jesus is the perfect expression of God's thoughts for men.
He then makes a plea that the present writers heartily endorse:
We should do well to rediscover and to preach again Jesus Christ as the logos, the Word of God" (70)
AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH
It might be felt that whilst the above explanation might be understood by, say, an educated Jewish Christian of the educational stamp of Philo and well versed in the concept of the divine Logos, Spirit and Wisdom as revealed in the Old Testament, to the average reader the idea might have been well above his head. So it is legitimate to ask if there is an even simpler way of expressing the thoughts contained in the prologue to John's gospel record.
It seems to the present writers that few if any of the expositors of John's prologue have ever sat down and asked the question "Why did John write it?" A prologue by definition is a preface to the main work, an introduction that sets the scene for what follows. It seems never to have been asked how John's prologue serves this purpose. One way to answer this question might be to discover any special feature that is common to both the prologue and the rest of the gospel. And such a feature is easy to find. If there is one characteristic of John's gospel above all others it is that it records the words of Jesus. Whilst the other gospel writers record the actions and many of the sayings and addresses of Jesus, John is unique in concentrating on the words of Jesus rather than the record of his life.
A glance through the gospel will readily demonstrate this. Chapter three records Christ's conversation with Nicodemus, and chapter four his dialogue with the woman of Samaria. Chapter five is devoted to a discussion about sabbath breaking that led on to Jesus explaining the source of his authority. Chapter six records the miracle of feeding the 5000 as a prelude to a long discourse on the true bread from heaven. Chapters seven and eight record Christ's words to the Jews in the Temple. Chapter nine describes the interchange between him and the Jewish leaders after the miracle of giving sight to the blind man. Chapter ten contains his parable of the shepherd and his sheep. And chapters thirteen to seventeen detail his conversation with his disciples and his prayer to God immediately before his arrest. Clearly John's emphasis throughout his gospel is on the words of Jesus.
And in those discourses Jesus emphasises that it is the words that he speaks that are important:
"He who hears my word and believes him who sent me, has eternal life" (5:24).
"If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples" (8:31).
"He who rejects me and does not receive my sayings has a judge; the word that I have spoken will be his judge on the last day" (12:48).
"I have given them thy word" (17:14).
And these words are not Christ's own, they are God's words:
"The word which you hear is not mine but the Father's who sent me" (John 14:24).
Can it be merely a coincidence therefore that the Prologue to this record of Christ's sayings is itself about the word of God. It must be reasonable to expect that the use of word in the prologue should be similar to its use in the body of the work.
If we then look again at the prologue as if through the eyes of an early reader we can see John's train of thought that made it a suitable introduction to what followed? Moulton in his "Modern Reader's Bible", which lays out the text according to its literary form, divides the prologue into three sections:
I
"In the beginning was the Word:
And the Word was with God:
And the Word was God (1:1)
II
And the Word became flesh,
And dwelt among us,
(and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father),
Full of grace and truth (1:14)
III
No man hath seen God at any time:
The only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father,
He hath declared him" (1:18)
There is a simple connection between these three. In (I) is the statement that God from the beginning has had a plan or purpose or word inseparable from Him. It is a plan to make mortal men and women the eternal sons and daughters of God (verse 12). But because (III) man cannot learn from God direct there needed to be a means of 'declaring' the plan to man. This had been accomplished partially by the prophets of old (verse 17) but now especially in the work of His Son, the 'Word made flesh' (II). Having explained by this preamble the reason for Christ's coming, and ended it by the statement that Jesus declared God to man, he then proceeds in the rest of the book to record in detail those very words of God that are essential for man to know and act upon.
Thus the prologue to John's gospel can be seen to be similar to the introduction to the epistle to the Hebrews:
"In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. He reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature" (Hebrews 1:1-3).
Again the topic is the words of God, spoken first through prophets and then by his Son. And as in John, Christ is here shown to be a reflection of the glory of God, and His purpose through him the prime reason for the creation.
SUMMARY
In this section we have noted that, apart from a few occasions in the rest of Scripture which are easily explained, the great majority of the passages used to support the idea of Christ's personal pre-existence occur in the gospel record of John. When these are examined in the light of other scriptures, and in comparison with John's use of similar language to describe other situations that clearly have no implication of pre-existence, no support for the personal pre-existence of Jesus can be found. The prologue to John's gospel record was examined in detail, in the light of first century understanding of the logos, and the conclusion reached that to the original Christians the 'logos becoming flesh' was a way of saying that God's power and wisdom, and His long standing-intentions for man's redemption, were now being manifested in the person of Jesus. No personal pre-existence of the Saviour is demanded by the text or was envisaged by the writer.
http://dawnchristadelphians.net/books/trin/trinind.htm
Merry Christmas, Brenda. Hope you have been well.Thank you Tom! Merry Christmas to you also.
As far as the Trinity and your above explanation....I'll have to re-read it if I can. I don't see any confusion in my view of this. There is no separation within the Trinity; it is still one God, yes. Manifested in several ways. I have a couple of references that might answer your post, but right now I'm totally bushed after having dinner and the grandkids over (but had a great time!). I'd welcome prayers for my Mother's comfort, as she is very ill in the hospital. Hope you have an awesome Christmas and Happy New Year! Will talk later, God willing.Amen. Merry Christmas to you Tom and Brenda. I hope and pray that all mankind may come to realize the truth in the love and the words of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as he is in all of us binding us together and waiting to be revealed, carrying our shoulders that we may one day be one with him against the evil one and his minions. To God be the glory as we keep Jesus in our hearts or KJOH.
As Paul wrote, in perfect agreement with the terms of the "new covenant" and the "seal" in Christ's Spirit-active death on the cross, "The written law brings death, but the Spirit gives life".
2 Cor. 3:6
Only if priorily equipped by the Spirit can one identify the pre-Incarnation Savior in the books of the "old covenant" of whom there are quite a few.
Here is a very well penned look at the subject and it touches upon all the verses trinitarians throw up to defend that abomination of a practice.
http://dawnchristadelphians.net/books/trin/trinind.htm
*********
We (as Yahshua) all came from God
Ecclesiastes 12:7
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
Yahshua showed us that Humans can live a life of Love and Mercy, and spotless.
He loved God and wanted to obey and please him.
He was God's voice because he spoke only what God gave himBrenda,
In view of the radical change in distinction between "the Father" and the Son anticipated in the move from the use of "figures of speech" to plain language, as written in prophecy (Zech. 14: 6-9) and in the gospels (John 16: 25-33), I think we are required to update ourselves.
Don't you agree?Well put . Three beings one God , all inclusive
I agree They are One and separate but since God the son became man He did suffer and He did have a flesh body. He was tempted equally as we are and showed through the Spirit to resist temptation. Of course no one could equal Him but He was being a model for us to follow to do as He did for good life on earth and salvation to eternity.
The same can be said of Buddha, Krishna and Horus. Why do they recieve no credence?
It would clear things up greatly if you accept that our religions are, all, not true.
There is no need to try and make sense out of imaginary nonsense.Getitrite, whether or not it is true, I would still like to fully understand the the essence behind the suggestion.
Remember, knowledge is power - to avoid an intellectual discussion by merely disregarding it would be disadvantageous to your potential understanding of a subject, whether or not you agree or disagree with it.????????????????????????????????????
This is not an intellectual discussion.
But you can keep trying to make sense out of nonsense if you'd like. You have been given the most intelligent answer to this conundrum, yet you keep searching. The kind of knowledge you are seeking is not power, but more like MADNESS!Imagination is a very powerful part of our intellect, yet if one book causes the greatest bloodshed ever, more than mankind has ever known. It makes good sense not to be trapped by the bible.
I don't wish for this to turn into a does God exist or is Religion real kind of subject, I am more than happy to accept and understand an Atheists point of view, as I am to accept the point of view of a religious person.
I genuinely think it is naive to turn away the pursuit of any knowledge, no matter what subject it is on.
If we were all to follow this advice and leave the subject alone, then we would end up repeating past mistakes because no one would have learnt enough from the previous mistakes.
I would also argue Castlepaloma, that whilst you are correct in talking about bloodshed from Religion, I think the primary blame comes from man, not from the book. Further to this, religion has also done more charity work than any other institution in the world.. but that is a different subject for a different day.Could you explain to me what knowledge there is to be gained when trying to make an illogical, false assertion consistent with reality?
Please inform me as to how you see this as a pursuit of knowledge, whenever you have already disregarded the BEST possible answer...while proceeding into a quagmire of absurdities.Indeed I can. Knowledge of myths and legends is knowledge nonetheless. From that knowledge you can learn history and even moral lessons. In the same way, even if you do not believe in God or religion, knowledge in it can be useful. For example, if you had a greater knowledge of the question I have posed here - you could present a more convincing argument as to why you think what I am talking about is not worth learning. It is only once you have learnt something, that you can truly assess its value.
Knowledge of how to kill a man would in many cases be counter productive to society, but in some cases it may save a life, or a family members life.
My point is, any knowledge is good knowledge. You don't have to agree with what you learn, but you can still learn it nonetheless!
You are looking at the world for you truth; a nose evaluation of what comes in front of it.
Read the bible, look inside yourself. I am sure that any sane person can see enough good in the scriptures not to dismiss the entire bible or Christianity.
Do you have a replacement for society to live peacefully? Please don't reply if you are going to say that people will naturally get alone.You should check the white house archives for an update on the bloodshed book theory
getitrite: I would surely be nice if all of the "ATHEISTS" like yourself would keep your 1 cent worth to your self and stay out of Theological religious discussion. You choose not to believe in God. That's your choice, but why try to force your opinion upon others who could care less what kind of dribble you choose to spout.
Spoken like a true Christian. It's very thoughtful of you to keep us updated with good reasons why we wouldn't want to be a Christian, far better reasons than just not believing in God.
If you were to divide that which is perfect into a million pieces, every piece will be exactly the same as the whole.....
Thus realizing this Jesus said ...
..my father and I are one...
I am in the father and the father in me...
When yuo see me you see the father...
Meaning he is exactly as his father absolutly no difference no separation between him and his Father.
The christian concept of trinity is a misunderstanding of this would lead you astray..You have to separate between God's Spirit and God's flesh. God became flesh and dwelt among us. John 1:14 He was totally God and totally man at the same time.
God as a man experienced the flesh as we do yet without sin, He felt the same temptations we do and He experienced the same feelings we do, yet without sin.
This is why He prayed, because in His flesh He felt the need to pray and He felt the feelings that humans feel when we are in need or sick or in trouble. So it really was His flesh crying out to His Spirit, Not God praying to God. The flesh that God dwelt in was not God, it was human flesh. God was manifest in the flesh 1 Tim.3:16
As a man He prayed, He was hungry, He fasted, He felt sorrow and pain, He cried, etc. But as God He answered prayer, He fed the hungry, comforted the sorrowful, and healed the sick, etc.
And I will say something that will blow some people away, There is no such thing as a trinity concerning God.
God is One Spirit, and One person. There is not 3 distinct persons of God, but one distinct indivisible person of God.
This One God came down in human flesh and sacrificed His life for all humanity all by Himself!
There is only one sinless one, and that is God, and since it took the shedding of sinless blood for the salvation of man, God had to come Himself.
Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Fulfilled in Mattehw 1:21-23
21 - And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: ...
22 - Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
23 - Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, GOD WITH US.
Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: ...and his name shall be called ...The mighty God, The everlasting Father...
Jesus is The God
Jesus is The everlasting Father
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, ...and the Word was God.
John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,...
John 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him,...
John 8:24 ...for if ye believe not that I am he,(the Father) ye shall die in your sins.
John 8:27 They (Jews) understood not that he spake to them of the Father.
John 8:58 Jesus said unto them,...Before Abraham was, I am.
- I AM is God, this is why those Jews wanted to stone Him because He was telling them He was God.
John 10:31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
John 10:32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
John 10:33 The Jews answered him, saying,...because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
- Here again Jesus was telling them He was God, and again they wanted to stone Him.
2 Cor. 4:4 ...Christ, who is the image of God...
Col 1:15 (Jesus) ... is the image of the invisible God...
- This is how God was seen,
John 12:45 he that seeth me seeth him that sent me.
John 14:8 Philip saith Lord, shew us the Father...
John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, ..he that hath seen me hath seen the Father;...
1Tim. 3:16 ...great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh...
John 5:43 I am come in my Father's name...
Christ's name is Jesus who happens to be God, The everlasting Father.John 1:1 has a section that was left out. It says clearly that the Word was WITH God and that the Word WAS God. The essence (of being God) is the same, but there is some level of distinction. The Father would send another Comforter in Jesus' name. The Father, Son, and Spirit are all present at the baptism of Jesus. Genesis 1 says that that God said "Let US make man in OUR image and after OUR likeness...either this is bad grammar or it is saying something significant. Why emphasize this if it is not telling something significant about God.
John 17:22 says regarding those who would believe in Jesus: The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one. Are the members of the body of Christ absolutely one and the same with no distinctions whatsoever? Are there not differing personalities in the church? Christ defined his oneness with God in these terms. In John 17:5 Jesus asked the Father to glorify him with the glory that he had WITH the father before the world began.
All of this is problematic from a strict oneness position.
To answer the initial question, in John 10, people wanted to kill Jesus because he made himself out to be God. They understood the implications of his claims to be God, and wanted to execute him for blasphemy.Again you fail to separate the flesh from the Spirit.
Yes the Word was with God but the sum of that verse is "the Word was God"
You cannot separate the word from the one speaking. and the Word is not a second person.
The image of God is Christ, the flesh. God is a Spirit and cannot be seen, His image was the man Christ, that is why Christ said "He that seeth me seeth Him that sent me"
Hebrews 1:3 Christ is the express image of God's person...
or simply, Christ is the visible expression of God's personality
At the baptism of Jesus the Spirit descended in the form of a dove, this was not another person, this was a sign to John the baptist, God told John before he even baptized Jesus that, upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining on that this would be the Christ. So when John saw the Spirit descend upon Jesus, He knew that the One God said would come was here. and then God spoke a word of confirmation to John, this is my beloved Son....
This does not mean there are three persons.
But three manifestations of the One God.
As for John 17 I don't know exactly how to explain this at this time, but I do know it's still not three persons of God. The Church is made up of many, But God is not many He is One Spirit and One person.
Of course in John 10 that's why they wanted to stone Jesus, that was the point I made previously, He was telling the Jews that He was the Father.
vs 24-27A word cannot be separated from the one speaking, I will agree with this, but in the Greek, logos (word) means more than word in the common contemporary sense of word.
You mention failing to separate flesh from spirit. In all men, spirit and flesh are separate. Without a spirit, you have a lifeless body. So, therefore, the analogy that someone has mentioned about Jesus' flesh praying to his spirit makes no sense, because flesh does nothing without a spirit. The absence of a spirit is death. Jesus speaks of loving the Father and the Father loving him. Manifestations do not love. People (or beings with traits like love, etc.) love.The Logos (Word) is still God. and they cannot be separated.
God in His humanity prayed to the (S)pirit, not flesh all by itself.
I'm speaking about God becoming a man as we are, He fully experienced living in the flesh.
When I say separate the Spirit (God) from the flesh, I mean when Jesus prayed it was in His humanity that He prayed, in His humanity He experienced temptation, sufferings, hunger, loneliness, etc.
But as God He answered prayers, Forgave sins, raised the dead, healed the sick, etc.But that doesn't really make sense, because even if he was in humanity, he was still supposedly God, and let's remember omnipotent, so why would he a. need to experience these things human, and b. do it anyway, because praying to himself doesn't seem to make sense. Especially in Gethsemane where he literally was praying by himself, for himself, to himself!
It was necessary for Him to come in the flesh because of redemption.
It would take sinless, innocent blood to redeem man, and God is the only one that is sinless, Since God is a Spirit and cannot shed blood, He came in the flesh and sacrificed His life for us.
Even though He came in the flesh He had a human nature, and that human nature had to pray to be submitted to the will of God.
" And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross" Phil.2:8
And having a human will, it was a hard thing to submit to, going to the cross.
So God totally humbled Himself to go through the human process to become the supreme sacrifice for all mankind, and while in that human process He prayed.
Sorry, I'm not sure I'm saying this as clear as I'd likeIt is because God is omnipotent and omnipresent that he sent Jesus, God incarnate as human, in order to lead people back to God. As three-dimensional beings, humans would not know how to relate to God as himself. God didn't need to experience being human, it was Man who needed to be able to relate to God. Jesus in this three dimensional world was human form. When Jesus prayed in Gethsemane, it was his humanity that was afraid and made him pray to his Father.
and this 'humanity' was no more than all the neuro-circuitry causing flesh to respond to the situation. Jesus body relayed its anxiety to God and God needed to keep it under control. Its like when you get to close to an edge and look down how your stomach feels all weird. Flesh reacts and we experience that reaction - flesh needs to be controlled.
When we think of prayer we sometimes think of our prayers but i imagine jesus' time was spent differently.
Very interesting points. Thank you very much.
Thank you Chevy, this is the best answer yet, full of proof and reasoning. Much obliged.
Hi chuckbi, I agree with chevy in the aspect of Jesus being one with God and this is in the bible in John 1:3 and Colossians 1:16, and that he is one with God during creation, and the Holy Spirit is also one with God as he too is the Spirit of God, and the power that is passed on to all the saints and those who believe and are obedient to God and become one with God in Christ Jesus. Sounds complicated but as in Matthew 19:26, with man all these things are possible, but 'with God all things are possible,' as God is all powerful, omnipotent and omniscient as he is everywhere taking different forms at one given time, and being in the spirit makes no account of time as everything is timeless, as in Saint Peter's account of the last judgment where a thousand years or so on earth can be equivalent to small amount of time as far as God is concerned with the timelessness of everything. Jesus in flesh as man feels the pain in crucifixion. It's only when we are in spirit that we feel no pain as we have no flesh in us. That is why, Saint Paul keeps on telling us that only when we die in our flesh will we be able to better understand the meaningless of the flesh and of all material things in this life for when we experience death and separate from our body, our spirit feels no pain whatsoever, but everything else is real and vivid in our sight as explained in this video about a man who had an NDE or a near death experience, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRSjzY0s … r_embedded
An interesting answer Edwinoel, thank you for your input. Have a merry Christmas.
You too chuckbi and to all the peoples of the world since we were all created by the one true God, our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, being one with the Father and the Holy Spirit. Hope you have learned about 'laminin,' the protein molecule binding the human body in the form of a cross. God made us all and Jesus being one with God in creation, he made sure his cross will be revealed in laminin that science and all mankind may see the connection of our being and that Christ Jesus loves us all and wants to save us all, and right now, Satan is the only stumbling block since he has been successful eluding and alluring many to other gods including material greed and lust and even false prophets who deny the truth about Jesus. It is high time that we unmask the evil one and save the many who are being duped into hell. Show our love for all men, especially those who have long become innocent victims of false beliefs by showing them the way to the light of Christ, To the true God be the glory as we keep Jesus in our hearts.
Then why does laminin do this?
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-03-ill … ation.html
I agree with you.
Jesus was a humble servant of the Creator God; he was never a god or a son of god in literal terms.
He created nothing; everything remained the same as before.I do not agree with this, although I cannot deny that it is possible. I am assuming in my question that Jesus is in fact the son of God, but just not necessarily God himself.
If Mary was not a wife of god; then Jesus cannot be a son of god in literal terms.
I think you will agree on this.Don't forget the virgin birth they did not have sperm banks or DNA back in those days, only magic to make the spirit of man..
what resulted from mary was a flesh and blood body. Humans birth humans. That's what was necessary. Now since the Holy spirit conceived the birth - my thoughts are a zygote and not just the male sperm - which is another way of sayin goddunit. Then Mary was just an incubator for the body which God would inhabit.
Those who understand Gods power do not see marys virginity as being broken by God and i am sure joseph saw her virginity broken while he sired their next child, otherwise there would not have been more after that second child.
Wrong,
John 1:10 - He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.Oh really! John was with Jesus and wrote the things which had seen and heard from Jesus, so I guess I will have to write you off as the one wrong
the term world here, means jewish society - its not our planet. How can a planet know him? (and the world (jewish society) knew him not). The world was made by him means.. the jewish society was impacted by him for he was in the world (jewish society).
Jesus is the son of God, (a word which should make the distinction of the two obvious). He is one of the three individual beings who created the heavens and the Earth. All of them are united in purpose, and share a oneness in unity on a divine level.
As a man and wife are to be "one", so are the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. So because a man and his wife are "one" in a biblical sense of the word it does not mean they are one entity, or of one substance.
Note that the scripture states "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1
Here it states very plianly that the word was WITH God, (hence there are two entities present). It also says the word was God, (Both entities have the title of God). And later it says the word was made flesh, (the birth of Christ).chuckbl
Gracious. Although this is easy enough to explain, it is hard for many to understand. The following scripture explains it.
1 Timothy 3:16 KJV
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
God knew He had to send the people that they could "see". so
as the text says,
He became man in the flesh.
Just if i (God in the Spirit)
SEEN of angles,
He preached unto the Gentiles
was believed on in the world
and was received in glory.
Just my two cents worth. I know there are goin to be those that say "nay"Thanks mom101, very clear answer and much appreciated.
I can' say "nay" to that if "received in glory" refers to drawing everyone to himself through "the kind of death Christ suffered."
(John 12: 32-33)
The reference is to Christ's meritorious distinction of being "the first and the last" in a Spirit-active, perfect and diacritical death on the cross. It is personally verifiable!
(Rev. 5)
No.
My God, is one God... and Jesus Christ is His Son and our Saviour.
Anyone who thinks they can prove that Christ and God are one, please do.
The trinity is niether inferred, nor taught, in the Gospels... as even the Catholic Scholars admit... it, the trinity, is not in there. Do not be led to believe in polytheism. God is One God, and Jesus Christ is the Son of the Living God.
And no, I have not read the previous four pages... but will start now."When that day comes, fresh water will flow from Jerusalem ... all year round. Then the LORD will be king over all the earth; everyone will worship him as God and know him by the same name."
(Zech. 14: 8-9)
According to the Scriptures in general, and the gospel in particular, "that day" and "fresh water" refer to the day of God's final self-revelation in Christ's characteristic death on the cross with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, respectively.
Of course, there is not an room for the doctrine of the trinity in this context."Anyone who thinks they can prove that Christ and God are one, please do. "
I posted scriptures above that show that Christ was actually God Himself manifest in the flesh.You can permalink them, or eventually I will get to them. But I will keep your name in mind. I am a lil busy round here and moving slowly. But I will get to them.
I would imagine every one of them, your verses, are addressed in the link I supplied above if you want to read my reply now. I hold the same viwew as the authors when it comes to the trinity and the verses you all use to support it.
And I always find it amazing that people state the trinity is in the bible, when even those who devised it and supprt it, the Catholics, admit it is not in there.
Very interesting.
"All scripture is inspired by God, and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
The Authority of the Church.
But some will say "Surely, this is also the position of the Church. No Christian would deny that the Bible is the ultimate source of appeal in theological questions."
It is true that this is the theoretical position, but in practice the authority of the Church itself is given equal or even greater weight than that of Scripture. One of the dominant ecclesiastical figures of the nineteenth century was John Newman, an Anglican vicar who in later life switched to Rome and eventually became a Catholic Cardinal. If he is at all remembered today it is for his hymn "Lead, kindly Light", but in his day he was well known for his prolific doctrinal writings. He wrote about the doctrine of the Trinity as follows:
"It may startle those who are but acquainted with the popular writings of this day, yet, I believe, the most accurate consideration of the subject will lead us to acquiesce in the statement as a general truth, that the doctrines in question (viz., the Trinity and the Incarnation) have never been learned merely from Scripture. Surely the sacred volume was never intended, and is not adapted to teach us our creed; however certain it is that we can prove our creed from it, when it has once been taught us ... From the very first, the rule has been, as a matter of fact, for the Church to teach the truth, and then appeal to Scripture in vindication of its own teaching". 3
Notice the clear implication of these words. The Church formulates the doctrines and then appeals to Scripture in an attempt to support them. This is very different from coming to the Bible with an open mind in order to learn what it teaches.4
Another Catholic priest, the Rev James Hughes, was even more outspoken about the real source of Church doctrine in general and the Trinity in particular:
"My belief in the Trinity is based on the authority of the Church: no other authority is sufficient". 5
This is a bold, even audacious claim. It alleges that the Church has greater authority in formulating its doctrines and traditions than God*s own revelation to mankind. This simply cannot be right. Way back in the days of Israel*s prophets God castigated those who disregarded His words:
"Should not a people enquire of their God? ... To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, they have no light of dawn". (Isaiah 8:19-20 NIV)
Undoubtedly, then, if the doctrine of the Trinity cannot be reconciled with the whole tenor of Scripture, it should immediately be dismissed as spurious—no matter what the Church teaching and centuries of tradition may be.
In those comments of Newman and Hughes do we detect some uneasiness among the advocates of the doctrine of the Trinity? If the biblical evidence for the belief is unassailable why does the Church need to justify the doctrine by invoking its own authority? Such a claim suggests that the Bible*s support for the Church doctrine is, to put it mildly, not as strong as is generally supposed. A later chapter 6 will show that many theologians down the centuries have admitted that the biblical evidence for the Trinity is indeed very weak.
But not all Christians are members of an Established Church. Many non-conformists and evangelical groups claim to have by-passed the Church and to have gained their teaching directly from Scripture. And they, almost without exception, believe the doctrine of the Trinity. Yet how accurate is their claim that they are guided solely by the Bible and not by church tradition? Professor F.F. Bruce, the noted Manchester University theologian, keenly observed:
"People who adhere to sola scriptura (as they believe) often adhere in fact to a traditional school of interpretation of sola scriptura. Evangelical Protestants can be as much servants of tradition as Roman Catholics or Greek Orthodox Christians; only they don*t realise that it is ‘tradition*" 7
The seeker after truth, then, will test every belief by Scripture, and will accept nothing that cannot be clearly demonstrated by the Word of God.
But in relying exclusively on the Bible for our understanding of God we must also recognise the fact that the Bible is an ancient book—one of the oldest in the world—and that it was originally written in languages now unfamiliar to most of us, and to a people of an entirely different culture and society. The only way that ordinary people today can understand the Bible is because it has been translated into their own language. Recognition of the fact that the English Bible is a translation — for ease of reading often a rather free translation—must always be borne in mind in our attempt to probe its teaching about God.
The Trinity a ‘Mystery*
This leads us on to mention another frequent misapprehension about a word often used in relation to the Trinity. We refer to the word ‘mystery*. The doctrine of the Trinity is termed a mystery, and the implication is that the relationship between God and Jesus is therefore beyond our understanding. This is based upon the conventional meaning of the word, which implies something inexplicable or unintelligible. Bishop Beverage in his Private Thoughts on Religion described the Trinity as the "mystery of mysteries" and went on to call it a "heart-amazing, thought devouring, inconceivable mystery". Such a view may have been prompted by a passage about the coming of Jesus in the writings of the Apostle Paul:
"Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of our religion: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory" (1 Timothy 3:16).
But by using the word translated mystery is Paul really saying that Christ's appearance among men is something impossible for us to understand? Not at all. His word had a slightly different meaning. Rather than describing something inexplicable it meant "what is known only to the initiated" (Young's translation). So the idea is that of secret information which once divulged is clearly understood by the recipient. Jesus used the word in this sense concerning his parables. The crowd could not see the underlying meaning of the stories, but Jesus explained them to his disciples with the comment:
"To you it has been given to know the secrets (AV mysteries) of the kingdom of God; but for others they are in parables" (Luke 8:10).
So Biblical mysteries are in fact Biblical revelations that all who read with care and understanding can readily grasp. The whole purpose of the Bible is to reveal, not to conceal. This is particularly true of this topic of the relationship between God and His son Jesus. If we allow the whole Bible to speak and if we listen to its voice to the exclusion of all others, this "mystery" becomes crystal clear. 8
http://dawnchristadelphians.net/books/trin/trinind.htm
I find it interesting also, that the church which so resembles the Chaldean Mystery Religion, should need a "Mystery" around which to gather in awe.I have read zero verses here that prove the trinity.
Zero.You're right, because there aren't any!
TMMason
while on the campaign trail, one of the hopefuls (turned elected) came up to a waitress and called her sweetie or sugar or something like that. I, as a female, took offense to that. He, in my opinion, thought he was above her, as a waitress.
There is a descriptive word for that but it has escaped my thinking cap right now. Nonetheless, it was rude.You find my statements that the trinity is myth made by man rude, arrogant and condescending, (I would be the word to be)?
If the truth of the matter, that the trinity is not inferred, nor found in the Gospels is, "rude", then I do not know what to say to anyone. Shall I not speak the truth because it offends someone?
Nope! Not I. To hell with PC. Truth is truth, error is error. They are not inter-changable.TMMason, no. You misunderstand.
The statements are just that, statements.
They are your opinion. All fine and good.
Condescending. That's the word I was lookin for.
I was referring to the hun remark of your statement. It just struck me wrong, and I felt sad for the one it was made to.
Hughes. Newman. Young. Good fine people. I suppose. I have never met them, even thru their writings.
I was fortunate to have parents that taught me to think for myself, to form my own opinions. I found the ladder inside that box that so many fall prey to long ago.
The Bible is full of verses that teach the trinity. That is just that. Many verses have been mentioned here. Some agree. Some do not.Brenda is a very good friend of mine... so it is really none of your bussiness to be insulted by my referring to her with a term of endearment such as hun. I also am sorry that you are so insecure in your womanhood that a benign non-gender descriptive term of endearment would so throw you into a spin.
And as far as thinking for ones self... I am happy to hear that you know how to. So many in this day do not.
But, I have no reason to sit here and re-type exactly what I would say to you all, when I can clip and paste. And as I said earlier, these gentlemen put it in very clear and easy terms for any laymen to understand.
They cover every verse used by trinitarians and the Chaldean catholics. Even those that the Catholic scholars deliberately changed and added to. Gee that was nice of them.
Besides that.. to sit here and think we can get to the truth of this matter in a paragraph or two is simply BS. Many a scholar and laymen have spent their lives contemplating this question... and still no concensus. This writing addresses all the verses in question and takes the time to review translation, as well as transliteration, sources, first century Jewish thought, etc...
So anyone truly interested in this subject should take the time to read thru the doc. But I am sure many will simply wag thier fingers and tongues about it while dismissing it out of hand. Never having a clue that things are not as they have been told. Simply because they will not look into it.
http://dawnchristadelphians.net/books/trin/trinind.htm
All you trinitarians should also take note of the fact that no Jew nor Hebrew, first century or prior, or even today, would ever attribute the trinity to God, the Holy Ghost, and the Messiah. Never! Not in a million years. They would call it what it is... Polytheism.
The trinity is no more than a restructure of the Chaldean, Babylonian and Egyptian Mystery religion. Osiris (Father), Ishtar (Mother/Creating force - holy spirit), and Horace (Son). The son, born from the father, who has become the son. What a perversion.There is no trinity in the Bible.
Plain and simple. As I said even the Catholics know this to be a fact.
*******************************
There is only one God and none beside him.
Yahshua was not God.
The Holy Ghost, the Shekhinah, is the sacred wind..the power of God and is not a person.Good morning Deborah
I would like to know more of the Shekhinah. The sacred wind.
Hope you are having a beautifully blessed day.
GOD Jesus Holy Ghost or (Spirit)
By the way I think Ghost is a better picture of what is to come. But to understand How and why all of these Plus many, many more are God. You have to understand the complete story Of our Creator's. Who is as much a being as we all are who found Himself alone. And then Created or spoke into existence everything in the the World His world. according to His point of view. His point of view was He did it all at once for time was never a factor for Him.
God is the very air you Breathe and the ground you walk upon there is nowhere you can go to escape his reach Hell is a Place that has never existed and shall never exist for GOD doesn't reside there and Nothing else can. Hell Is a description of where GOD is Not and This is a Place that He wishes None would choose to go. Its all a matter of Time and Condition of choice which Satan Believe that he can sustain a world such as GOD's World he seeks to send you by your own admissions and choice to Hell Him him as He is the only One sentenced to go until the Great White Throne of Judgment. Jesus IS going to be there as the Sole decider of your choice yes or no that he Knew you do you Know him? GOD the Father GOD the Creator God the Son God the Holy Ghost the form of the man (Flesh that walked among men) in whatever Body Spirit or flesh or something else from that point after we who choose will forever be as The alpha and the Omega is in the same likeness or form. this is why God is able to say that if you have seen the Son you have seen the Father you will never be able to see the form that was in this flesh body it is to prefect that it shines brighter than any sun or star. you would instantly be melted away.We are all the same beings as God. Jesus tried to tell his desciples this, but they chose to follow him and not his teachings and missed the bus all together.
Hope this helps! (I did some research on this myself and this is what I wrote). I've included lots of verses for you to reference. But one of the most clear is in John when Jesus says that if you have seen Him, you have seen God, because He and the Father are One.
JESUS IS UNIQUE IN THAT HE IS THE “GOD-MAN;” FULLY HUMAN AND FULLY GOD—INTEGRATED INTO ONE PERSON, CONSTITUTING BOTH NATURES. THE WORK HE ACCOMPLISHED RECONCILED HUMANKIND TO GOD, SAVED THEM FROM THE PUNISHMENT OF SIN, AND DESTROYED THE WORK OF THE DEVIL.
JESUS WAS FULLY HUMAN
Matthew 1:1, 16; Luke 2:12; Matt. 2:11; Luke 2:43; Matt. 8:27; Mark 2:7; Matt. 26:12; Hebrews 10:10; 1 Peter 2:24; Matt. 4:2; Mark 11:12; Luke 7:34; John 4:6; John 4:7; Matt. 11:19; Matt. 11:19; John 11:35; Col 1:15; Luke 2:40; Mat. 4:1; Hebrews 5:8; Luke 23:46
I believe that Jesus was fully human. Born of a woman, He was created in the image of God and was called the “Son of Man.” He shared in the limitations of his brothers, as he was a fragile infant and a young boy before He was a man. He grew in wisdom and stature and had to learn obedience. He had a physical body and was hungry, thirsty, ate food, and drank. He became tired and wept. He was tempted and he died.
JESUS IS FULLY GOD
Matt. 12:25; Matt. 27:18; Eph. 3:30; Col. 2:10; Heb. 1:8-12; Heb. 13:8; Matt. 18:20; Rom. 8:10; Isaiah 9:6; John 1:1-3; Rev. 1:8; Rev. 4:11; John 1:10; 1 Cor. 8:6; Heb. 3:3-4; 1 Chr. 16:33; Rev. 20:12; Matt. 7:22-23; Matt. 25: 31-33; John 14:1-6; Matt. 11:27; Matt. 16:16; Luke 2:11; Luke 3:4-6; Phil. 2:11; John 20:28; Hebrews 1:8; Matt 1:21, Acts 4:12; Heb 2:10; Luke 2:11; Col 1:15; John 1:41; Hebrews 4:14; Hebrews 6:20; Matt. 13:57; Matt. 21:11; Matt. 27:11; Matt. 27:37; Luke 24:1-3; Acts 1:22
I believe that Jesus is fully God. He is omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent (in His divine nature), and immutable. Jesus is eternal and is the creator and sustainer of all things. He is the rightful judge of humankind and also their Savior. He is the image of the invisible God and the Messiah. He is called “Son of God,” “Lord,” and “the Christ.” He is King and demonstrated His deity and power by His resurrection.
THE WORK OF CHRIST
Matt. 3:11; John 15:26; Romans 8:9; Gal. 4::6; Heb. 2:17; 1 John 2:2; Rom. 3:25; Gal. 3:13; Rom. 3:24; Col 1:14; Eph. 5:2; Rom. 5:11; Rom. 4:25; Rom. 5:15; 2 Cor. 3:9; Isaiah 53:11; Hebrews 2:17; Rom. 3:25; Rom. 5:6; 2 Cor. 5:19-20; Col. 1:18-20; Heb. 8:9-10; 1 Peter 1:18-19; Col 2:15; 1 Cor. 15:24-28; John 12:31; 1 John 3:8; 1 Peter 2:21; John 15:13; 1 Peter 2:11; Luke 18:31; John 18:32; Heb. 12:24; Heb. 13:20; Rev. 1:5; Gal. 3:14; Rom. 5:17; Rom. 8:2;
I believe that as by one man, Adam, we were all counted guilty, by one man, also, Jesus Christ, are we counted as righteous. Christ fulfilled the prophecies in Scripture by His life and death, and the Davidic covenant by His own blood. We are justified by faith in Jesus, as His righteousness is both credited to us and infused into us. His blood sacrifice atoned for our sins and appeased the wrath of God so that justice could be rightly administered. He became our substitute and took the punishment of death that we deserved. Christ paid the ransom and set us free from the wages of sin, which is death; Christ conquered death for Him and for us. He released us from the bondage of Satan, as He set the prisoners free. We are free to be obedient to Christ. Through his death and resurrection, we are reconciled to God and our relationship and oneness with God has been restored; our lives have been redeemed. He is the first born of a new creation and by His work we are born again—but not born of woman but of the Spirit of God. He provides a moral example for us to follow, as He represents the ideal of what humanity should be like. His coming to earth, living a perfect life, dying on the cross, and resurrection made a way for Him to send the Holy Spirit—that God would dwell not only with humankind but in them.Also,I forgot to mention this. The Bible says that Jesus is the image of the invisible God, and Jesus possess Divine qualities such as the world was created through Him (just a man could not do this), He was absolutely pure (did not sin), and of course, His death and resurrection. Not only did He do miracles, but had the power to forgive sins--this is something only God has the power to do. Another thing is that He was worshiped as God. When people tried to worship angels, they refused worship because they were creatures of God, not the Creator, but Jesus accepted acts of worship because He was God. Not to mention that He fulfills the prophecies of the Messiah. So He is both the Son of God and He is God. He is a "God-Man." Both natures co-existing.
Jesus represents man for God, as man. So Jesus is showing that he being a man speaks to God the Father as a creation, a man and indicates that as mankind we should see God as a Father and God that cares for man by causing the very thing that separates man from God, to be the point of redemption.....man as a sinner that deserves to die. Jesus Christ is that sin for man, so when Jesus died he was cut off from God, "Forsaken" by the Father representing the current position of man, cut off from God.Since Jesus is resurrected God is able to come and live in man by the Holy Spirit because the blood of his Son is our cover which covers our sin permanently. Therefore.....Born Again becomes a reality, when and why Jesus said you must be born again to see the Kingdom and to enter therein.... The water is the blood the Holy Spirit is God....John 3
One of my followers and vice versa have asked a similar question. This question had been asked by both Christians and non-Christians alike, and found no satisfactory answers. So, I've tried to go online, and do some researching, and I found this site: http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/jesusgd2.htm. It explains that Jesus Christ is God Incarnate, which means they are one and the same. Hope you will find this helpful.
my belief of god is strong and i feel like god and jesus are to different people. As the bible says when jesus(the son) was on the cross he looked up to his father and asked him to forgive them for they not know what they do so they must be to different people
*************************
I agree.
In the garden he prayed for God to take his cup away**********************
His cup was his lot in life. He knew he would be murdered.
We went over this in another thread
EDIT
I looked in my dictionary and this is what it says
CUP
• one's portion or share, as of sorrow or joy : I submit to God's will and drink this cup for his satisfaction.
"But, taking into account, this was decided by a group of men hundreds of years after Jesus, what is everyone's opinion on this?"
The answer to this is really quite simple, people make mistakes.The way I see it is like this: they are the same God but not the same being. They can't be the same being because, like you said, Jesus prayed to the Father. However, they are the same God because they are both equally divine.
The drop of water out of the ocean has the same qualities as the water in the ocean itself..when it goes back to the ocean it is the ocean itself!
Individual soul is like a drop of the cosmic soul..it is the micro of the macro being. You.. me everyone around us has this in them.. only some realize it and see it.. some know it but doesn't feel to see it... and some don't want to see it.. it's just the state of mind.Jesus and God are not the same beings. If you believe in the resurrection, then Jesus has a body. When Jesus says He and the Father are one He means in purpose and in unity. See John chapter 17 where Jesus clearly talks about how He and the Father are one, and how all of us can one in them and with them in purpose and unity. Jesus was not a ventriloquist, so when the voice of the father is heard at his baptism that should be proof enough they aren't the same.
Jesus was sent by God to deliver a faithful message and he did. The three that bear record in heaven are; God, God's Word, and God's Spirit. Jesus delivered a faithful message but many have gone astray from it.
Hey Chuck,
Let me see if I can simplify this understanding for you.
G/god has an ultimate power, knowledge and wisdom. In knowing that, he has the power to take a "piece" of himself and separate that "piece" from his whole.
Thus, the creation of Jesus in the flesh(body). G/god's power also extends to the point that which allows him to also use his ultimate wisdom(spirit) as a guidance for those who he created, including Jesus.
According the bible- Jesus is only one of the trinity- God.
There's Jesus(God in flesh(body) and God's Wisdom(the Holy Spirit), and God(himself).
I think that just about covers it.Hey Cagsil,
Thanks for this. I can understand how God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit might be one entity and three parts of one entity. But I don't understand why we think that is the case?
Why do we think Jesus is God etc. etc. Why shouldn't he actually be the Son of God and not God himself rather than the Son of God and God. The bible repeatedly refers to him as Son of God. Why would Satan bother trying to tempt him if he was God as well as the Son of God... Satan would know that there was no point if this was the case.
There is a slight possibility, using my logic (which I admit is probably somewhat limited!!) that, men, at the convention, I can't remember what it was called or when it was, but when they decided that God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit were all part of the trinity and one being etc. seemed to have got it wrong or at least might have got it wrong. Perhaps Jesus is the Son of God and just that? I am having trouble trying to express clearly what I want to say but hopefully you are understanding me?
Thanks for your reply.I don't think it's the case. But, Christianity is based on a "trinity" sect which believe it.
Because, Jesus made the statement to the Pharisees that HE was God. He made that statement loud and clear.
He made that statement also as did he also made the statement that ALL humankind was the "Sons of God", as well as, stating that "I say to Ye, Ye are All Gods".
Yes, the bible continues to state that he is the "Son of God". God supposedly, according to scripture impregnated a women, which Jesus was born. Thus, giving God a "son".
Ego blinds to truth. According to many Satan assumed he was "greater" than God, and that's pure ego.
There's more than a little possibility that what is in the bible is wrong. No doubt in that on my side. It's something you must reconcile for yourself.
This would depend on the "definition" of what you consider "G/god" to be. Among other attributes you want to apply to said "G/god".God Has said there is none other except Me.
Then would He have no other to Mate with or combined with. So He Himself replicated himself or created others by the laws of Nature; which is to say (the extend of His ability) which God set in motion Himself.
There is Not another for Him as He is. So God is All things to all that He created this is why He is the First and the Last. God is not only Himself but he is everyone and everything else.
Which He has brought into Being and did so according to the rules that he has set upon Himself with. And then made He a Promise to those that He created so that He would never be alone again.
Now Along comes Satan who seek to Be as God or even so Better than GOD which he can never be for he too is, but a part of GOD as we all are. Even the 2/3 that are not here with us.
God can clearly Stat that He will never Leave or forsake us for if he does We fail to exist here, when He does. We are an unfinished work that was progression that was either captured or stolen by misdirection. which only GOD can bring to a conclusion or rectification.
No worries God is forever Faithful to do as he has proclaimed.
Well, you seemed to have glossed over the whole fact that almost everything known about the concept of 'jesus' was copied from other past sources (some dating back thousands of years before the story of jesus was started) but other than that fact you are correct. Carry on….
No where in the Bible does it actually say that Jesus was God. Any reaching of that conclusion requires a whole lot of conjecture. The Nicean Counsel invented the whole concept of the Trinity. They said Jesus was God, the Bible did not. Jesus did not.
I would assume it was to get around that whole "worshiping false idols" thing.If Jesus is not God then his mission and death are pointless and man is still in His sins.
See my other post.It depends on whether you see Christ as the scapegoat of all your sins and you can take the "easy way" by just praying like hell on your death bed, or whether you see him as a teacher sent to guide us and show us behave in a way that would please God.
And your verses don't back up Jesus being God without some pretty good philosophical backflips.Let's take Isaiah 42:8 in context...
Reread the entire chapter and tell me who is speaking in it. If you take just that verse, then you would assume that Jesus was pronouncing Godhood. When you read the rest of the verses, especially the previous couple, you'll see that Jesus is actually "channeling" God. As a matter of fact, he refers to himself in the third person during the speech saying: "Behold, My Servant, whom I uphold; My chosen one in whom My soul delights" (Jesus is talking about himself as the servant there)
Sounds like an introduction to me.
Deuteronomy 6:4
This refers to the Big Guy himself. So much so that the Jewish use it in their ShemaIsaiah 48
That is all God talking.
There is no Jesus there.
Isaiah 43 is what you wanted.
Odd or to the point? that in 43:11 God should say.. "beside me there is no saviour."
Surely, regardless of whether he is God or the Son of God he could still take away the sins of the world? Why shouldn't the Son of God also be able to do this? Does he have to be God himself in order for this to happen?
Melissa does not believe He was God, but he was just a man. If he was just a man, his death was pointless.
Well yes, it was, but we are assuming here that Jesus is the Son of God, so could he not have died as man and Son of God for our sins without having to be God as well?'
Your question doesn't make sense. If you accept that Jesus is the Son of God, begotten as man to show men the way back to God, died to atone for our sins, and rose from the dead to return to God, his Father, then how can you deny his divinity?
I am not denying his divinity, he can stay divine and stay the son of God, he doesn't have to be God as well. I am questioning why people think he is also God.
We see this as true because Thomas professed Him to be so and Jesus commended Him on it saying He was blessed for believing it, and also said those who haven't seen Him with their eyes and believe it are blessed.
Jesus is well known for correcting verbal and even unspoken mistakes or misunderstandings of His disciples, and He does no such thing here.
He rather does the 180 degree opposite and validates Thomas' words.
*******
Please post the scripture where Yahshua makes it loud and clear (your statement) that he is God.The religious point of view is that we were all created by God in his image. Would this not mean that we are of God? We all have the propensity to create, to be jealous and to destroy that which we find unworthy of ourselve's. It is time that we move on, clinging to belief is just making us dumber in a spiritual sense. Why can some people not see this?
"You will die in your sins if you do not believe that 'I Am Who I Am'", a.k.a., God the Father.
Followed by the real proof, "When you lift up the Son of Man, you will know that 'I Am Who I Am'" just like Moses did.
(John 8: 24, 28; Ex. 3: 1-15 )
Personal knowledge of God is accompanied by forgiveness of sins and overlooking of wrongs. PTL,
(Jer. 31: 31-34)*************
Is that a fact? I'm not worried so leave it between God and me.
You're making yourself God by judging and that is blasphemy.
Funny how the Christians can sin in any way they want and you still belong to God, but everyone else is going to hell.
Pray and ask for truth with an open heart, and God will take all the man made doctrines away.Deborah, in which way do you think we are like God in a small way?
We are all God in every way, just as we are star dust, we are the wing of a fly.
Sorry, only people to whom God's image of immortality is imparted, through being "born spiritually of the Spirit" (in Christ's unique death on the cross) are called "gods".
So you are omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent? WOW!
We all are, we just haven't realised it yet. Being part of the one does not require death.
Nope. I just found out the truth of it all and it has nothing to do with any thing this world has to offer.
********************************************
Physical Image.
Scripture says God is a spirit, but that doesn’t mean He is void of looks/Physical attributes.
The O.T. says Moses saw the backside of God. We are told God’s eyes are ever on the righteous. He tells us his hand is with us.
Does God really have feet and fingers and hands and eyes and legs and a back? Exodus says God wrote the Laws with His finger. He also has a voice.
I think mankind became more physical after the fall.
Mental, Emotional, Spiritual Attributes
Somehow I am the image of God. All of us were made in his likeness in some way. Maybe this has to do with our spiritual nature. We love our children as he loves his. We have moments of unmitigated compassion as he must have continually.
God feels love, pity, compassion, hate, jealousy, justice, He is long-suffering, and good.
We are able, with our desire and will, to manifest the things we want.
Some of us can see tomorrow, and/or just know things
Man and woman can create another human.But most importantly, God has SHAPE. The Bible says so. Without shape/form, the Lord would be nothing. The Bible talks about 'something'....and that something is God!
Numbers 12:8 -- “With him I speak face to face, clearly and not in riddles; he sees the FORM of the LORD.”
Job 4:15-17 -- “A spirit glided past my face, and the hair on my body stood on end. It stopped, but I could not tell what it was. A FORM stood before my eyes, and I heard a hushed voice: 'Can a mortal be more righteous than God? Can a man be more pure than his Maker?”Did you know that people were not allowed to see the faces of the Annunaki when they were in physical form on the earth according to the Sumerian Texts? That's where Moses seeing the back of God is from. Why on earth would God speak to Moses from the clouds then speak to him as a person arrogantly turning his back to him? How ridiculous! Exodus is talking about nonsense.
I would agree with you about sharing attributes like love except for the part of jealousy. People feel jealous when they covet something someone else had. That's out of ego. Jesus was never jealous because as they say, jealous makes you nasty.***************************
As far as Jealousy. There are many verses that say God is jealous. It’s caused by worshiping idols.
Nothing is wrong with jealousy when there is a cause.
People also feel Jealous, when a person is unfaithful to them.
Not just when they covet the things of someone else
Exodus 20:5
Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me
Exodus 34:14
For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God
Deuteronomy 4:24
For the LORD thy God is a consuming fire, even a jealous God
Deuteronomy 6:15
(For the LORD thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the LORD thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth
Deuteronomy 32:16
They provoked him to jealousy with strange gods, with abominations provoked they him to angerMost women feel betrayed and hurt when there husbands cheat on them. Jealous is ego related. If they are, they are envying whatever the mistress has that attracted her husband.
What example do we have that indicates Jesus was jealous?
Personally, I find that if I feel jealousy and envy crop up, it's due to ego or not me being satisfied with myself.
I simply highlighted John 8: 24 and 28 referring to the basis of Christ's judgement or salvation applicable to all (without any distinction). If you do not agree, I am not the one to discuss with.
EXCUSE me, you replied to my post so you were speaking to me.
You better take your own instruction which was
"You will die in your sins if you do not believe that 'I Am Who I Am'", a.k.a., God the Father." Your words
Don't say stuff to someone then lie about it when confronted.
If you didn't mean it to any particular person you would have posted a reply at the bottom of the page
The link to your post
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/89110?p … ost1935248EXCUSE me, Deborah!
The words, "You will die in your sins if you do not believe that 'I Am Who I Am' ", a.k.a., "the Father" are right out of the mouths of the Lion (Jesus) and his disciple (John), respectively.
Therefore, the words are Jesus' speaking to all of us of which I have personally taken a good dose. I do not agree at all in posting Jesus' own reply to the question in the OP, like an appendage, at the bottom of the page.*********
No it is you speaking and you chose me to say it to ME.
You use the Bible for an excuse.
If there is a hell, you're the one going because you worship idolsYes, Deborah, I shared with you Christ's life-giving words specific to his crucifixion.The alternative is death in one's sins.
The choice is mine and yours! Bless you.Is this Love/Unconditional Kindness (1Corinthians 13) that is Patient and Kind? What fruit is it? Of God, or not?
The fruit of self and selflessness, is all the fruit we can truly harvest. God is of every being and every being is of God. We are one in the same, the holly trinity. We are all of God in the sense that we are all one. This a hard pill to swallow, for it sowers the tongue for those that wish otherwise.
**********************
Yahshua said if you ANGER without a CAUSE, it is wrong but I had cause.
I feel no condemnation..and I am close to God. Are you?
Have you shown love?
Melissa, there are several places that do say they are one.
Mom101, you are right with the exception of those necessary times before his death on the cross when Jesus repeatedly speaks in "figures of speech" and altruistic language.
(John 16: 23-33; Phil. 2: 5-11)
Tertullian coined the term trinity, and he wrote well over a century before Nicaea. He only used it to describe his and other people's understanding of the Bible.
The problem with the Trinity is that it teaches three distinct personalities. But there is only one God.
Deuteronomy 6:4
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.
Isaiah 42:8
I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not give my glory to another.
Isaiah 9:6
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
John 8:58
I tell you the truth, Jesus answered, before Abraham was born, I am!
According to Isaiah above, Jesus was the Father Himself, not a son as a human parent would produce a son. Jesus said He was the Father when He declared Himself "I Am".
God is omnipresent; the Holy Spirit is a term used for His presence upon the Earth, and Jesus is a term for His presence upon the Earth in flesh.
He gives us a Father/Son analogy to help us understand our relationship with the Father and to demonstrate submission to the Father.CONSIDER: I am part my father, part my mother, yet "I" am both yet neither. This is the inner being, further I have a conscious, and a sub conscious, and I believe in a super-consciousness. All of this is equitable to the three in one aspect which, by rights, is contained in the "image" in which we were created. I don't by into that Jesus was "God", only in the same way that the whole of creation is God, a reflection of the creator. Peter himself said that Jesus was a MAN, approved of God. In short, he was chosen. We all are of God, and Jesus was one of us...therefore, you or I can find the same approval of God. Jesus shows how, in his life and word.
An interesting interpretation Druid. One that is at odds to the teaching of Christianity, but one that makes sense nonetheless.
Thanks for posting.I was just using that as a "for instance". I am not a christian...neither was Jesus. His followers were called christians, but, even the disciples didn't call themselves christians. That term covers a lot of territory. Some people think that catholicism and christianity are two different things, which is not quite true. I believe that Energy (as in Einstein) manifests all things, including consciousness, and that there is a definite possibility of "awareness" on a level which most people, including christians, are unwilling to accept.
Actually Jesus is God.
God is One Spirit, One Mind, One Will, One Person. there is not 3 parts of God is not three in one.
God is totally One indivisible God.
Because He would show Himself in the flesh does not mean that there is more than one.
His Spirit is Himself, His Word is Himself. You cannot separate them into persons.
Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit are one and make up what is sometimes referred to as the Godhead. A simple analogy would be to consider 'water'. Water exists as either a gas (steam), liquid (water) or solid (ice), but although their physical properties differ, chemically, they are still water. It's no different for the Godhead, in that, you may think of the Father, Son and Holy spirit having different 'properties', but they are still God.
The only danger with that analogy is that you can fall into the trap of thinking of them as inanimate when all three are referred to as a person in their own right. For example, it's easy to think of the Holy spirit as an 'it' rather than 'He', which it should be. After all, it was man that was created in Gods image and not the other way around. In Genesis 1:26 it states 'Let us make man in 'our' image, after our likeness. DOUBLE UNDERLINE 'OUR'! Our = Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
To give you further biblical proof that Jesus existed from the very beginning look at these two verses:
Exo_3:14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
Then in the New testament we find:
Joh 8:57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
Joh 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
I don't think that there is one person alive that truly understands the nature of God, and really, its futile to even try. That is not a cop-out that is just the way it is. To get some idea of the enormity of God, just go look at some Hubble photographs of the universe - it's the only way that you can get a true feel for the majesty of God, without denigrating Him to some cartoon character status, like the vast majority of the world does.Jesus represents MAN in that scenario. Peter himself said that Jesus was a man. It is to show our relationship with the godhead as you call it.
No one is denying that Jesus was a man. He was man but also God - the two are not mutually exclusive. This is non-negotiable and is just a fact.
Joh_14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
Joh 10:38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
Sorry but the scriptures are not for private interpretation:
2Pe_1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.Nice try using the bible as a confirmation of Jesus being a "G/god", when it cannot be proven without using the bible. So please.
There's NO fact that Jesus was anything other than a man.
It sure is funny what believers consider facts to be. If it's written from a time when people ran from thunder and lightning because gods were believed to be angry, then it must be a fact."I do not pray for these only, but also for those who are to believe in me through their word, that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, I in them and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one .... " (John 17.20-23)
Thus the concept of unity between God and his Son is extended to include all who believe in the apostolic teaching concerning the Son. The attainment of such a unity is, of course, no sudden achievement but a process, as the words of verse 23 imply: "may become perfectly one" or, more literally: "may be perfected into one." This will be realised only in "the last day" (John 6:44). When this aspect of the process is appreciated, other verses in John's record become more significant in revealing and explaining the growing relationship between the Father, the Son and the believers.
But to follow your reasoning we are all God, and God is all of us who believe in Christ. That reasoning is so flawed and anti-Gospel it isn't funny. It ranks right up there with the trinity itself.
The message of unity in the Gospels and the Torat in no way infers the trinity. Or would you have us to continue that line of reasoning with the other verses of unity?
There is no trinity in the bible... only when you read it into the verses and twist them can you sustain it as a doctrine.
God does not play games and hide truths from us.The DNA of Jesus' blood on the shroud shows that he had only all the xy chromosomes found in any normal human being; and none from from a deity .
Jesus was only a simple man as was his mother Mary a simple woman; it is true that the Creator God conversed with them as He did with Adam and Eve or Moses and his mother before.
In The Acts of The Apostles 7:56 Stephen said "Behold I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God." Christ said (Matthew 24:36)"But of that day and hour knoweth no man, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." In John 14:23 Christ is quoted as saying "....If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father, for my Father is greater than I." And, in John 8:42 "Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me." And, in John 20:17 "Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God."
Very good! The father is GREATER than Jesus. Jesus himself speaks for what I say.
To put it quite simply, the Bible makes it qutie clear that there is a trinity and they all have specific purposes. Our human minds are incompetint and cant understand such a thing, just like eternity. Have you ever tried to imagine it? I have and it just confuses me. So that is something we really cant comprehend.
Really? Why then does he obviously want us to understand it. You underestimate yourself. You have been told that by those who were not up to the understanding of it. It is all quite LOGICAL!!!
YES, JESUS IS ACTUALLY THE VERY SAME BEING AS GOD ALMIGHTY.
The conclusive evidence is based on matching the characteristics of the two divine manifestations in the human experience of their "self-revelations". Typical examples are:
1) MOSES and "a flame coming from the middle of a bush on fire but not burning up", a.k.a., self-sufficient fire/life, holy (unapproachable without safeguards), immortal references (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob), humbling, champion of the down-trodden, enabler, complete with a personal name ("I Am Who I Am") and a promise for encore!
(Ex. 3: 1-15)
2) OPEN-ENDED: Us and the "source of life", a.k.a., Jesus Christ with his works of Spirit-active, perfect and diacritical death on the cross manifesting 100% of the characteristics noted under Moses.
(Matt. 27: 50-56; John 19: 30-37; Acts 2; etc.)I found this discussion interesting and though this will be my first post in the Hub forums, I hope I can jump in on this discussion. I am currently studying mythology and consciousness at the Evergreen State College in Washington...
Chuck, if you're asking questions like this I highly suggest you check out the writings of Joseph Campbell, he has illuminated many of my own questions in the mythology/spirituality realm.
Chevy, I think you gave the best answer here. Campbell compares the holy trinity to the three faces of the Buddha. They are the spiritual, the physical and the eternal. This 'seperation' is distinct within each human and within Jesus, not without.
There are energies that are conflicting with one another inside a person. When a spiritual being enters the physical realm it is torn into pieces and the trinity represents this. In other words, from the father we are incarnated into the physical (son) BY the holy spirit and through it we will return to him.Sorry, further thoughts...Jesus prays to god...meaning that he asks his higher self for guidance. This is meditation and the only way that anyone ever advances spiritually.
Speaking of Bible Verses (as seen above)...
Concerning Christ being actually the same as God:
God says of Jesus in the first chapter of Hebrews:
Hebrews 1:8 But about the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom."Given Jesus' use of "figures of speech" and altruistic language, including the witness of others, e.g., the writer of the Hebrews, the result is an inconclusive portrait of Jesus Christ.
(John 16: 23-26)
An acceptable answer can be found in personal experience of "the things the Father wants him to do" in the timeless exercise of absolute rights in his death on the cross, by which alone "everyone will worship him as God and know him by the same name", i.e., "I Am Who I Am".
(Zech. 14:9; John 8: 21-28 based on Ex. 3: 1-15).
AMEN!
Never the less there it sits in Hebrews...What do you attribute should be left...and what should be taken away from the Bible?
It can be pointed out that there is anonymity in who the writer is...however...later we find The Order of Melchizedek:
Hebrews 7:1-3...so I believe the writer to be a credible source annointed by God to deliver a message.I submit that the Bible is only a 2-way road map (with forward and backward linkages) converging at God's personal self-revelation according to the terms of the "new covenant" sealed/"finished" in Christ's death on the cross, a.k.a., the time-sensitive source and cornerstone of all inspiration by the Holy Spirit .The Letter to the Hebrews testifies as much.
In the book of Revelation we are told that Jesus (The Lamb) sits on the throne, next to God. that makes the two separate. The trinity was never spoken about until about 300 years after Christ was crucified. Look up the history as to why Constantine did to make pagans become Christians. Pagans had trinites. He put a lot of Pagan traditions, holidays etc. so they would become Chritians.
Actually, John's vision of "a Lamb, standing in the centre of the throne, ... appeared to have been killed" but divinely alive, well, powerful and worthy of unlimited praise and worship. (Rev. 5)
There is no other God sitting next to Jesus (the Lamb) in the book of Revelation which is a prophetic work based on Christ's death on the cross.
I agree with your comments on the doctrine of trinity as a creation of Constantine and his bishops based on pagan traditions.
First of all we can not with our human brain understand the power God has to do the things he does. Bring forth mankind from the ground who can understand that? Not going back to ground but able to bring Ev into existence who can understand that?
When we as people have offspring do we not say they are apart of us? When a king sends his offspring out into the world doesn't the child perform in the capacity of the kind so in in our human lives the offspring isn't the king but he is part of the king.The Councils didn't create the Trinity any more than Newton created gravity. They expressed the truth of it meticulously, which should come as no surprise. It is always better to express biblical truth in as clear terms as are possible, and the necessity to do so for the doctrine of the Trinity would have come sooner or later. The doctrine of the Trinity says that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are identical, not in person but in nature, that is, God the Father is not the same person as God the Son, or God the Holy Spirit; nor is the Son the same person as the Father, or as the Spirit. Nor is the Spirit the same person as God the Father, or God the Son. It says that the divine being of God exists in three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit who are different from each other. To say they (the Father, Son, and Spirit) are the same person and yet three persons would be absurd. Together they are the one true God and each one is God in his nature.
Hello Thomas C Booher and welcome to the hub. Hope you like your new found home and am looking forward to versing with you.
Here you will find many different views on just about any topic you can or wish to think of..
This one in particular, is a prime example.Those men created the trinity, but Nowhere in the Scriptures does it say God exists as three persons, He is indivisibly One God. He just simply took on humanity and manifested Himself as the Christ.
He is ONE person, ONE Spirit, ONE nature, ONE mind, ONE will, and ONE name. And cannot be separated as persons, wills, minds, natures, etc.
The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are ONE and the same person.******************************
Jeremiah 16:19 “O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge
in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ends
of the earth, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity,
and things wherein there is no profit.”
- Deborah Sextonposted 12 years ago
0Taken From
http://www.islamicweb.com/begin/trinity.htm
“The concept of a Trinity of divine beings was not an idea put forth by Jesus or any other prophet of God. This doctrine, now subscribed to by Christians all over the world, is entirely man-made in origin.
The Doctrine Takes Shape
Tertullian, a lawyer and presbyter of the third century Church in Carthage, was the first to use the word "Trinity" when he put forth the theory that the Son and the Spirit participate in the being of God, but all are of one being of substance with the Father.
A Formal Doctrine is Drawn Up
When controversy over the matter of the Trinity blew up in 318 between two church men from Alexandria - Arius, the deacon, and Alexander, his bishop - Emperor Constantine stepped into the fray.
Although Christian dogma was a complete mystery to him, he did realize that a unified church was necessary for a strong kingdom. When negotiation failed to settle the dispute, Constantine called for the first ecumenical council in Church history in order to settle the matter once and for all.
Six weeks after the 300 bishops first gathered at Nicea in 325, the doctrine of the Trinity was hammered out. The God of the Christians was now seen as having three essences, or natures, in the form of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.”
THE TRINITY DOCTRINE ( This site shows the absurdity of a trinity)
http://www.angelfire.com/pa/greywlf/trinity.html"God (the Father) created," "God the Son Spoke/Word," "Spirit of God hovered over the waters," Genesis 1
"Holy Spirit/Spirit will come upon you, the power of the Most High/Father will overshadow you, so the One to be born will be called the Holy One of God/Son." Matthew/Luke 1-3
"Through Him, Jesus, all things were made." John 1************************
All things were created by the word of God. He spoke and they were.
He asked Moses to be his mouth, but Moses thought he wasn't elegant enough.
When Yahshua came he was filled with the Holy Ghost (the first person to be) (God in the flesh) and God had someone who would speak his wordsWe all have the ability to speak the words of the one, we just have yet to listen honestly.
"Thomas C Booher wrote:
The Councils didn't create the Trinity any more than Newton created gravity. They expressed the truth of it meticulously, which should come as no surprise. It is always better to express biblical truth in as clear terms as are possible, and the necessity to do so for the doctrine of the Trinity would have come sooner or later. The doctrine of the Trinity says that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are identical, not in person but in nature, that is, God the Father is not the same person as God the Son, or God the Holy Spirit; nor is the Son the same person as the Father, or as the Spirit. Nor is the Spirit the same person as God the Father, or God the Son. It says that the divine being of God exists in three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit who are different from each other. To say they (the Father, Son, and Spirit) are the same person and yet three persons would be absurd. Together they are the one true God and each one is God in his nature."-
God does not hide his truths from Man.
If the trinity were intended to be the understanding of God, the Holy Ghost, and Christ, then God and Christ would have made that abundently clear. Or the Apostles themselves would have clearified it so as to be understood without question, as thier mission was to bring complete understanding of Christ and his Sacrifice, and Gods plan, to the world.
To think God, Christ, or the Holy Ghost, would leave it to the church to devise, is absurd.
But nowhere in the Gospels or Hebrew Scriptures do you find the trinity.
That alone should speak volumes to you.
As I said earlier... the new age Chaldeans needed a Mystery.Is Jesus actually the same being as God?
No; Jesus is an obedient servant of the Creator God whom he used to address while praying to Him as God-the-Father.Jesus if the only person I've ever heard God claim as is own Son.
Only Jesus from Heaven to the entire universe qualified to save all of mankind.
It will only can only be by Jesus that man can approach God.
I'm seem to me Jesus holds a position with God that no else in Heaven or on Earth holds.mankind is already saved , with or without jesus...
u just got to see journey of human beings since so many years in holistic view...just get acquainted with much older civilizations and statement would get proven by itself...humans always needed symbolic saviour...there were many before jesus and many after that...Key here is symbol and it doesnot matter who that symbol is....Jesus is good story...but thats it...nothing more , nothing less...important story in that era
pisean282311, People here don’t care about the facts. They don’t care about the history of the bible, just what stories were put inside. They don’t care about the history of religion, just that they “belong” to one. Maybe it’s because of the god gene, or just human nature, but symbols make them feel better. Hopefully one day mankind can evolve past all this and then the world can truly be a better place.
The Trinity is often compared to an egg. The yolk could represent Jesus, the white God and the shell the Holy Spirit. They are separate components but make up one unit, which is the egg.
Jesus was not God on earth, He was the son of God. He never claimed to be. He did say He was one with the Father, however. Think of the white and the yolk coming together as one egg. When He died and resurrected and ascended into human, He reunited with God as the Holy Spirit and they are now one spirit. It's a complicated thing to get round. Our minds are finite so often I address Jesus in prayer and other times I address God, knowing that they are one.So, the basis of Christianity is scrambled eggs?
The scripture say that God was manifest in the flesh, 1 Tim.3:16, So Jesus was God on earth in human flesh.
He took upon himself the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
Jesus was the Son of God according to the flesh, but He was the very God according to the Spirit.
I've posted several scriptures (above) from old and new testament that show that the son born is The mighty God, The everlasting Father.
Sometimes when Jesus spoke He spoke as a man, and other times He spoke as God. Whenever He prayed He was praying from His human position.So Jesus, as God, was praying to Himself? Why did He say that the only way to the Father was through Him?
God Himself became human, (manifest in the flesh) the flesh part was not God, but God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself.
Since it would take sinless blood to save man from the curse of sin, & God being the only One that is sinless, (God is a Spirit and cannot shed blood so) He prepared a body and came Himself. He became the supreme sacrifice for all mankind.
While in His human state, His flesh had a human will, and the human will must be submitted to the will of the God in order to get God's will accomplished. So in His humanity He felt the struggle and fear of going to the cross, as any human would feel, knowing He had to go there to get God's will done, So in this struggle between human will and God's will He prayed to get the human will in submission to God so that He could carriy out the plan of God.
God humbled Himself and allowed Himself to go through this human process in order to become the supreme sacrifice for us all. If He did not do it, who could have? If He did not do it we all would have no hope.
The only way to the Father was through Christ, because sinful man could not approach a Holy God directly, so God became that sacrifice, the way (the door), so that we could have a way to the Father, again, no one else could have done it.
I posted scriptures above that show that God became flesh.How does any part of a thing die? And how does that death not effect the whole?
And of what value is it that a God could over-come this world?
He is a God, it makes no difference, of course he could over-come it. And it de-values the sacrafice of the Christ.
Adam was perfect, and he was a man.
Christ was the second adam, and he was a man.
His over-coming sin and death was the fullfilment of the prophecy to Eve in the garden, that one of her descendents would crush the head of the Serpent.
Not a God... but her offspring, a Man.
Pretty simple if you set the myths aside and read the Gospels as they were written.
Any verse you can post to suppossedly support the trinity can be torn apart with a read of this.
http://dawnchristadelphians.net/books/trin/trinind.htm
It is all in there.
So if your not going to review it and look to see the truth... then you will be lost among the Chaldean Mysteries forever.
Again... any verse you can post to suppossedly support the trinity can be seen with a read of this to be falsely understood in that application.
http://dawnchristadelphians.net/books/trin/trinind.htm
There is NO trinity in the Gospels.
"... there is none like me in all the earth." (Exodus 9:14)
"that you might know that the LORD is God; there is no other besides him." (Deuteronomy 4:35).
"the LORD is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath; there is no other" (Deuteronomy 4:39).
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD" (Deuteronomy 6:4).
"See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me" (Deuteronomy 32:39).
"the LORD is God; there is no other" (1 Kings 8:60).
"Thou art the LORD, thou alone" (Nehemiah 9:6).
"Let them know that thou alone, whose name is the LORD, art the Most High over all the earth" (Psalm 83:18).
".... thou alone art God" (Psalm 86:10).
"Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me". I, I am the Lord, and besides me there is no saviour" (Isaiah 43:10-11).
"I am the first, and I am the last: besides me there is no God" (Isaiah 44:6).
"Is there a God besides me? There is no Rock 2; I know not any" (Isaiah 44:8). Rock -A metaphor for God; see Deuteronomy 32:4.
"I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides me there is no God" (Isaiah 45:5).
"I am the Lord, and there is no other" (Isaiah 45:6, see also verse 14)
"I am the Lord, and there is no other" (Isaiah 45:18).
"... there is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Saviour; there is none besides me" (Isaiah 45:21).
"For I am God, and there is no other" (Isaiah 45:22).
"For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me" (Isaiah 46:9).
"... you know no God but me, and besides me there is no Saviour" (Hosea 13:4).
Let's be honest. Throughout these passages, is there the slightest hint whatever that God, the great and holy one of Israel, is in fact two, three, or for that matter thirty-three? "I. even I, am He, and there is no god besides Me." Note the pronouns'I', 'He', 'Me' is this one person speaking or several? What other wording could have been selected to make this matter clearer or more precise?
"And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent" (John 17:3).
"... to the only wise God be glory for evermore through Jesus Christ! Amen" (Romans 16:27).
"To the King of ages, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen" (1 Timothy 1:17).
"... the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone has immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has ever seen or can see" (1 Timothy 6:15-16).
"To the only God, our Saviour through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and for ever. Amen" (Jude 25).
"... O King of the ages! Who shall not fear and glorify thy name, O Lord? For thou alone art holy" (Revelation 15:4).
"... we know ... that there is no God but one" (I Corinthians 8:4).
"yet for us there is one God, the Father , from whom are all things" (I Corinthians 8:6).
"there is ... one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all" (Ephesians 4:6).
"For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2:5).
Christ's endorsement of the Old Testament
The very first quotation listed above shows Christ's firm endorsement of Old Testament teaching. A scribe had asked Jesus which was the first commandment of all, and Jesus replied with the passage from Deuteronomy 6:4 quoted above:
"Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one."
The scribe was discerning and responded with approval and added:
"You are right, Teacher; you have truly said that He is one and that there is no other than He"
for which, as we have seen, he had plenty of Old Testament backing.
Did Jesus take this splendid opportunity to correct the scribe's statement on the basis of trinitarian teaching?
Far from it! When he 'saw that the scribe had answered wisely', he told him, 'You are not far from the kingdom of God'. Perhaps the scribe had overheard Christ's earlier reply to the rich young man who had addressed him as 'Good Teacher': 'Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.'
NO trinity in the Gospels! NONE! Not at all!
God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself 1 Cor. 5:19
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, The MAN Christ Jesus; 1 Tim.2:5
The Man Christ was Not God, but God Dwelt in the Flesh
The Word was Made flesh.
Adam was perfect, and he was a man.
But there has not been another man that is perfect enough to be the supreme sacrifice since the fall of man.
it would take Sinless blood, of which only God could provide, if Christ were born of natural man His blood would not be sinless. God over shadowed Mary and she conceived and bore a Son, This is how and where Christ becomes the Son of God, the only begotten.
When the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law. Gal.4:4
Before this there was no Son of God.
I hope you don't get the impression that I support a trinity, because I do not.
There definitely is NO trinity
Claire,
The Bible branches into two directions, viz.: 1) a hard road leading to a narrow gate and eternal life, and 2) an easy road leading to a wide gate and hell. The former was spearheaded by Christ, the Good Shepherd himself! The least we can do is to follow him.
(Matt. 7: 13-14; John 10: 1-21)
The distinction between God “the Father” and “the Son of God”, based on “figures of speech” and altruistic language necessarily used by Jesus, was temporary and spurious until the latter’s self-revelation in his Spirit-active, perfect and diacritical death on the cross as long promised.
(John 8: 21-28; 14: 18-21; 16: 25-26; 19: 30-37; Phil. 2: 5-11)
- Muldaniaposted 12 years ago0
I remember religious education at school, when the teacher started talking about Jesus creating the universe. I put up my hand, and said "sir, I thought it was God who created the universe." He then pointed to the condensation on the window, and said that water can exist in three states - liquid, condensation and ice, yet it is all water, and therefore of one substance existing in three different states. This explained water to me, but left me none the wiser concerning the Holy Trinity.
Years later, I learned how the idea of the trinity exists in many different ancient religions, and how these ideas were adopted by the Church, as they developed the image of Jesus. I never could understand why Christ would pray to God, asking that the cup may be taken from Him, if he were God Himself, and therefore would have the power to take it from Himself.I like your explanations. If I could be so bold to try and shed some light on why Jesus ask the Father. From reading scripture I take God likes order and he further conveys that to us by way of the human family. The man being the head of the housejhold.
God came to Earth to do what God the father-the head wanted done. Now I also believe Jesus could have stopped at anytime and mankind's salvation would have been lost but Jesus himself said I do my father's work and not my own so that is why I believe Jesus calls out to the head.what work did he do by getting him hanged?...preaching was fine but getting hanged just to please his father sounds weird...anyways can't blame writers of 2k yrs ago...they wrote with full sincerity according to what they were exposed to during those days...
It was not God who crucified Christ, it was man.
God knew what would occur, He did not do it.
Christ was slaughtered by us... not God.
You all should really get at least that much straight.
And in His, Christ's, un-just and underserved suffering and death, and his subsequent forgiveness of us... he opened the way for Man once again.
Excuse me.
Can I intervene? I see many quoted texts from the bible, but I believe it'll only confuse our questioner. Please allow me to explain it in a more simplistic using layman's words.
First of all, this is one of the things in the bible that we believers just have to accept. We'll never understand how that works. We've never been in God's dimension.
In a 2 dimensional world, using only the x and y coordinates, we can draw a polygon, a square. If you draw two squares, even if they are merged or even if they both share an edge of each, we know they're separate. They're distinct to each other.
In a 3 dimensional world, we use 3 coordinates - x,y, and z. We can draw a minimum of 3 polygons to produce a solid object.
In a 3 dimensional world, we can have 6 planes yet they're all one cube.
Mickey Mouse could have never understood or comprehend or imagine what a real cube looks like. We can only tell mickey that "plane 1" is one with the other planes yet they're different and distinct planes. Hence, Mickey could never and would never imagine what it's like to be in our world.
In God's dimension, God told us that 3 objects or 3 personas could be one, but how are we to illustrate that? I'm afraid we cannot.
This is one of the paradoxical things in the bible that I just choose to believe and trust what God says.If being "born spiritually of the Spirit", in the very image of "the living God" perpetually revealed in Christ's death on the cross, humbly accepted and obeyed, does not give our lives "God's dimension", nothing else will!
(John 3: 6-15; 14: 18-21; 17: 1-3; 19: 30-37)
Chuckbl,
1. The doctrine of trinity is very bad theology in lieu of firsthand knowledge of God as promised in the Scriptures, e.g., the "self-sufficient fire" (Ex. 3: 1-15) and the terms of the "new covenant" (Jer. 31: 31-34); and as typically "sealed" in Christ's death on the cross: a perpetual demo of eternal life or "source of life".(Matt. 26: 26-29, 64; 27: 50-56)
The conclusive proof is exclusively saved for man's personal experience of God in his work of man's life-transformation thereby but not in any Scriptures.
2) Only by the work of Christ's "baptism in the Holy Spirit", synchronized with his death on the cross, through "the blood and the water" pouring out from his pierced side, can one know "the truth about God" and about the reason for one's own unbelief (John 16: 5-15; 19: 30-37).
3) Strange as it is to do, Jesus' prayer to his Father is a great measure of his humble and obedient attitude which, as real proof of the truth about himself, relied less on any claims and more on works in his death on the cross including baptism in the Holy Spirit. (John 5: 31-36; 10: 37-38; 10: 37-38; 12: 32-36; 14: 6, 18-21; 16: 5-15; 19: 30-37)
Your feedback will be appreciated.Claire,
1) Rather than praying to himself (which is a joke) Christ was reflecting his attitude of utter humility true to his nature of divinity.
2) "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one goes to the Father except by me" is a mere CLAIM.
The same context includes Christ's death on the cross cum self-revelation as the REAL PROOF requiring our careful follow up until fully satisfied.
Omitting the real proof invalidates the claim.
(John 14: 6, 18-21; 19: 30-37)1.) He was still praying to Himself. Why refer to the Father in the first place? Why refer Himself to the son of God and not God Himself?
2.) So you don't believe that part of the Bible is true?
3.) You are not offering real proof. When Jesus prayed to God in the Garden of Gethsemane for this cup to pass, was He asking Himself that? It's just ridiculous, sorry.The REAL PROOF is the accessible VISION of the divine identity and absolute authority of the Son of Man "finished" for demo in Christ's death on the cross, a.k.a., the basis for being "born spiritually of the Spirit".
(John 1:51; 3: 6-15; 14: 18-21; 19: 30-37)
It is confirmable.
Otherwise, what appears ridiculous is explainable. First, "the Father" is a temporary "figure of speech" admitted by Jesus himself (Ibid,16: 25-26). Secondly, "this cup of suffering" is noticeable only in the vocabulary of hearsay witnesses, viz.: Matthew, Mark and Luke, a.k.a., the synoptic gospels. The account by the eyewitness (John) is wholy different.Who do you know Jesus was referring to "The Father" when He said He was speaking figuratively? Maybe He was referring to the example of the woman giving birth?"
In John 15:9: "As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you."
"...just as I've obeyed my Father's commands and remain in His love."
It is pretty clear that Jesus and the Father are separate at this stage.
If not, how do you interpret this? And how do you interpret the high priest asking Jesus if He is the son of God when He was arrested and confirmed it? Do you believe He rose from the dead or do you believe that it is figurative?
I wouldn't describe the synoptic gospels as being mere hearsay. There were eyewitnesses.The stage in the gospel development and timing of the context (John 16: 25-26), on the very eve of the hour of glory, a.k.a., Christ's self-revelation in his death on the cross (Ibid, 17: 1-3), is highly significant and just around the corner.
The distinction between the Father and the Son was a question of divine convenience.
Altruistic language, such as in Christ's answer to the High Priest, is typical of Christ's attitude about to be displaced at his chartacteristic death on the cross. (Phil. 2: 5-11)
The power of Christ's resurrection, prophetically and specifically defined in the "same day" as his death on the cross, is neither figurative nor of the garden- variety. Such power is a mark of self-sufficiency.
(Deut. 21: 22-23; Matt. 27: 50-56)
As far as the Gethsemane scene is concerned, neither Matthew nor Mark nor Luke were eyewitnesses.
Finally, the real proof for Jesus really being the same as God is not in any Scriptures but rather in his direct and personal self-revelation and the permanent stamp thereof in one's life. PTL.
God bless you.Why didn't the High Priest ask Jesus if He was God and not the son of God? They obviously heard these claims from Jesus' followers.
"As far as the Gethsemane scene is concerned, neither Matthew nor Mark nor Luke were eyewitnesses. "
And John automatically was? How do you know he even was there? Who said Matthew, Mark and Luke weren't there?
Finally if Jesus was God, how was He tempted? God cannot be tempted to do evil.
How much of the gospels do you think is automatically not credible or didn't happened?I submit that the two nomenclatures, viz.: "God" and "the Son of God", are variations of the same being.
Why else would Jesus claim, "From this time on you will the Son of Man sitting on the right of the Almighty and coming on the clouds of heaven" and be charged twice for saying "Blasphemcy"?
(Matt. 26:64)
The members of the audience in waiting in the Gethsemane scene were Peter and the two sons of Zebedee (Matt. 26:37) --exactly the same who were present in the Transfiguration (Ibid, 17: 1-13).
All the events reported in the gospels by bona fide disciples (Matthew and John) are credible. The others less so!
However, the knowledge about their secrets, a.k.a., "the Kingdom of heaven" or the divine identity of Jesus Christ, has been exclusively given to his past, present and future certified disciples who have the know-how for introducing others to Jesus in person. (John 17; Matt. 28: 18-20)I was considered blasphemous to claim to be the son of God as that would make Him divine.
John did not write his gospels by himself. How could he have been at all the places his gospels mentions? Therefore he must have relied on eye witnesses so tell him things. Could you consider some of what he wrote as hearsay?Claire,
Being present with Jesus from DAY 1 (John 1: 35-42) all the way through the "LAST DAY" (Ibid, 19: 25-37), nothing of what John (a.k.a. "the disciple Jesus loved") wrote in the 4th Gospel is hearsay. On the contrary, it has insights into programmed learning and spiritual secrets lacking in the other gospels.So not everything in the synoptic gospels can be hearsay then if it mirrors what John said. How does it differ much from the synoptic gospels?
Jesus was only a simple man as was his mother Mary a simple woman; it is true that the Creator God conversed with them as He did with Adam and Eve or Moses and his mother before.
Jesus was never a god or son of god.1Jn 5:20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.
His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.
He wasn't the Son of God eh?
- Deborah Sextonposted 12 years ago0
Posting again.
A lot of Christians use John 8:56-58 to try to prove Yahshua (Jesus) is God.
John 8:56-58
Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
That’s one reason to study the Old Testament
In Exodus 3:13-14
Moses says to God when I tell the people “the God of your fathers hath sent me ” They shall ask me, What is his name? what shall I Tell them?
And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
So what Yahshua was saying is that “The I Am” (God) existed before Abraham and told him of Yahshua’s day
After all we’ve already learned Yahshua wasn’t speaking of himself:
John 12:49
For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
John 14:10
Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
Psalms 33:6, 9
By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Fulfilled in Mattehw 1:21-23
21 - And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: ...
22 - Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
23 - Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, GOD WITH US.
Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: ...and his name shall be called ...The mighty God, The everlasting Father...
Jesus is The God
Jesus is The everlasting Father
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, ...and the Word was God.
John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,...
John 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him,...
John 8:24-27 ...for if ye believe not that I am he,(the Father) ye shall die in your sins.
vs. 27 They (Jews) understood not that he spake to them of the Father.
John 8:58 Jesus said unto them,...Before Abraham was, I am.
- I AM is God, this is why those Jews wanted to stone Him because He was telling them He was God.
John 10:31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
John 10:32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
John 10:33 The Jews answered him, saying,...because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
- Here again Jesus was telling them He was God, and again they wanted to stone Him.
John 14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him (the Father)
.
How is it that they seen the Father?
2 Cor. 4:4 ...Christ, who is the image of God...
Col 1:15 (Jesus) ... is the image of the invisible God...
- This is how God was seen,
John 12:45 he that seeth me seeth him that sent me.
John 14:8 Philip saith Lord, shew us the Father...
John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
Jesus was telling him, "you are looking at the Father", you cannot see God except for His manifestation, His image.
1Tim. 3:16 ...great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh...
John 5:43 I am come in my Father's name...
Christ's name is Jesus who happens to be God, The everlasting Father.**************
None of your verses prove Yahshua is God, just the opposite.
He never once claimed to be God
Jesus was not his nameI agree with you; Jesus/Yashua never claimed to be god in literal terms.
Oh Really, what was His name?
Jesus said these things....
I am come in my Fathers name, John 5:43
...the works that I do in my Fathers name...John 10:25
I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me... John 17:6
Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me...John 17:11
... I kept them in thy name...John 17:12
And I have declared unto them thy name...John17:26
It was prophesied in the Old Testament that the Messiah would declare God's name. Psalms 22:22, also referenced in Hebrews 2:12.
Jesus received His name by inheritance Hebrews 1:4.
What name did He come in?
What name did He declare?
what name did He manifest?
The name He actually received, came in, manifested, and declared was JESUS.
And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. Acts 7:59
There is none other name under Heaven given among men whereby we must be saved Acts 4:12
The name Jesus is greater than every name that is named, in Heaven and in earth.
Forgiveness and remission of sins come ONLY in the name of Jesus,
healing, miracles, salvation all come ONLY through the name of Jesus.
there is NO other name
and how could those verses not prove that Jesus is God?
the son that shall be born, His name shall be called "The mighty God", "The everlasting Father"
they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, GOD WITH US.
And Jesus did claim to be God, that is why those Jews wanted to stone Him in John 8:24,27 10:30-33.
John 4:23-24 The Father ...Is God...Is a Spirit
1 Cor. 8:6 There is One God, the Father (who is a Spirit)
1 Cor. 8:6 One Lord Jesus Christ
2 Cor. 3:17 The Lord is that Spirit"I am come in my Fathers name, John 5:43"
This means He came to represent the Father. It doesn't mean He IS the Father.
"And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. Acts 7:59"
When Jesus ascended, He become one with the Father in the form of the Holy Spirit. Collectively they are God.
Jesus wasn't called Emmanuel.
John 8:24-27
New International Version (NIV)
24 I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.”
25 “Who are you?” they asked.
“Just what I have been telling you from the beginning,” Jesus replied. 26 “I have much to say in judgment of you. But he who sent me is trustworthy, and what I have heard from him I tell the world.”
So God sent God?
And continuing with the verses:
28 So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up[a] the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me. 29 The one who sent me is with me; he has not left me alone, for I always do what pleases him.”
So God was the son of Man? He is now a subordinate? God taught God? God pleases God? You know this doesn't make sense!I've explained it already, my explaining it over and over is not going to get any more clearer.
Gal. 4:4 when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law.
that Holy thing, shall be called the Son of God Luke 1:35
that "thing" is flesh,
This is when the Son came into existence, there was no Son until this point.
This is when God sent His Son.
But this Son is the Word which is God which was made flesh John 1:14
it really is just that simple.
So yes, that Man Christ, the Son of man, was in submission to God.
God took on Himself the seed of Abraham and submitted Himself to the divine plan of redemption.
"I am come in my Fathers name, John 5:43"
Again I ask, what name did He come in?
Whatever name He declared was the name of the Father
so what was His name?
Claire Evans says "Jesus wasn't called Emmanuel."
Is.7:14 - the virgin shall call His name Immanuel
Matt.1:21 - she shall call His name JESUS
vs.22 - all this was done to fulfill the word of the Lord by the prophet Isaiah 7:14
vs.23 - the virgin shall call His name Emmanuel, which means God with us
God was with us because He came Himself as the Son.
Sometime He spoke as a man, like,but of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.
and sometimes He spoke as God, ..Son thy sins be forgiven thee. or Peace, be still
The scriptures show He was God manifest in the flesh, 1 Tim.3:16.
According to the trinity teaching, there being three separate persons yet one God (one Spirit) they believe that this one God came in the flesh, so I ask you, was God praying to God?
If the Father and the Son are co-equal then how can they be Father and Son?
A Father and Son cannot be co-equal, for a son is not equal to his father, but is in submission to his father.
How can the Son of the Father be just as eternal as the Father?
If one is the Father and one is the Son, then the Son had to come into existence AFTER the Father, because Son means, offspring of or descendant of a father. So when did this happen?
If the Son existed as eternally as the Father, then the Son cannot be a Son, Again, Son means offspring of a father, coming into existence After a father.
If there is a Son then there must be a mother, you cannot have a son without a mother, So who is the mother?
So why is God the Holy Ghost left out? is He just someone who joined up with this Father and Son?"that Holy thing, shall be called the Son of God Luke 1:35
that "thing" is flesh,
This is when the Son came into existence, there was no Son until this point.
This is when God sent His Son.
But this Son is the Word which is God which was made flesh John 1:14
it really is just that simple."
No, come on now! How much clearer can you get than, "God sent His Son"! Is there any part of the Bible that says "the Son" means "The Word"?
I think the "Word" part was Jesus coming to fulfill the prophecies.
Is.7:14 - the virgin shall call His name Immanuel
Matt.1:21 - she shall call His name JESUS
vs.22 - all this was done to fulfill the word of the Lord by the prophet Isaiah 7:14
I thought Matthew was based on hearsay?? Who's to say that the writers knew that Emmanuel was Jesus, but it doesn't say so, but automatically called Him Emmanuel? Bottom line. His name is not Emmanuel. It's Jesus.
"Sometime He spoke as a man, like,but of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father."
So how can God as the son not know but God as God knows?John1:1, 14 if the Word was made flesh, who was it if not the Son?
but you answered the question yourself "I think the "Word" part was Jesus coming to fulfill the prophecies. "
The scriptures said was "God manifest in the flesh", 1 Tim.3:16.
and you still did not answer the questions I had in the last post.
"I am come in my Fathers name, John 5:43"
what name did He come in?
Whatever name He declared was the name of the Father
so what was His name?
No matthew is not based on heresy.The word of God is Jesus, yes.
"I am come in my Fathers name, John 5:43"
what name did He come in?
Whatever name He declared was the name of the Father
so what was His name?
I think that means Jesus came on behalf of God. I think it would be just more simple if Jesus claimed to be God and not the son of God.Actually God came in the flesh, i.e. Jesus the Christ.
In Jesus Christ, all the fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily. Not
spiritually only, but bodily as well. Jesus did not put off His deity to
become just a man, but ‘in Him dwells ALL the FULLNESS of the Godhead’.
Jesus was fully God and fully man.
Look at 1 Timothy 1
5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man
Christ Jesus,
6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time,
Just a few verses later in chapter 3, the Bible states:
16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was
manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels,
Preached among the Gentiles,
Believed on in the world, Received up in glory.
Jesus is first called the man who is the mediator between God and men and then He is called God who was manifested in the flesh. Jesus humbled Himself and veiled His deity, but He never quit being God.
"I am come in my Fathers name, John 5:43"
what name did He come in?
Whatever name He declared was the name of the Father
so what was His name?
The only saving name given, that is JESUS, and that is the name of the Father.I think it is true that Jesus is a manifestation of God but that God made Himself a subordinate in the form Jesus. He was God in heaven and on earth the subordinate, Jesus. They were separate on earth, as they were now two entities, but they were still one. It's kind of like breaking a roll of bread and keeping one for yourself and giving the other half to another. They are now separate from one another, in two pieces, but are actually two halves of the same roll.
So it's like Jesus was the son and Father at the same time but took on the role of the subordinate and acknowledged the Father as His superior. Separate on earth but one.
I think the purpose of God sending the son was that He could identify with mankind. God as the spirit is not subject to temptation and did not need to exercise faith because He was the most high. Jesus taught us how to have a relationship with God and the power of faith. He experienced human obstacles. He had to trust God implicitly when His time had come and to ask God for strength to withstand temptation.
I may not be articulating this very well. You've taught me a lot.*****************************
******************************
In Hebrew the word translated at Godhead is Shekhinah, the divine presence, the Holy Ghost, the sacred power of God. Everywhere else the Hebrew & Greek words for Shekhinah was found it was translated as Holy Ghost, but not here.
People think the Godhead means some kind of thing where God, the Son , and Holy ghost dwell.
So Yahshua had the fullness of the power of the Holy Ghost in his body instead of just spiritual.
The Spirit was given to Yahshua as a whole, and not measured to him.
John 3:34
For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.
The Spirit had not been given to the others because Yahshua had it's fullness.
John 7:39
(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)
The spirit would be given to the children of God after Yahshua was glorified, and it would Dwell IN them (bodily)
John 14:17
Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be IN you.
God's Name
Yahshua was born Immanuel, but he went out in the name of God Yahshua, (Yah) Yah Saves. You'll find the name of God, YAH in HalleluYah, meaning Yah be praised."Yahshua was born Immanuel, but he went out in the name of God Yahshua, (Yah) Yah Saves. You'll find the name of God, YAH in HalleluYah, meaning Yah be praised."
"Yahshua was born Immanuel,(God With Us) but he went out in the name of God Yahshua
So then, Jesus is the revealed name of Jehovah.
Jesus = Jehovah saviour
And I totally agree with you on all these points.
See below.
"If you've seen Me you've seen the Father," John 14
"I and the Father are One/Identical." John 10
Neither was Yahsua. It was Ishoa (Aramaic). What matters is that He is Savior, He saves, which is what His name/character means.***************************
The Aramaic Language
Aramaic is one of the Semitic languages, an important group of languages known almost from the beginning of human history and including also Arabic, Hebrew, Ethiopic, and Akkadian (ancient Babylonian and Assyrian). It is particularly closely related to Hebrew, and was written in a variety of alphabetic scripts. (What is usually called "Hebrew" script is actually an Aramaic script.)
http://cal.huc.edu/aramaic_language.html
If ¥ou read Hebrew you would know this***********
The OT was written in Hebrew and Aramaic and it is twins with Hebrew
Yahshua was born to Hebrews, therefore he was Hebrew
There are errors in your logic. Just because Jesus said I do not speak of my own accord does not meant that nothing He said was for Himself, as when He told them to go get the donkey for Him, He wasn't saying for them to get the donkey for the Father. Therefore before Abraham was "I AM" is for Himself, but "of" the Father, in "alignment" with the Father. "Father give them the glory that We had before the foundation of the world," John 17
***************************
Oh well, the Donkey proves it!
And I have errors in my Logic?
Yahshua clearly said it was God speaking, and in more than one place.
He had to speak sometimes, but when he taught or did works it was God
He also told his disciples they would be one with him the way he is with the Father.
It doesn't mean Yahshua or the disciples are the same person as GodDebra is correct. Makes more sense if you are open to what was logical and what was reasonable in those times. being raised baptist this mystery always confused me some how so this is great dialogue never the less. Blessings. Does not mean I do not believe in Jesus Christ. i believe he more of a way to understand God. If Jesus never existed many would never know God as they do. For this I am grateful for Jesus Christ. 1
*************************
You are right about Yahshua, if it wasn't for him everyone would have forgotten and/or would have never known God existed.
Take a look at Moses and the brazen snake.
The making of a bronze snake or the Nehustan is attributed to Moses or in Numbers 21:6-9
6. And the LORD sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died.
7. Therefore the people came to Moses, and said, We have sinned, for we have spoken against the LORD, and against thee; pray unto the LORD, that he take away the serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people.
8. And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.
9. And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.
It was not the copper serpent that healed the Israelites; but, it was their looking up and submitting themselves to God.
So when Yahshua came he caused us to look up and know God through his life. . Yahshua wanted us to see that God exists and loves us. He wanted us to look up and see that God still wants us to come back.
We can convince ourselves of whatever we want for we have the freedom to do so however if you're going to talk about the Christain faith logic should dictate that something is very special about Jesus for the focus from Heaven and Earth is on Jesus.
It was Jesus not an arch angel that was given the position on the right hand of God. Like it or not one day every person, good and bad will kneel before Jesus-(Kneel Before Jesus). Every tongue will Now Confess That Jesus is Lord-(Not A Man, But Our Savior).
Romans 14:11
For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.
Like I say we can tell ourselves whatever but one day it shall come to past it is Jesus whom we will be kneeling to.Is Jesus actually the same being as God?
No Jesus cannot be a god; he prayed to the Creator God; if Jesus had been a god he need not pray to anyone; he would just do what he wanted.
Only an unwise man would pray to himselfHere is a clue given by Jesus about himself.
"Do not believe me, then, if I am not doing the things my Father wants me to do. But if I do them, even if you do no believe me, you should at least believe my deeds, in order that you may know once and for all that the Father in me and that I am in the Father."
(John 10: 37-38)
The "real proof" is saved for demo of Jesus' absolute authority over his own death and life (verses 17-18).
Are there any authentications or invalidations?Why didn't Jesus just say He was God instead of constantly referring to Himself as a subordinate?
The language of God, as used by Jesus Christ (Phil. 2: 5-11) perfectly reflects the following disparity.
"My thoughts, " says the LORD, "are not like yours, and my ways are different from yours. As high as the heavens are above the earth, so high are my ways and thoughts above yours."
Isa. 56: 8-9
This explains why Jesus, in his incarnate days, used altruistic language and "figures of speech" about the Father saving the plain language for the day he was "lifted up from the earth" in a unique death.
John 12: 32-33; 16: 25-26I don't think it gets any plainer than claiming you're God and not the son of God.
By logical reasoning, there must be a higher God who created Jesus. Therefore, Jesus is not a God, but the Son of God.
The conclusion depends on which logic one uses, viz.: the divine or the human (such as ours).
Holy Spirit-assisted breakthrough in knowledge about Jesus, a.k.a., being "born spiritually of the Spirit", in the power of Christ's death on the cross, is accompanied by movement to the higher level and sustainable progress therein.
John 3: 1-15; 19: 30-37How did Jesus get tempted if God can't be tempted? God can't be tempted to do evil.
When Jesus broke the Sabbath and because Jesus called God His Father, the Jewish leaders accused Him of saying He is equal to God.
Let me point out John 5:19
"I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by Himself, He can do only what he sees His Father do."
It is pretty clear Jesus is making a distinction between Himself and God, definitely saying He is a subordinate.That's because the man Christ (the human part) was not God, God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself 1 Cor. 5:19
So do you believe the trinity theory?Trinity is false; neither Moses nor Jesus mentioned of it.
Chevyssbowtie, that's exactly what I have been arguing. Christ on earth was not God. God was within in but He was not God on earth.
Moses nor Jesus mentioned mentioned the trinity because the Holy Spirit only came into existence when Jesus ascended into heaven and become one with God with the from of the Holy Spirit.I do not believe in a trinity either.
I agree that the Man (Flesh, human) Christ was not God, but God was in Christ, meaning God was manifest (made known) in the flesh. 1 Tim.3:16
This Human Christ was the image of the invisible God, Col.1:15, Hebrews 1:3 Christ is the express image of God's person.
That is what the scriptures teach.
I don't understand your statement - "the Holy Spirit only came into existence when Jesus ascended into heaven and become one with God with the from of the Holy Spirit."
This is false, There has Always been the Holy Spirit, because The Holy Spirit is God Himself, God is a Spirit... John 4:24 And God is A Holy God, Joshua 24:19 Isa. 43:3 so He is the Holy Spirit.It's generally known that the Holy Spirit is God and Jesus's spirit as one. Pentecost tells us the Holy Spirit poured into the world after Jesus' ascension to heaven. He said in Acts 1:4: "Do not leaven Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father has promised, which you have heard Me speak about. For John baptised with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.
And then there is Matthew 18:19:
“baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”
So the gift Jesus is speaking about in Acts is the Holy Spirit as mentioned by Jesus in Matthew, clearing indicating that He together with the Father is the Holy Spirit.The Holy Spirit existed before the Christ existed
Luke 1:35, Mat.1:18 say the Holy Spirit over shadowed Mary, and that which was in her was of the Holy Spirit,The the Holy Spirit that will enter her will be Jesus and God in the form of the Holy Spirit. That trinity is confirmed by Matthew.
Thinking again, the Holy Spirit did exist prior to Jesus' time on earth as they are one and the same. However, there is no Holy Spirit without the aspect of Jesus.
So I was wrong to say that the Holy Spirit didn't exist before Jesus, as they always were one, yet separate on earth.The purpose of the Holy Spirit or God's power, in coming upon Mary, was for the exclusive work of personally revealing what she found impossible to believe: "I am a virgin. How, then, can this be?"
In other words, there is no parallel, whatsoever, between the concept of divine "entering" and the conjugal act between man and woman. This is a common but serious error!
To clarify, the Holy Spirit coming into the world after Jesus' ascension means we can all have a personal relationship with God. I think before Jesus, people did not have that connection, except the prophets. The Jews relied on the prophets to tell them about God.
According to the road map in the Scriptures, the relationship with the self-revealing God one personally knows depends on the exact timing of "the kind of death Jesus suffered" by which alone he draws everyone to himself.
(John 12: 32-33; Ephe. 4: 8-10)
Like any ruling dictator, temptation has but long been removed from the equation and only the extremes are left to dictate to the masses. Great rewards are bestowed upon anyone who worships, obeys and pleases the dictator while equally great punishments are meted out to those who don't worship, obey and please. Such is the very same kind of reward/punishment system we observe from religions, especially the Abrahamic.
God can't be tempted to do evil because God IS evil.
Fair enough. So, how does one explain the contradiction between Gods word, 'an eye for eye' and Jesus' word, 'turn the other cheek' if Jesus can only do what he sees from His Father?Because the "evil God" you mention is actually Satan. Note that Jesus did not say, "You have heard God say..." Instead He said, you have heard IT say..."
Let me explain this to you:
First of all, the Jews worshipped many gods and so “God” throughout the OT is not the monotheistic God. In the OT, God is referred to as Elohim but Elohim is actually a plural and reads “gods”. This is referred when it says in Genesis: “Let US make man in our image”. I think “God” is a myriad of different pagan gods. As I mentioned earlier, pagans often sacrificed their first born and Abraham was going to sacrifice Isaac, his first born. The early Hebrews worshipped the serpent god of the Sumer Empire and the Levites, who wrote the Torah, were known as the “Sons of the Great Serpent”. Yahweh was depicted as half a human and half a snake and the Levites worshipped him as Leviathan, hence the name. They placed bronze and copper serpent symbols on the altars of their temples. Remember the story where God said if the Jews look at the brazen symbol, they would be healed from the snake bites? It’s very clear who God is here: Leviathan.
Jesus came to correct the corrupted idea of God, which to the chagrin of the high priests.
I'm sure the true nature of God (I'm not very familiar with the OT) can be found occasionally in the OT but for the most part, He's depicted as a raving lunatic, egomaniac and murderer.
So the Levites and high priests made their Jewish laws according to their own will and claimed it was God's law, too. If it was, then Jesus would have stoned prostitutes and he did not. Quite the contrary in fact.**********
In the old testament they worshiped the one almighty God.
Elohyim does not mean Gods. It means God with a duel nature.
Yim is the suffix in Jewish words showing one thing with double attributes.
It is always used for God. The other names he is called is for his attributes.
The yim is used for hands, eyes, skies, and God.
You might want to look this up.As humans, we tend to see everything as duallistic in nature. The right hand knows what the left hand is doing, so to speak. Duallity is a facet of the mind in this way. We must get away from our conditioned mind and let it be as it is. I may only be able to see this for myself, so it is up to the reader to decipher the meaning of it.
I have suffered and I have desired a great many things, even being hanged at the neck. I have lost a great many people and then again, I have been a great many people. I have seen this world move and change a great many times as well. If it is God that limits my perceptions to this, then I want nothing to with it. If it is God that is in the beauty of nature and life, then I want everything to do with it.*****************
Yim means The one God with a Dual Nature. He is Merciful yet he is Just.
We do all see and live in Duality, but it isn't wrong. It's how we look at it.
South can't exist without North. Up cannot exist without down. Take away South and Down and North and Up no longer exists
So opposites are one as a whole just extremes of the other.
Examples
If we give too much love always putting our self second people will use us, or not come around because a person who always gives makes you feel bad. Because most can't live up to that.
A person who never gives love, is cold and no one wants to be around you. They are usually avoided and disliked.
Those are extremes of each other.
So the best place to be is in the middle of both.
It's balance we need.
God is a balanced DualityThe middle way was Buddha's stance, yet his way is more of science than a religion. The middle way entails seeing dualism as a reallity and it is in accepting this reallity, that duallity fades to the side and is not important to the total scheme of things. So therefor it does not matter what I beleieve, so much as that I act like a true gentleman and take no side at all.
***********
I base mine on Jewish Mysticism that existed since Bible days a long long time ago
Science is not apart from God it is a part of God. He created everything.So then did God give us higher functions of understanding. I am enlightened and I will see heaven, thus I will never come back to this. I have suffered through many lives to discover these things. I have been like Jesus and I have been like Buddha. Now I am as myself and God is with me. I do not think I am important nor do I think I am special. I have just seen what it is in myself that I aspire to be... Of God and of life. I did not need God to see this, only an open mind in which I was open to myself. I accepted the world as it is and everything on it. If I am reborn or if I go to heaven is of no import, only that I share what I have found with others.
Elohim is a plural of El. That is a fact that it's a plural.
There is an argument that it represents God's duality and that it represents strength and so it can be attributed to God, so they say. However, if one believes in a dual nature of God, then one has to concede God is both the creator of good and evil. If He is responsible for evil, there wouldn't be clean words for me to say about Him. Fortunately, I know that isn't the case.
Elohim is also used to describe false gods, angels and even human beings. So that is a bit strange. Then sometimes in the Old Testament, God is referred back to El, which is obviously the singular. Now He no longer has duality.
So who is the Elohim mentioned in Genesis? Clearly many gods for they said, "Let US make man in our own image."
And Genesis is an variant of the pagan Sumerian texts so coming to the conclusion of "gods" meaning "elohim" is logical.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_ … fm?id=1303****************
Elohyim is a Dual singular, it is not plural as in more than one. You would have to understand the way Hebrews write their language.
It can be plural if used with plural verbs, but not in the Genesis example.
El is the generic for false Gods. Not Elohyim.
It is his dual attribute. Nothing was created without him. Anyway everything has a polar opposite. Something can't exist without it's polar opposite. We are created in his image, and we are dual. I know the meanings of the language I speak.
Genesis 1 wasn't translated just right. You need a Hebrew Bible to see what it really says.
Anyway if you read on it says and God created man in his own image (not more than one God)
Genesis 1:27
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
No reason to give a link with someone's opinion.
I have a Hebrew husband sitting right beside me now, and he also understands Hebrew word meanings.
From the Hebrew writings
“The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to those, You want to know my name? I am called according to my actions. When I judge the creatures I am Elohim, and when I have mercy with My world, I am named YHVH” (Ex R. 3:6).
God is Dual in that he is Merciful and JustGod is referred to El sometimes in the Bible as well. Is He now a false god then?
If you believe God has a duel attribute, then you believe He is the creator of both good and evil? How can Jesus die for the sins of the world to save us from what God created? What kind of sicko creates evil and then condemns us for committing evil.
"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."
This is true. However, this suggests to me that Satan and God are co-creators. It seems to be an innate quality of humans to commit evil. If God created us perfect, how was this so? I'm not sure if you are aware that Genesis is actually a plagiarized version of the pagan Sumerian Tablets? It is much older than Genesis and has an Adam and Eve story so I'm not surprised that gods are mentioned. The Sumerian Tablets tell us that the gods, the Annunaki, manipulated the DNA of mankind through genetic engineering so that man could be in their image.
In Genesis, man was made out of clay. In the Sumerian Text, it is the same:
Nammu, who is either the sea or the goddess of the riverbed, goes to her son Enki, who is asleep in the deep (the Apsu) and entreats him to rise from his bed and "fashion servants of the gods" (Kramer, History Begins 109). Enki, who after all is the god of wisdom, thinks of the germinating powers of the clay and water of the abyss, and he tells Nammu to have some womb-goddesses pinch off this clay and have some "princely fashioners" thicken it, so she can mold it or give birth to it:
Mix the heart of the clay that is over the abyss,
The good and princely fashioners will thicken the clay,
You, [Nammu] do you bring the limbs into existence;
Ninmah [earth-mother or birth goddess] will work above you,
The goddesses [of birth] . . . will stand by you at your fashioning;
O my mother, decree its [the newborn's] fate,
Ninmah will bind upon it the image (?) of the gods,
It is man . . . . (Kramer, History Begins 109)
Notice image of the gods. “Let us make man in our own image.”
http://faculty.gvsu.edu/websterm/SumerianMyth.htm
Here is the rest of the Sumerian story.
I’m paraphrasing:
But Enki had a solution. He proposed to cross breed the Anunnaki with some local beasts known as Homo erectus, and make them do the work. Everybody agreed. (Well, all of the Anunnaki.) Enki’s proposal was to combine DNAs -- i.e. create man in the image of the Anunnaki. Enki and his half-sister, Ninhursag (Ninti) began a program of genetic engineering and created ADAPA ("the mixed worker") or ADAMA. Ninti, given the job of carrying the creation to term, was able to announce, "I have created it!"
After Ninti's first born, the team resorted to 14 Birth Goddesses to begin an assembly line birthing operation for the new mixed workers. Unfortunately, the ADAPA was ahybrid -- i.e., he could not procreate. So this plan worked for a while.
But the assembly line goddesses found the program somewhat arduous. Assembly line birthing has never been what it’s cracked up to be. For the goddesses it was less than appealing -- not a whole lot better than mining. Thus in a second act of creation of man [Ah, so! Two creation stories!], Enki and Ninti created a man and woman who could procreate. Enki just didn't tell Enlil about the new models. [The plot thickens.]
Meanwhile, Enlil had decided he wanted his own undocumented workers to do the ditch digging and crop raising in Mesopotamia. So he placed some of Enki and Ninti's creations in a place called in the Sumerian texts, E.DIN. To tend the garden, and the trees. Enlil, however, still thought they were hybrids and incapable of procreating, whereas Enki had sold him the new models. Boy was Enlil surprised! For, of course, the new state of (love) affairs eventually became obvious! These two had been eating of the Tree of Life! And for this crime, Enlil threw them out of the Garden
More:
http://www.halexandria.org/dward180.htm*************
No he is not false because some call him El, but false God's aren't called by any names of God, only El. El is Generic. You twist my words
I don't care about any of the myths.
God is not a sicko. It just so happens that Duality exists. Nothing could exist without it.
The way it is said. God wanted to give so he made a vessel he could give to. But The Vessel could not contain God and it shattered creating the levels. God gave us free will, because he wanted someone who would truly love him and not be robots, People chose not to love him, but to love pleasure.
Evil is real, we know by the people who murder, but a murderer doesn't have to murder, it's a choice, we all have choices.
He gave the earth to mankind, to have dominion over it. This is what happens when man is in control. It's chaos.
Seems you don't want to learn anything, not from me, you just want to debate...but I don't want to.
I know the Hebrews always say God as a Dual singular.So to the unlearned it looks like Gods.It is true that duality exists as good and evil. Therefore God and Satan were never created. They are the complete opposite of one another.
It is said that God is the creator of both good and evil. Do you agree with this?
Why is God sometimes referred to as El and sometimes Elohim?
Forums are about debating. That is how people learn from one another. It is how I learn things. You cannot ignore the fact that the creation story was a pagan myth and thus Genesis is not original. The story is not unique. Gods created man in the Sumerian Tablets, which predates Genesis by far, so I think it is perfectly reasonable to deduct that Elohim means god in this case.
Elohim is plural, whenever there is an "im" in Hebrew it is plural, as in "Seraphim" and there are multiple Serphs in Isaiah 6. Elohim can be used for false "gods" because it is plural, "el" can be used for a false "god" because it is singular.
Plus there's multiple verses that show the Father, Son and Holy Spirit being God. Even in Genesis 1, "God the Father Created," "God the Son Spoke/Word," and "the Spirit of God/Holy Spirit hovered over the waters.
Claire,
Here is an alternate of understanding of John 5:19.
As can be confirmed by personal experience, the "distinction" you noted is spurious.
The proof can be found in the hour of Spirit-active, perfect and diacritical death on the cross, at which time "the Son of Man went back to the place where he was before", i.e., in heavenly glory, in order to draw everyone to himself. This is the everlasting GOOD NEWS!
(John 6: 62-64; 12: 32-33; 17: 1-3; 19: 30-37)Yes, Jesus was from heaven. He was a creation of God. Where else would He have come from? Angels are in heaven, too.
Claire, I hope you are enjoying our little discussion as much as I do. Many thanks! Here is a complete mug shot of the controversial Jesus.
The name Immanuel, which means "God is with us" or INCARNATION via a virgin conception, was an indication of God's unlimited power just like its reverse or GLORIFICATION in his death on the cross whence "the Son of Man went back to the place where he was before".
The is why the scripture says, "People will look at him whom they pierced."
(Matt. 1: 22-25; John 6: 62-64; 8: 21-28; 12: 32-33; 14: 18-21; 17: 1-2; 19: 30-37)I am, too, thank you. Have you ever wondered why the prophecy doesn't name Jesus by His name and not Emmanuel? Would that not have made believers out of the Jews?
You are welcome.
On a light note, "What is in a name? A rose is a rose by any other name."
More seriously, the exclusive means of producing sustainable faith both in Jews and Gentiles alike is not the name but what Christians have long misplaced at great cost but not totally lost, viz.: the very ministry of Christ's baptism work in the Holy Spirit at his death on the cross and his powerful self-revelation therein according to the Scriptures (ranging from Genesis to Revelation).
This is what Jesus came to do. Isn't it?I was playing Devil's Advocate in case you didn't know.
Emmanuel is clearly a title like "Christ".
Yes, He came to do that. He also came to identity with us by being human and to teach us the right way to live. Nobody can truly know the nature of God without knowing Jesus.Thanks God that we both know for ourselves and can also make known his ways and means of self-revelation to a world which is hungry for his knowledge.
Claire,
Jesus allows, by his own free will and power, somethings happen, such as the following:
1) His temptation (Matt. 4: 1-11);
2) Self-identification for arrest and self-surrender (John 18: 1-11);
3) Self-incrimination in death sentencing (Matt. 26: 57-68; John 18: 19-24)
4) Willingly giving up his own life (Matt. 27:50; John 19:30)
5) Taking back his own life (Matt. 27: 51-56; John 19: 31-37)
If Scriptures confirm 100% the exercise of Jesus' absolute rights, at his death on the cross, we too will have the pleasure of his self-revelation for our personal acquaintance and sustainable faith.
Bless you!
Then, by logical reasoning, there must be a higher God who created God.
"Jesus spat on the ground, made some mud with the spittle and rubbed the mud on the eyes of a man born blind" after which "he went, washed his face and came back seeing".
John 9
paarsurrey, the whole community was shocked. Aren't you?
Wouldn't you say that the following two CREATIVE MIRACLES are essentially identical?
1) Jesus' Healing a man born blind and
2) God's forming a man out of the moist soil of the ground (Gen. 2: 6-7)
Is Jesus actually the same being as God?
Not at all; Jesus is a human being who created nothing.We are all the same beings as God. We acknowledge the God within ourselve's. Jesus understood this and so then did Buddha and all of the other wandering ascettics of the day. When we just accept it as it is, we have been created again and we are awake to it.
This is what is meant by true enlightenment.
Not a bad ambition at all!
However, you can make it happen only by accepting and obeying the terms of Christ's unique death on the cross and becoming truly "born spiritually of the Spirit", i.e., in the very image of God.
There is no other alternative.For you there may be no other alternative. One must remember that the teaching was meant for everyone and that it should be taken with a grain of salt, which meant to chew it and accept it as one can. It didn't become a must until the egos of men made it that way, all philosophy must be an aquired taste and it must lead others to enlightenment. We have destroyed the teaching, in turning it into a religion.
Like Adam and Eve before us, we all live with the choice between "the tree of life", a.k.a, "Christ's death on the cross" (Spirit-active, perfect and diacritical), and "the tree of knowledge of what is good and what is bad" (religion).
Only in the former is there God's characteristic self-revelation, as "source of life" --self-sufficient life, in Jesus Christ.
It is true that the teaching is for everyone and the Teacher is exclusively one. We add or take away from the teaching at our own peril!. As you said yourself, what we need is not any man-made religion but personal knowledge of who Jesus Christ really is. We need to strive and pray for his personal revelation to make our lives more meaningful and really worth living.
Jesus said, "I have come in order that you might have life --life in all its fulllness" (John 10:10). This is exactly the kind of life which is within our reach in the teaching of Jesus but outside of all religions (even Christianity).
I pray that you will find it.
I am sure a human being with absolutely no claim of being a god; and I don't believe any human being a god; that will be mis-statement.
Jesus: "It is written in your Law that God said, 'You are gods'. We know that what the Scripture says is true for ever; and God called those people gods, the people to whom the message was given."
John 10: 34-35
I propose the following two points are worthy of coordinated and urgent research and study.
1) The name "gods" to people is assigned by God himself. (Psa. 82:6)
2) The power that makes people "gods" is defined in God's "message", a.k.a., "the Good News from the glorious and blessed God". (1 Tim. 1:10-11)
Any seconders?
Instead of repeating the same argument like before, you should refute my reply or hold your peace.
I am not arguing nor am I defending. I am stating a truth and nothing more. Why would I want to refute something as mundane as any of this. I either accept it or edify it. My answers should not matter if they are going to be all negative and quarellsome.
If you think I am right, then I am, that is up to you. I can get nowhere and learn nothing by being quarellsome. Your views bring you close to peace, just follow them to peace and there you will find God. You just have to be willing to see it.
John 10:30 I and the Father are one. Direct Quote from Jesus
Jesus tried to get people to see that for themselve's. I and the father are one and so this to applies to all creation, the universe if you so choose.
Suppose, as is common in the gospel, the REAL PROOF of the truth is far greater than the CLAIMS of Jesus?
This is absolutely true. The workings of the universe are a mystery to us and an even greater mystery to those before us. To them the universe was infinite, to us it is getting smaller everyday. But it is the workings and the cause that we still do not understand. Like the apostle John, I believe their are things about what we see, that were never meant for us to understand.
That could simply mean Jesus thinks the same way as God.
That could also mean that we all think the same way as God. We all have the abillity to do great works and we also have the abillity to do great harm. The truth is, it is how we live our lives that determine if we are divine or not.
If I did "think" the same was as God, I would be a tyrannical dictator ruling over the masses using fear and harsh punishments to keep the masses in line and doling out rewards to anyone who obeyed and worshiped me. Sound familiar?
I expect no rewards from God, I don't really care for candy. I saw that life was a mixture of bitter and sweet and that one could not have one without the other. To me this is God. The final realization that, it does not matter. I must live because I am living. I live for myself and if I have to carry others along, so be it. The propensities that we have towards things, really has nothing to do with God, so much as if we are Godly.
Does this make sense, more so than religion?No religion makes sense anyway!
In Christ, who is above all religions, however, there is "life in all its fullness" --a victorious life worth living including immortality here and now.
John 10:10; 11: 25-26; 14: 18-21; 19: 30-37
It matters enough, therefore, a great deal to wish to be liberated by Christ's self-revelation from all religious hangovers! AMEN.It matters to those that follow the doctrine, not so much myself. I do not contest the truth that you have found for yourself, I am saying that it does not work for me, nor does any religion for that matter.
If there is "life in all its fullness", outside personal experience of Christ's self-revelation in his death on the cross, I would have agreed with you 100%.
We are all here to question, search, find answers and show the way. Aren't we?
By accident or design, the name and the reply are synonymous. Aren't they?
A Troubled Man,
In the context of the infinitely higher dimensions of God's thoughs and ways than men's (Isa. 53: 8-9), "thinking the same way as God" is a compliment exclusvely fit for the divine.
Don't you agree at least in principle?
One's answer to the question, "Is Jesus actually the same being as God?", becomes conclusive and sustainable if and only when based on the personal vision of "a Lamb standing in the centre of the throne ... appearing to have been killed" and at the same time divinely alive, well and active according to the Scriptures and the gospel.
Rev. 5
Christ's unique death on the cross, viz.: Spirit-active, perfect and diacritical refers (Matt. 16:18; Luke 9: 28-36; Matt. 22: 29-32; 26: 26-29, 64; 27: 50-56 confirmed by John 8: 21-28; 12: 32-33; 14: 18-21; 19: 30-37)That's about it. I think that once the truth is known, it really doesn't matter what I say, or what you say. The truth sets you free. If someone else hasn't found it, it's not my determination. I believe that E as in E=MC2 is just another name for he whose name is silent.
The point that I have been unable to convince you of, is that we are all God. You just refuse to see it. We are unworthy to worship God, for we would be worshipping ourselve's. There is no need to be angry about it. Be aware of it and you will be happy and there will be no need for anger. Be mindful of others and you will feel better about yourself.
I don't agree with your faulty notion; I know that I and you are simply human beings created by the Creator God.
God means to be self-sufficient. "Being mindful of others in order to feel better about oneself" falls way below the divine standard!
Are you sure? Being mindful is what society is all about. You seem so indoctrinated that it appears that you hate anyone that does not agree. I am just pointing out how it looks to me, don't take it personally.
Yes, I am sure.
If one is to be mindful, we had better make the sharp distinction between the standards of the human and the divine. Having long thrown away all my indoctrinations, I welcome free discussions with disagreements in order to test the strength of my own ideas and faith. If you can say the same thing, you will have no problem with me.I have something and that something has only the importance that I give it and it is not important. I love the premise of religious belief, but I do not believe. I have a knowledge of myself and it helps me to be human and divine. I am of God and so is every other being in the universe, be it cat, dog or human. Life is the miracle, not the actions of men. A true hero bosts not for he is only human.
Let us hope to live long enough to see whose ideas/faith stands or falls when tested.
****************
Oh I disagree with this.
It says we are Gods, meaning we are a shadow of his image, but we are not God. We are Children of God according to scripture.
John 10:34
"Yahshua answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?"
Psalms 82:6
I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High
And it says to worship God.
I believe a few things you do that are outside the church religions, but not that we are God.
With the following CREDENTIALS, in writing and practice, if not Jesus then who?
1. PROPHECY: "A child is born to us! A son is given to us to become our ruler with the names, 'Wonderful', 'Counsellor', 'Mighty God', 'Eternal Father', and 'Prince of Peace'."
(Isa. 9:6)
2. PRACTICE: The "tree of life", a.k.a., Christ's death on the cross: the "source of life", knowledge of God, sustainable faith, and "true worship" in Spirit and truth
(John 4: 21-26; 19: 30-37; Matt. 27: 50-56; Acts 2; Heb. 10: 19-25)************
That verse says he would be called "Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, and Prince of Peace". And many people have and do call him that.
It does not say he is "wonderful, counselor, etc.In his case, his name is his being.
Given his perpetual self-revelation, according to the means and ways in the gospel, the authentication by anyone of Jesus' divine identity and absolute authority is confirmed not on the basis of hearsay (even if Biblical) but by personal experience alone!
(John 1: 50-51)
I confirm.
*********************
Correct.
I agree with you again
Own my perspectives or point of view, JESUS, will consider as GOD since, GOD possess these attributes omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent . . .JESUS, just only great servant of Almighty GOD ...by saving humankind into salvation
history:80
section:gg1And you let the church do this to you? Think with your own mind or you will find that hole you feel, will never be filled.
"JESUS, just a great servant of Almighty GOD" is a divine, temporary disguise ("curtain") of the Incarnation.
There is overwhelming evidence in the Scriptures indicating that Jesus Christ and, on the one hand, the God Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; and, on the other hand, the God of Moses and Elijah, are all one and the same.
For conclusive proof, the identification is confirmable by personal experience.
- JoelMcLendonposted 12 years ago0
Deborah is correct
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elohim
When Elohim is used with singular verbs and adjectives elohim is usually singular, "god" or especially, the God. When used with plural verbs and adjectives elohim is usually plural, "gods" or "powers".
In Hebrew, the word when referring to the Name of God is grammatically singular, and takes a singular verb in the Hebrew Bible.
You should get a lot out of the link below.
http://www.altupc.com/altupc/articles/elohimpl.htm Is Jesus actually the same being as God?
No, Jesus is a humble servant of the Creator God.I believe the King Jame bible says:
John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.What is the source of John writing these words?
From the question you ask you are aware of this passage which also indicated to me that perhaps you already know.
John could have no source to write those words; the words depict no reality.
Act 4:19 But Peter AND JOHN answered and said unto them, ...
Act 4:20 For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.
1Jn 1:1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
1Jn 1:2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us
1Jn 1:3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.
1Jn 1:4 And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full.
1Jn 1:5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you,
The WORD of life was manifested and John was an Eyewitness and heard HIS words, there is his source. Straight from the Lord.
So how you can say that John's words depict no reality is totally false.Again. The bible is but a story of a journey into civilized behavior. It is not the word of God, if it were, we would all have no choice but to agree.
Can you tell me your view of civilized behavior without the Words of God or God not being in the equation?
Life was hard back then and the best idea to define things back then were spiritual in nature. No one from that part of the world had ever heard of other religions, but the ones that were present at the time. If we decide to look at it from a distance, we see that everybody, no matter what part of the world they were from, had some idea as to what it is they were seeking as a whole.
To be civilized we must be able to discuss it as unbiased as possible. that is true civilized behavior but we confuse civilization with society.
The Bible is the Word of God. And the Word is forever settled in Heaven, And we do have the choice to agree with it or not to agree.
There is nothing wrong with God's Word, what is wrong is all the Mis-interpretations of it, from peoples private interpretations.Self delluded perceptions lead to all sorts of havic. If I truly believe what I am thinking, I will protect it with many levels of violence. Which to me is totally the wrong way to go about things. If I don't think and just attack, I am reducing myself to savagery and that is not gentlemanly behavior. Especially in a society so quick to point out manners.
Just because you would be violent in defense of your beliefs does not mean all will be.
@Chevy. Yup. Interpretations are the issue. Not the Word of God.again you confuse the words for the meaning. Read the statement first, then answer it, don't just read the words, look for the meaning of the statement, apply it to basic behavior, then make the comment. That is what's called having the last word and it is not always right. I know I'm wrong 90% of the time. But what of the other ten%?
Words are only spoken; they are not seen as he mentions; so John's witnessing is not to be trusted.
The Word of life which is "the Word was made flesh", that is what John was talking about, so He seen the Word in action, and heard Him speak and wrote to us what he heard Jesus do and speak.
To read John as you do, completely contradicts his other writings.
He is writing in a style known as "personification" in the book you are quoting above.
So you think he is in contradictionhere with his other writings?
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:
Why would have to give this revalation to jesus Christ, if Christ were God?It seems that the Bible indicates that both are true--Jesus is both fully human (as the son of God) and fully God (here are a few verses but more are below...Titus 2: "...Our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ..."; 2Peter 1: "Our God and Savior, Jesus Christ..." John 20: "My Lord and my God..."; John 14: "If you've seen me, you've seen the Father..." I'm stating scriptures before my beliefs (it would be way too much to post all the scriptures on here!) but take a look at the verses--I believe they claim both.
JESUS WAS FULLY HUMAN
Matthew 1:1, 16; Luke 2:12; Matt. 2:11; Luke 2:43; Matt. 8:27; Mark 2:7; Matt. 26:12; Hebrews 10:10; 1 Peter 2:24; Matt. 4:2; Mark 11:12; Luke 7:34; John 4:6; John 4:7; Matt. 11:19; Matt. 11:19; John 11:35; Col 1:15; Luke 2:40; Mat. 4:1; Hebrews 5:8; Luke 23:46
I believe that Jesus was fully human. Born of a woman, He was created in the image of God and was called the “Son of Man.” He shared in the limitations of his brothers, as he was a fragile infant and a young boy before He was a man. He grew in wisdom and stature and had to learn obedience. He had a physical body and was hungry, thirsty, ate food, and drank. He became tired and wept. He was tempted and he died.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
JESUS IS FULLY GOD
Matt. 12:25; Matt. 27:18; Eph. 3:30; Col. 2:10; Heb. 1:8-12; Heb. 13:8; Matt. 18:20; Rom. 8:10; Isaiah 9:6; John 1:1-3; Rev. 1:8; Rev. 4:11; John 1:10; 1 Cor. 8:6; Heb. 3:3-4; 1 Chr. 16:33; Rev. 20:12; Matt. 7:22-23; Matt. 25: 31-33; John 14:1-6; Matt. 11:27; Matt. 16:16; Luke 2:11; Luke 3:4-6; Phil. 2:11; John 20:28; Hebrews 1:8; Matt 1:21, Acts 4:12; Heb 2:10; Luke 2:11; Col 1:15; John 1:41; Hebrews 4:14; Hebrews 6:20; Matt. 13:57; Matt. 21:11; Matt. 27:11; Matt. 27:37; Luke 24:1-3; Acts 1:22
I believe that Jesus is fully God. He is omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent (in His divine nature), and immutable. Jesus is eternal and is the creator and sustainer of all things. He is the rightful judge of humankind and also their Savior. He is the image of the invisible God and the Messiah. He is called “Son of God,” “Lord,” and “the Christ.” He is King and demonstrated His deity and power by His resurrection.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*******************
Every Christian has posted those same verses. They do not say Yahshua is God.
Clearly he isn'tSee my last post that I just made--I included verses in full. Do these verses not say that Jesus is God? I'd love your sincere reply. Thanks!
***********************
No, there is no verse that says he is God.
I do read scripture as a whole in English, Greek, and Hebrew.
I study it and use logic and knowledge of the Language (what the words mean)
Do you think you are the only one who reads scripture?
From the things I see you post, it shows me that maybe you read but don't understand."No, there is no verse that says he is God."
I don't see how the verses I posted don't say this. I am all for searching out truth and using logic, but I don't see how the verses I've posted say something other that Jesus being God. I'd truly like to understand why you believe this is not the case, but simply saying, "No, there is no verse that says he is God" when I just posted several doesn't help me to understand why you make this statement.
"I do read scripture as a whole in English, Greek, and Hebrew."
That's awesome--more people should study the original languages. I study the ancient texts as well, yet I'm not seeing the implications that you are making. I'd truly want to know if this was, indeed, the case.
"I study it and use logic and knowledge of the Language (what the words mean)"
As so I--I'm wondering how two people that study the same text, especially looking at the original languages, come up with such different interpretations?
"Do you think you are the only one who reads scripture?"
Absolutely not!
"From the things I see you post, it shows me that maybe you read but don't understand."
I read and seek understanding, as it seems you do. I'm not trying to be argumentative in a negative way. I'm trying to understand your perspective and know why you believe what you state is truth. I think we could learn from each other through some more dialogue, but I only like to dialogue with those that are open to discussion, giving explanations, and can remain respectful throughout. You strike me as one who feels the same.
I'd love to glean a better understanding as to how you interpret the texts to mean as you suggest. If you have the time or have links to sites that can explain your reasons, I am interested in reading.
Thanks!******************
I have posted my reasoning in this forum and many others.
I don't like typing it again and again.I've read many of your posts in this forum and I don't see convincing evidence that makes sense within the context of a whole to support that Jesus is not God, so I was hoping you had more to share. But I understand not wanting to repeat and type more. I've only seen your comments in this forum, not in others. I shall end by saying that may you and I both be blessed to seek and find and truly understand the truths that God intends for each of us to understand. Thanks for the interactions. -Blessings-
*********************
If Yahshua was God why did he say:
John 5:37
And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.
What I say might not make sense to you. We all need eyes to see and ears to hear.
The Bible is full of Metaphors
In fact, here's one thing I've heard people say: "If Jesus is God, then why did He say the Father was greater than He?"
"You heard that I said to you, ‘I go away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I,'" (John 14:28).
Jesus said the Father was greater than He not because Jesus is not God, but because Jesus was also a man and as a man he was in a lower position. He was ". . . made for a little while lower than the angels . . ." (Heb. 2:9). Also in Phil. 2:5-8, it says that Jesus "emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men . . ."
Jesus has two natures. Jesus was not denying that He was God. He was merely acknowledging the fact that He was also a man. Jesus is both God and man. As a man, he was in a lesser position than the Father. He had added to Himself human nature (Col. 2:9). He became a man to die for people.
So, Jesus was not denying that He was God. He was simply acknowledging that He was also a man and as a man, he was subject to the laws of God 5so that He might redeem those who were under the law; namely, sinners (Gal. 4:4-5).
Rev 1:2 (John) Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.
There is no contradictions
John saw the Word of life manifested when The Word of life was made known in the flesh and dwelt among us as the only begotten Son of God
he also wrote:
1 John 5:20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.
Jesus was fully God and fully man.
Look at 1 Timothy 2
5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
Just a few verses later in chapter 3, the Bible states:
16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
Jesus is first called the man who is the mediator between God and men and then He is called God who was manifested in the flesh. Jesus humbled Himself and veiled His deity, but He never quit being God.
@span interesting...world's oldest religion too has same starting concept...in beginning was word...
Jesus was worshiped as God by numerous people and He never stopped any of them. He healed the sick and gave sight to the blind. He gave life to the dead, with many witnesses. He healed a man by saying your sins are forgiven, and the religious leaders questioned Him, that only God can forgive sins. Jesus answered them, "which is easier to say, pick up your bed and walk or you're sins are forgiven." The religious rulers started to conspire on how they might kill Him, from that point on, because He being a man, made Himself equal with God. One of the biggest things that showed Jesus was God, is coming back from the dead Himself, and then showing Himself alive to many people, after His crucifixion. The most prominent one was speaking to over 500 people at one time, and having that many witnesses is had to deny.
There are others, but I thought these are the most prominent. I don't have a bible present with me at this moment, so I can't give you the references that I just spoke of. I can get those to you and you can look them up yourself.
Hope this helps.Christ repeatedly told all people to NOT worship him, but to worship the FATHER in heaven only.
Chevy,
the easiest way to answer this question is to ask you to read this.
It is an exegetical study on "worship" and the Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic, to English translations, and where the confusion comes from.
There are a lot of English translations which lose the original meaning when translated.
Also, there is confusion added because in some bibles ceertain words are translated, and in some they are trans-literated, which are two different things completely. And usually bring forth two different understandings of the same words.
So if you would take a minute amd look through this it should clear up some things. If not then I will continue to try to clearify for you, my understanding of Christ and God.
http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/articl … sus-christOf course your easiest way to answer my question is without scriptural backup. instead you resort to outside sources to try to prove YOUR point.
If Jesus repeatedly told all people to worship the Father only, where did He tell this? He either said it in scripture or He did not, It is simply a scriptural answer, Not a dumbing down of the Word of God and how it was translated.
The only place I see where Jesus said to worship the Father was when the devil was tempting Him. But He was not saying that people were not to worship Him. He was simply quoting scripture, because the devil was trying to get Jesus to worship him.No.
I point you to the correct translations of the Gospels. And information on those translations. If you think the English version is not flawed, then you have no idea about translation and errors which occur in its process.
What part of that didn't you understand?
You would rather I sit here and go thru verse after verse pointing out and writing out correct and alternative tranlations?
That would take forever.
And it is a chore that has already been done by many. you do not have to accept my source., google it and look through the works on flawed translations. There were terms and words that exist in hebrew and greek that simply didn't have accurate English equivilents. That is just a fact of histiory Chrevy.
You go read some of the Strong's Concordance with the greek and hebrew indexes and notes... and you will find many such occurances. Not to mention the Catholics influence in the translations, which were done mainly to support their own conclusions of the trinity, etc.
if you had looked at the link... you would see that there are serious issues with the use of the word "worship" as it is translated, and when it is translated, and how we understand it today, Vs, at that time in history.
Perhaps you would understand that you can worship showing respect, and worship from the heart and soul to God and God alone.Bbut that is a difference not many today grasp... as they have been taught to understand wrong.
That is pretty simply.
Not all bibles read the same... especially the newer ones. And if you think that isn't so... then I do not know what to tell you. Perhaps if you had even bothered to read a lil of the source I sent you to you would have understood the translational values lost in the mix, and where the confusion comes from. but since you won't even look and consider, have fun in your english bible.You said "Christ repeatedly told all people to NOT worship him, but to worship the FATHER in heaven only."
All I asked was for you to give scriptures (from whatever version of your choice) that show where He Said this.
He either said it in scripture or He did not.“It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” (Matthew 4:10) Later Jesus instructed his disciples: “Do not call anyone your father on earth, for one is your Father, the heavenly One.”—Matthew 23:9.
Yes, reverent adoration should be expressed only to God. To render worship to anyone or anything else would be a form of idolatry, which is condemned in both the Hebrew and the Greek Scriptures.—Exodus 20:4, 5; Galatians 5:19, 20.Living in the now is important no matter what one believes. This is not to say I believe in something, it just doesn't matter as long as I can somewhat be level headed when dealing with religious belief outside of my own. To me it's all the same thing anyway, whether it be worshipping God or crackers. They should take a back seat when dealing with others. We can talk about whatever, but there's never any reason to be hostile. It just simply isn't what Jesus would do, The same can be said of any truly "spiritual" or "enlightened" being. Somewhere along the line people thought that ideas were worth fighting over and it's far from being civilized.
Kind of sounds counter intuitive to preach peace and tollerance, when the same person preaching is swinging an axe. I don't see how any of it can be taken so seriously, especially when it's just one's personal belief, atheist or not. It doesn't seem to fit any form of morality that I percieve. I was under the impression that morals were a personal thing and realy can only be suggested, not taught.I have no idea what you are talking about.
I have given you sources and told you go review them for yourself.
If you do not want to... then so be it.
You really need to grasp the whole translation issue. Go read some of the verses in the original and you will see Christ did not accept worship as though he was God.
Other than that, believe what you want.
I am not going to go posting verses and then translations and corrections on here... it would take up massive amounts of room and time. Go read.
Simple as that, Chevy.
In the verses you all are posting the original hebrew and greek does not cannotte "worship" as in as God. they cannotte worship as in respect for a teacher, Rabbi, respected man of knowledge and authority... NOT as God. the translationa nd use of words to bring it to English was minipulated by the Church to diefy Christ, as they have done with Mary, and that is a historic fact.
"The LORD your GOD, is ONE GOD!"
Not three... not two... but ONE!
note these examples of the chioce of translations... and these are what they translate as worship.
A study of the Hebrew word shachah and the Greek word proskuneo reveals that both these words mean “to bow down.” The Hebrew word shachah (Strong’s number 7812) is used of bowing or prostrating oneself, often before a superior or before God. [1] In the King James Version, it is translated by a number of different English words, including: “worship” (99 times), “bow” (31 times), “bow down” (18 times), “obeisance” (9 times), and “reverence” (5 times).
The Greek word proskuneo (Strong’s number 4505) comes from the Greek words pros, “to” or “toward,” and kuneo, “to kiss.” It literally means to kiss the hand to (toward) someone in token of reverence, and among the Orientals, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence. Hence, in the New Testament it means kneeling or prostration to do homage or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication.
Not strictly to worship as God. that was the choice of the translators of the time, and their attempts to deify Christ.So the bottom line is, Jesus did not say this repeatedly to people.
Convinced because you assume it so.
Have fun.
Jesus did say He was one with the Father so worshiping Jesus is worshiping God. If this was not so, He would not have allowed others to worship Him (Matthew 28:9) because wouldn't that constitute as blasphemy if He claimed that only the Father should be worshiped?
*************************
We talked about this earlier
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/89110?p … ost1943264***************
All you have to do is click on the link I gave you and it will take you to my post.Why didn't Jesus chastise those who worshiped Him? Why did He say He will come from the clouds on the right hand of the Father? And why did He say He and the Father are one?
*********************
No one worshiped him as God. Scripture please.
He did not raise the dead or heal anyone. Scripture please***********************
As far as the word "worship"
Transliteration
shachah
Pronunciation
shä·khä' (Key)
(pronounced shaw-khaw')
1) to bow down
a) (Qal) to bow down
b) (Hiphil) to depress (fig)
c) (Hithpael)
1) to bow down, prostrate oneself
shachah is the word that the Hebrews used when God said "thou shalt not "shachah" (translated worship) no other god" (Ex 34:14)
Everywhere but where there are Hebrews, the word “worship” is an action directed toward God and God alone. But this is not the case in the Hebrew Bible. The word shechah is a common Hebrew word meaning to prostrate oneself before another in respect
In Exodus 18:7, Moses shows respect to his father-in-law. He did not worship him. When the translators translate the word shechah they will use the word "worship" when the bowing down is directed toward God but as "obeisance" when directed toward another man.
There is no Hebrew word meaning worship in the sense that we are used to using it in our culture today. From an Hebraic perspective worship, or shehhah is the act of getting down on ones knees and placing the face down on the ground before another worthy of respect."
Please read
By Phoenix Freedman
A look at the context of Jewish culture about "worship"
[Biblical Antiquities, Edwin Bissell, 1888, Hartford theological Seminary page 53]
"The warm demonstrative temperament of Orientals displays itself in nothing more than in the manner in which they are accustomed to receive and welcome their guests. On the most ordinary occasions they bow low, the right hand being placed upon the left breast, and are profuse in their greetings and expressions of joy. Even on passing an acquaintance on the highway the Oriental, instead of giving the silent nod usual with us [still in 2009...], goes through a series of movements an inquiries intended to show respect and interest, which consume no little time. It cannot hvae been otherwise in the early days, as we may judge from the command of our Lord to the seventy, "Salute no man by the way" (Luke 10:4; cf 2 Kings 4:29) And we read of Abraham, when the three strangers presented themselves at his tent, that he "bowed himself to the earth." ["worship"--7812] (Gen 18:2) He did the same to the sons of Heth, when he met them for the purchase of a burying-place. (Gen 23:7,12) Sometimes, in case superiors were being address, one fell upon his knees and touched his forehead to the earth. It was so when Joseph's brethren greeted him as viceroy of the land of Egypt: "They came, and bowed down themselves to him with their faces to the earth." (Gen 42:6; 43:28) Only in harmony with this general custom were some of the prostrations made before our Lord; they did not always carry with them the idea of paying him divine honors. (Matt 17:14, Mark 10:17; but cf Matt 28:9)"
Worship or honor, a look at how it is used
Authorized Version (KJV) Translation Count — Total: 172
AV — worship 99, bow 31, bow down 18, obeisance 9, reverence 5, fall down 3, themselves 2, stoop 1, crouch 1, misc 3 (ie. worship 99, other 72)
If the one word for worship did mean honor toward deity then it would only be directed toward idols, deity, and God himself; but several passages dismiss this idea.
Exodus 18:7 (New King James Version)
7 So Moses went out to meet his father-in-law, bowed down(word 7812 translated worship), and kissed him. And they asked each other about their well-being, and they went into the tent.
(Moses clearly did not look on his father-in-law as deity)
Genesis 23:7 (New King James Version)
7 Then Abraham stood up and bowed himself(7812) to the people of the land, the sons of Heth.
(Was Abraham worshipping the people of the land? Or was he honoring the people of the land?) He does the same thing in verse 12 of Gen 23
1 Chronicles 29:20
Then David said to all the assembly, “Now bless the LORD your God.” So all the assembly blessed the LORD God of their fathers, and bowed their heads and prostrated (7812) themselves before the LORD and (implied action relating to the king) the king
(David who loved YHWH was not allowing worship (as we today define it) of himself, but the word translated worship is applied to him, it would be clear that the meaning would be closer to honoring, though it literally means to bow down)
Genesis 33:1-3 (New King James Version)
1 Now Jacob lifted his eyes and looked, and there, Esau was coming, and with him were four hundred men. So he divided the children among Leah, Rachel, and the two maidservants. 2 And he put the maidservants and their childrein in front, Leah and her children behind, and Rachel and Joseph last. 3 Then he crossed over before them and bowed himself(7812) to the ground seven times, until he came near to his brother.
It would be pointless to list all the instances that the word translated worship is clearly not "adoration directed at deity".
But a snap shot of one book (the most that this word is used in) Genesis, would help to show that shachah is an idea larger then "adoration toward deity" or that is "setting something apart as holy".
7812 In Genesis:
Translated Bowed down: 14
Times Toward God: 3
Translated Obeisance:3
Times toward God: 0
Translated Worship: 4
Times toward God: 4
So this is the Jewish idea of what we called "worship", So could according to this context one "worship"(7812) Jesus if he was only the Son of YHWH and not God himself? According to the common usage of the english word, one would only worship something thought of as deity, but in the Jewish mindset that was not the case.Exactly, Deb.
Thank God you have sight to see with, and wisdom to percieve.
According to the Lord God, you are blessed.
God Bless you always, DeborahWhy is this true? Proof, evidence, etc. not just thinking that you are right. Thank you.
******************
Proof, the Hebrew and Greek bibles and the people I studied under to get my semichah
I thought you read Greek in their written language (not a translation of Greek)I acknowledge your accomplishment and hard work I'm sure in doing this.
But, if I read and studied books and under people who make claims about jumping off buildings and not getting hurt because don't believe in gravity or they won't fall, does that make me accomplished and true and having right understanding of reality? No. I'm not saying that that's all you have, for you have multiple good points that are true, but some majors that are not. But that was my point in asking for proof, because you make great claims about what you say, believe only what you say and the things that others say that you say, without considering others very much and without accepting that others have truth too that you do not, as I have done multiple times. Again I acknowledge your hard work, for it is clear that you have studied a lot just by the fact that you have so much knowledge and aren't just copying things in and thinking for yourself from what you've learned. You have a sharp mind. Keep sharpening it on truth, not letting it to waste but usefulness. Grace and peace.
When did I say that? Why does it matter or what do you mean?*********************
There are several reasons, but Hebrews don't believe Yahshua was the Messiah because of a couple of things Paul said.
_____
And as far as salvation
Yahshua said he came not to save the righteous but the lost.
So there was people who were righteous before Yahshua came.
The Hebrews taught me how to know what the words meant.
They did not speak of Paul. They did not teach me my doctrine.
I am very Eclectic
I read only the Bibles, not books. I got it all from scripture and revelation.If all you read is the bible, how do you learn anything about life outside of it? Release your grasp on what you think you know and you will find life can be very fulfilling.
**************
I mean I get my information about GOD from the bible.
Of course I read other books on other subjects
Because of a couple things Paul said? What things? Paul referred to Him as Jesus the Christ/Messiah. They don't believe because a veil covers theirs eyes even when they read the old covenant (2Cor. 3). In Genesis 28 the Hebrew reads "the God that has become flesh is my God," and many rabbis and hebrews convert/change and become Christ-ians because of it.
Okay.
Okay, that doesn't mean that they were righteous, He was saying He didn't come to call people who are "righteous" meaning "think they are righteous and not sinners" to repentance because they think they have no need for it. No one can be righteous apart from God. He even said your righteousness must exceed that of the Pharisees, the most thought to be righteous at that time, or they cannot enter the kingdom of God. You have to have perfection and that can only be God Jesus Christ's perfection applied to you.
Yes. But then there times when angels are thought to be God and worshiped and they stop people say do not worship me but only God. And the Lamb/Jesus is worshiped as worthy to receive glory and honor and power, etc. in Revelation, things only God is worthy to receive. And when Thomas fell down and worshiped Him he said “the Lord and the God of me.”
************************
They wanted to worship the angels as God not show respect. I stated there's a difference. You must be reading just some of what I write.
And calling someone God does not indicate they mean the Almighty God..
Again, you missed my pointNo, I was showing that there are examples of worship being for God only. It doesn't say they fell to the ground and worshiped said "I worship you as God" it says they fell to the ground, or, they worshiped. You may be reading only part of what I write, as you do not reply to all my points, maybe, I don't know.
Unless otherwise indicated by context or words, it is the Creator God.
I don't see that, I see that I made it and I made a counterpoint, that you are unwilling to receive.
****************************
As far as healing and raising the dead
What would you say If you or anyone else believed in hands on healing, and I went to you and said I laid hands on someone and healed him.
The first thing you would do is set me straight, by telling me it was God who healed him and not me.
Yahshua told many that it was God healing the people and not him.
John 14:10
Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works .
Yahshua told Mary that if she ask God he would raise Lazarus
Yahshua thanked God that God heard him (and did the healing
John 11:22,41,42
But I know, that even now, whatsoever thou wilt ask of God, God will give it thee
41. Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me
42. And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent meJesus actually did raise someone from the dead, Himself included.
John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
John 2:21 But he spake of the temple of his body.
Acts 2:32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
Acts 10:40 Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly;
Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus..
So Jesus was God in the flesh in order for Him to be able to raise Himself from the dead.******************
Yahshua was not God. And God raised him up.
If Yahshua was God it would defeated the purpose of his mission.I'm not going to post a link to my hub because I don't think we are supposed to do that, but I don't want to copy and past a Hub in here but my point is, I wrote something that I think could be helpful for the question of is Jesus God or not? I wrote a Creed (statement of belief) on Jesus and I included lots and lots of Scripture verses to back up my statements. You can find it from my profile page. Deborah, you have an interesting background and I'd love to hear your feedback/point of view if you get a chance. Thanks! :-)
*****************
Sorry seek and find, I read this on your site
"He revealed Himself to be eternally self-existent—one being in three persons: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, these three are co-equal and co-eternal'
And I believe you want to teach me your beliefs and not get my opinion.
I used to go to the Christian church but always knew it was wrong, and God led me out.
God let me know Yahshua was a man.Sorry but that would be confused and double-minded because this is the same who says "our great God and Savior Jesus Christ," Titus 2, "our God and Savior Jesus Christ," 2Peter 1, "I and the Father are one/identical," John 10, "If you've seen Me you've seen the Father," John 14. "Behold, My messenger will prepare the way before Me," Malachi 3. "Behold, Holy Spirit (Spirit of the Godhead) will come upon you and the power of the Most High (Father of the Godhead) will overshadow you and so the one to be born will be called the Holy One of God (Son of the Godhead) and you will call His name Jesus/Savior for He will Save His people from their sins," Matthew 1-3/Luke 1-3. "Through Him/Jesus all things were made, without Him nothing was made that has been made," John 1. "The Word [Jesus], and the Word was the God," John 1.
I'm sorry if you had a bad experience in the Christ-ian church.
Why else/exactly did you leave? What does your belief that Jesus is man allow you to do that believing He is God does not? Live the way you want? etc.?
*****************
Using guile to trick me.
Shameful
However, I'm not easily tricked.I wasn't trying to trick you, Deborah. I read some of your posts and your profile and was quite curious to know your take/response based on what I had written. I do not trick people--I was interested in what you believed and why. Now I've read enough responses from you to have a better take on your beliefs. I was interested in learning about what you think and why, not trying to "trick" you into believing mine. I mentioned several posts back that I'm not into arguing and personal attack--I like to discuss things and ask questions. Whether I end up agreeing or disagreeing in the end, conversations with others, especially when their beliefs are different, tend to be good teachers for me. I've acted in a way that is respectful throughout our conversations. I can see that you are no longer interested in this type of dialogue so I will not be participating in this forum any longer. I really do wish you the best, and thank you for taking the time to type the things you did--as I have a better understanding than before this forum started. Be blessed.
Where is the guile/deception? It's not there. Even if there was, there's no "shame" but rather "love and invitation to repent."
I don't receive that, but I receive grace and truth and light. Amen.**************
I wasn't speaking to you.
The shame was there because there was guile. You don't even know to what I am referring.I don't care, I am speaking to you, and I am speaking beyond you to life and the spirit and natural realms, Peace.
You think so, but it is not so. Yes I do, unless I don't, you are saying she used deception through having you read her creed. Just because someone has you read something doesn't meant hey are trying to trick you, below you have a link to one of your hubs for someone to read, are you tricking them? No. Thank you. Please converse with respect or not at all. Grace and peace.
Just the opposite. Jesus could not accomplish His mission, especially living a perfect sinless life, if He was not God.
Yes, because Jesus emptied Himself of His Godness/deity laying it aside and living as a man rightly related to the Father fully dependent on Holy Spirit, but He lived/did this perfectly and sinlessly because He is God. Thus giving us an example to follow as men rightly related to the Father fully dependent on Holy Spirit, going form one degree of glory to another (2Corinthians 3). And He says in multiple places "why are you angry with Me because I made a man whole on the sabbath?" Showing that He did do it, and yet as He says in other places the Father does it through Him, it's both and, not either or, the Father through the Son and the Son through the Father. And now, the Father through us and us through the Father, as one (1Corinthians 6, whoever is united to the Lord is one Spirit with Him).
John 9:38 Then he said, "Lord, I believe!" And he worshiped Him
Mark 5:6 When he saw Jesus from afar, he ran and worshiped Him.
Matthew 15:25 Then she came and worshiped Him, saying, "Lord, help me!"
Matthew 2:11 And when they had come into the house, they saw the young Child with Mary His mother, and fell down and worshiped Him. And when they had opened their treasures, they presented gifts to Him: gold, frankincense, and myrrh.Thomas acknowledged Jesus as God in John 20:28
he said "My Lord and My God"****************
Translation is hard on the word of God.
It is to test people in the word
Someone seeking God would never say "that's good enough for me"
A person of God would know that the mysteries of God are deep and would keep searching.But the "mystery" of God Himself He revealed in scripture. That He came to earth and became man, the Christ.
1 Tim.3:16 great is the mystery....(what mystery?)... God was manifest in the flesh...********
Quoting the False Apostle Paul means nothing to me.
He was a liar"Quoting the False Apostle Paul means nothing to me.
He was a liar"
can you prove that?
God chose this man to be an Apostle.*********
Sure, I wrote several hubs about it.
There was and always will be only 12 Apostles.
If he was a true Apostle why is there no seat/place for him in the New Jerusalem see Revelations
Acts tells what is required to be an Apostle and Paul did not meet any of the requirements not one
Paul was in Ephesus many years, who do you think Yahshua is talking about Here
Revelation 2:1,2
Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;
I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liarsWhere does it say in the Book of "The Revelation/Apocalypse of Jesus Christ" the names of the twelve seats of the Apostles? Obviously when it says in chapter 21 “the names of the 12 Apostles of the Lamb,” Judas is not going to be there with his name on it, but rather Mathias who replaced him, but it just says the 12 apostles, not the 12 are the only apostles, not could it because in the word of God as seen below, there are at least 16 names apostles.
Where does Acts tell us the requirements? Does it explicitly says "these are the requirements" or are they just some of the attributes listed? And why does Paul say in 1Corinthians 9, "Am I not an Apostle? Have I not seen the risen Lord?" "Paul, an Apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God," in almost every letter he writes? Because He was an Apostle.
There will only always be 12 Apostles?! Obviously not, if there were 12 in the Gospels and then in Acts 1 they cast lots saying "for someone must become an Apostle/partake in this Apostleship with us," and then Matthias is selected to replace Judas. There's the 13th right there. Then, Acts 14 says "...the Apostles Barnabas and Paul." There's numbers 14 and 15 at least, right there. The word Apostle/"Apostolos" means "Sent One." Jesus sent out 70 others other than the 12 in Luke 10, and the 12 He sent out in Luke 9. Modern day, we call them missionaries, and sometimes for some reason, pastors. Then, there’s Galatians 1 where Paul the Apostle says “But I saw none of the other Apostles, except James the Lord’s Brother,” here’s number 16 at least, seeing how James the Lord’s brother didn’t even believe in Him until after His resurrection and wrote the book of James, whereas the James of James and John was killed early in the book of Acts.
To say that Rev 2 is written about Paul is ridiculous, he wrote the Word of God, about a third of the New Covenant, with all the other apostles recognizing his apostleship. And Paul even writes about false apostles, multiple times. And he says well if I'm not accepted as an apostle to some, at least I am to you (Corinthians) and so you are a seal of my apostleship.*****************
Judas killed himself before he became an Apostle.
Paul gave some of his followers the title of "Apostle" but they were no more real than Paul was.
Always has been always will be 12. There can't possibly be more.
Acts tells the requirements. Why don't you read it?
If he was a true Apostle why is there no seat/place for him in the New Jerusalem see Revelations
• What difference does this make? This does not mean Paul was not an apostle.
Acts tells what is required to be an Apostle and Paul did not meet any of the requirements not one
• God called Paul to be an apostle to the Gentiles,That alone makes him an apostle.
Revelation 2:1,2
This does not refer to Paul at all.
Paul preached the same message as Peter and Philip etc, so if he was a liar so were the others.
all the apostles and elder did not look at Paul as liar
Acts 15:25-26
It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul,
Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
2 Peter 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
They referred to him as "beloved brother"
In Acts 9:3-20 Jesus chose Paul, God told Ananias the preacher that Paul was a chosen vessel
vs.15 the Lord said...for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name...
Vs. 17 Paul was to receive the Holy Ghost
Vs. 20 And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.
So how is it you slander Paul as a liar?
God chose him and ordained him to be an apostle and he preached for God. He was not a liar.
*****************
He admitted to being a liar.
He also told 3 different stories about his so called conversion."He admitted to being a liar.
He also told 3 different stories about his so called conversion."
Where did he admit this? I'd like to knowYes, give the Scripture, you can't just say it is so, sorry, we all have to give support for our words.
What? Paul says that he received the Gospel of Jesus Christ not from any man but from direct revelation/manifestation of Jesus Christ, Galatians 1. He says that the mysteries of God were revealed to them and wrote them to the churches, Ephesians 3. He says that he is the light for the gentiles prophesied from Isaiah, Acts 26 ish. He says follow the example I have given you, Philippians 3. Nowhere does he say that he is a liar.
And he tells his testimony three different times, giving more details in all three, but all have the same basic message, that he was riding on his horse on the road to Damascus to persecute more Christ-ians but Jesus appeared and knocked him off his horse and radically changed his life. Haven't you told a story three times with different highlights and details? Does that make it a lie, no, not in itself. This violates common sense and logic. Shalom/Peace.
******************************
2 Corinthians 12:16
But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.
Paul says telling lies is OK as long as it's to God's glory.
Romans 3:7,
7. For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner
Paul says as long as Christ is preached, it can be in pretense or truth and either way it will be counted for his salvation.
Philippians 1:18-19
18. What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretense, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.
19. For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ,
He robbed other churches so he would not be a burden to those in Corith.
Charging the churches money was illegal and punishable and was considered an abomination
2 Corinthians 11:8
I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service.No, these are ripped out of context, and these are obscure, and in good interpretation you use the obvious to explain/over the obscure not the other way around (I received the Gospel not from any man but a revelation of Jesus Christ, Galatians 1, the mystery of God has been made known to me and I have written it to you, Ephesians 3, what I first received I delivered to you, that Christ died for our sins...and on the third day rose again, 1Corinthians 15):
- 2Cor. 12, Paul is not being literal/serious here. Read the whole chapter, post the context. This could read as being "crafty" I "caught" you with "trickery". Paul goes on to say they speak as before God doing everything for their edification.
- Romans 3, read the whole chapter, once again. The next "verse" says "...(as we are slanderously reported, and as some affirm we say)." Obviously the lie is not a lie but a slanderous report that it is a lie, it is really Truth.
- Philippians 1, It says "Christ is preached with false motives and true," but the message is still the message, truth is truth whether someone speaks it in a good heart or not. That is the point and meaning. The "this" could be referring to Paul being in prison, his imprisonment would turn out for his deliverance, and, even still he's not saying that it's good to preach with false motives, obviously, he also wrote 1Corinthians 13 that says if I have faith to move mountains but have love I am nothing.
- 2Corinthians 11, Again, and again, read the context. First, the word here "esulesa" can mean "accept," so, I "accepted" pay/rations from other churches. Two, he's not saying he robbed them like stole from them, but he took their money that they wanted to give him, but he "robbed" meaning he took money they gave to him and used it for other churches, yet, at the same time it's clear in the other texts, the whole context of Paul's writings that he specifically took up offerings and the Philippians gave beyond their means to help him, so they that's what would happen. No problem, no sin, but context and simple logic. Thank you though.*******************
All of the Churches and Apostles, ended up rejecting and leaving Paul
Nothing is out of context. The whole thing is about it but I couldn't post all of Corinthians. Paul told different churches different things.
I knew you would say this, because you don't want to see it. Even though Paul admitted to these things.
It may be vague to you but not to me and many others.
You would think you would follow Yahshua and not Paul
I found a site about Paul. They can explain it better
http://www.truthseekers.co.za/content/view/40/32/I read your link and whoever wrote that is totally wrong.
There is not a shred of truth to what they wrote.
God told Ananias (the preacher) that He chose Paul to be a vessel to bear His name.
And none of Paul's writings contradict any of the other apostles writings, nor anything that Jesus said.********
OMG How blind are you. His teachings contradict everything Yahshua taught.
But maybe you aren't suppose to see it.**********************************
I'm afraid not. Paul was a liar and fake
Do you even know what Yahshua taught?***************
I wrote three hubs on Paul..but can't post the link here.
But I found two more websites for you to read
http://www.justgivemethetruth.com/paul_ … ceiver.htm
http://yahuah.org/oldPaul.html
Why? Because you say so? Sorry but that's not enough, that's not evidence. Do you really mean, "he says things that I wish weren't true."?
******************
I know it is, but you have to see and understand the mysteries.I do see the mystery, because it has been revealed, and that is "God was manifest in the flesh...
also I say it's good enough for me because God revealed Himself to me in this subject of God incarnate.The other mysteries of God I continue to seek and learn.
Actually translation is easy, if you know Hebrew and Greek. Interpretation is simple, when you have the basic building blocks.
***************
Well the English Bible was not translated correctly. ven if you say so.
If you truly study the prophecy about Paul and look closely at his ministry you'll see. Do you WANT TO SEE, or just to be right?
I do this to shareBecause you say so, so it was not translated correctly? Lets define correctly: anyone can read it and get the basic message, the most important message, salvation. The English translations do have this. Therefore that is trustworthy/sufficient. "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved." There's not misinterpretation there. Just as if I say "I went down to the store at 5pm," you know that when the clock was at 5pm I was not home, I was at the store. That's all that is needed.
As far as details and every specific part, the original Greek and Hebrew is needed of course, especially the ancient pictographic Hebrew.
I have for many years. The prophecy about Paul is from Isaiah and says that he will be light to the gentiles. You have a bent about Paul, therefore you are reading your own view into Rev 2, instead of seeing that he wrote a third of the Word of God in the NC, that all the apostles affirm his apostleship including Luke in Acts and Peter in 2Peter. Yes, I want to see more and more and more, truth, and the truth I see is that he wrote the word, the other apostles affirmed him, and he was probably not even alive when Rev 2 was written, only John was left, but anyways Jesus could have named him by name but didn't, and why would he name him as being false if He appeared to him and appointed him an apostle. He wouldn't. Do you want to see? Are you open? Are you confirming with proof? Do you just think you are right and unwilling to move? I have looked at everything you have said and thought it through and looked up the Word of God and tested them, and given my refutes. It's not about me being right, it's about right, truth, itself, leading to God Himself, Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Amen.**********************
The prophecy is in NumbersNeeds explanation.
Or should I just say, the truth/prophecy is in Isaiah. Or the truth is in Acts 14. That shows he was an apostles along with Barnabas, accepted by all apostles, doing miracles, signs and wonders, walking in love and power.? (forgot the exclamation point, sorrys)
This is the truth of what Christ is ...
"I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God" (John 20:17).
The exclamation of Thomas, "My Lord and my God", does not automatically mean that he was equating Jesus with God. It could have been a confession that by the resurrection he had become convinced that Jesus was indeed the Messiah, and therefore a perfect manifestation of God.
Thomas knew that both titles were attributed to the Messiah in the Old Testament (Psalm 45:6, 110:1), and so he could have been expressing his belief in Jesus in these terms. Thus Thomas's avowal can be seen as a further example of John's declared intention to use his gospel record to demonstrate that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God (John 20:31).
It is noteworthy that the context of these words of Thomas and those in Hebrews 1:8 excludes the use of God in a trinitarian sense. Prior to the meeting with Thomas Jesus referred to the Father as 'my God', implying his inequality of status (John 20:17). And the Hebrews passage goes on to make a similar point "therefore God, thy God, has anointed thee with the oil of gladness" (Hebrews 1:9).
The views of the first-century Christians are therefore clear. They came to realise that Jesus, in a much greater sense than the ministry of the angels as recorded in the Old Testament, was a complete manifestation of the Father, so that divine titles could be appropriately ascribed to him without making him God's equal, any more than the angels who on occasions took God's Name were the Deity Himself. As one writer says:
"When Jesus said "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father also" he did not contradict the statement that "no man hath seen God at any time," but simply expressed the truth contained in the following words of Paul: "Christ is the image of the invisible God" (Col. 1.15), "the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person" (Heb. 1.3). Those who looked upon the anointed Jesus, beheld a representation of the Deity accessible to human vision." (38)
The New Testament English translation is derived from a wide range of ancient manuscripts of Greek and Latin origin, and there are very many copies of the same passage that the translator has to compare, together with scriptural quotations by ancient writers. Over the centuries some slight variations have occurred, usually due to copyist error, but occasionally deliberately done to make a doctrinal point. A notable example of the latter is the fraudulent insertion, probably in the 4th century, of the passage in 1 John 5:7 that asserts the tri-unity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit
And to follow up...
Trinitarians claim that Thomas himself is here identifying Jesus as "God" and they further claim that Jesus' response to Thomas confirms his words to Jesus that he is indeed "God."
Examination of the Claim
1. Thomas' Said these word to Jesus
The text plainly states that Thomas said these words directly to Jesus.
Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!"
2. The Immediate Context: Seeing and Believing
Both the preceding and following context concern seeing and believing.
Then He said to Thomas, "Reach here with your finger, and see my hands and reach here your hand and put it into my side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing. Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him, "Because you have seen me you have believed. Blessed are they who did not see and yet believed."
3. The Overall Context
The overall context militates against the Trinitarian claim where Jesus describes his Father as Mary's God, as opposed to himself, and John indicates that he writes this Gospel, including the account of Jesus and Thomas, not to tell us that Jesus is himself God but instead that Jesus is God's son:
We have seen the Lord. (20:25).
I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God. (20:17)
These things have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God and that believing you may have life in His name. (20:31).
Since John writes that we might have life believing in the name of Jesus, one should also be reminded of Jesus' words at John 17:3, "Father.... this is eternal LIFE that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You sent."
4. The Greek Text
Thomas' words to Jesus in Greek literally read, "the Lord of me and the God of me." In Greek this is how one would refer to two persons. If one wanted to refer to one person he would say, "the Lord and God of me." This is confirmed by the first and Sixth Granville Sharp rules. However, Trinitarians make a convenient exception to the sixth rule for this particular verse.
There are actually TWO important things to see here. First, there is the fact that both nouns, (1) Lord, and (2) God, are each qualified by the definition article ('the'). Second, both nouns, (1) Lord, and (2) God, are qualified by the words "of me." This is also telling. Thomas could have said, "the Lord and the God of me." But he did not.
Because he knew Christ was not God.But Christ was God made known in the flesh.
Meaning that God took on Himself that human body called Christ.
Therefore He was God, in the flesh.
Like you said, the Christ is the image of the invisible God, when we see Christ we see God.Christ is NOT God.
He is the Son Of God.
if you had read above you would understand that.
Have fun with your polytheism, chevy.No, the One God of the Old T. became flesh and dwelt among us.
it is not hard to see that God took on the form of man, this does not make God more than One.
God can do anything, so why is it so hard to believe that He took on humanity?
It's simple, the invisible God took on visible flesh and made Himself known unto us.************************
All of the people that believed in idols believed God came down as a human.
Yahshua said:
John 5:37
And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape....he does say that...but he does also say "If you have seen me then you have seen the Father." In fact, here is a metaphor I once heard. If one were to stand right up against a large picture and he saw before him a blade of grass, he may believe that the picture is the essence of that blade of grace. But another person is standing on the far right side of the picture and sees the blue of the sky and thinks this is the essence of the picture. What if both are right? What if they stood back to see that the whole of the picture is a landscape with rolling hills and a blue sky? The Bible is one, big narrative and needs to be looked at as a whole for all the parts to make sense. While there are many verses that show the humanity of Jesus, there are many that also show His Divinity. Here are some of those verses:
John 1:1 - "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
John 1:14 - "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth."
John 5:18 - "For this cause therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God."
John 8:24 - "I said therefore to you, that you shall die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am He, you shall die in your sins."
Note: In the Greek, "He" is not there.
John 8:58 - "Jesus said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.'"
Exodus 3:14 - "And God said to Moses, 'I AM WHO I AM'; and He said, Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’"
John 10:30-33 - "I and the Father are one." 31 The Jews took up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus answered them, "I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?" 33 The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God."
John 20:28 - "Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!"
Col. 2:9 - "For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form."
Phil. 2:5-8 - "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 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 Therefore also God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those who are in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."
Heb. 1:8 - "But of the Son He says, "Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever, and the righteous scepter is the scepter of His kingdom."
Quoted from Psalm 45:6, "Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever; a scepter of uprightness is the scepter of Thy kingdom."
Jesus is worshipped - Jesus said to worship God only, yet He receives worship.
Matt. 4:10 - "Then Jesus said to him, 'Begone, Satan! For it is written, "You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only."’"
Matt. 2:2 - "Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we saw His star in the east, and have come to worship Him."
Matt. 2:11 - "And they came into the house and saw the Child with Mary His mother; and they fell down and worshiped Him; and opening their treasures they presented to Him gifts of gold and frankincense and myrrh."
Matt. 14:33 - "And those who were in the boat worshiped Him, saying, "You are certainly God’s Son!"
Matt. 28:9 - "And behold, Jesus met them and greeted them. And they came up and took hold of His feet and worshiped Him."
John 9:35-38 - "Jesus heard that they had put him out; and finding him, He said, "Do you believe in the Son of Man?" 36 He answered and said, "And who is He, Lord, that I may believe in Him?" 37 Jesus said to him, "You have both seen Him, and He is the one who is talking with you." 38 And he said, "Lord, I believe." And he worshiped Him."
Heb. 1:6 - "And when He again brings the first-born into the world, He says, 'And let all the angels of God worship Him.'"
Jesus is prayed to
Acts 7:55-60 - "But being full of the Holy Spirit, he gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God; 56 and he said, "Behold, I see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God." 57 But they cried out with a loud voice, and covered their ears, and they rushed upon him with one impulse. 58 And when they had driven him out of the city, they began stoning him, and the witnesses laid aside their robes at the feet of a young man named Saul. 59 And they went on stoning Stephen as he called upon the Lord and said, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit!" 60 And falling on his knees, he cried out with a loud voice, "Lord, do not hold this sin against them!" And having said this, he fell asleep."
1 Cor. 1:1-2 - "Paul, called as an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother, 2 to the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling, with all who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours." (The phrase, "to call upon the name of the Lord" is a phrase used to designate prayer.)
1 Kings 18:24 - "Then you call on the name of your god, and I will call on the name of the Lord, and the God who answers by fire, He is God." And all the people answered and said, "That is a good idea."
Zech. 13:9 - "And I will bring the third part through the fire, refine them as silver is refined, and test them as gold is tested. They will call on My name, and I will answer them; I will say, ‘They are My people,’ and they will say, ‘The Lord is my God.’"
Rom. 10:13-14 - "for 'whoever will call upon the name of the Lord' will be saved." 14 How then shall they call upon Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him whom they have not heard?" (Paul is speaking of calling upon Jesus. (The phrase "Call upon the name of the Lord" is a quote from Joel 2:32)).
Joel 2:32 - "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call." (LORD here is YHWH, the name of God as revealed in Exodus 3:14. Therefore, this quote, dealing with God Himself is attributed to Jesus.)
Jesus is the First and Last
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, and there is no God besides Me."
Rev. 1:17-18 - "Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, 18 and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades."Yes, but they had no proof to back it up. They believed the Caesars were god and when saw a star shoot they said of course that's Caesar ascending to god. But not physical resurrection to prove it. Most of these myths/false beliefs were about agricultural gods dying and rising, as crops do every year. Nothing anywhere else except Jesus Christ coming in physical form, dying, the rising again in physical form.
Yes, He did say that in John 5. Speaking to people who hadn't had a prophet or the word of the Lord for four hundred years, since Malachi. Then in John 14, 9 chapters later He says if you've seen Me you've seen the Father, and in John 10, 5 chapters later He says I and the Father are one/hen/identical/to the exclusion of another."To them belong the patriarchs, and from them, by human descent, came the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever! Amen." Romans 9:5
Paul Talking about Israel, and here he refers to Jesus, The Messiah, as God who is over all.
All I here from you Deborah is, "I believe". I'm not interested in what you believe, I'm interested in what God says in His Word, The Bible. If you don't believe that the Bible is the very word of God, then you tell me which parts are good to read and which parts aren't, since you are the expert here?
If you don't take it all as the very Word of God, then you have nothing to say. Who are you that you can divide which part is true and which part is not?
If you don't take it as the very Word of God, then that's OK. That's your choice, but set yourself up like this final authority for all to listen too.
I agree with Spirit n Truth, you don't respond to anything that I've said either. I've given verse after verse where Jesus is God come down in human flesh, but you've never given any kind of response.Yeah Brian, amen, truth, Romans 9 is yet another example that I was not aware that explicitly says that Jesus the Christ is God and not just theos but theos/God over ALL. Wow! Thank you so much! I have added that to my list. Titus 2: "our great God and Savior Jesus Christ." 2Peter 1: "our God and Savior Jesus Christ." John 20, "THE Lord and THE God of me," (Literal Greek tense/terms). www.scripture4all.org > Interlinear Scripture Analyzer is awesome! Thanks again. Bless you, Grace and Peace.
*******************
We are all the image of God. But we are not GodYes, we are made in the image of God, but of course not God. "So He created them. Male and female He created them. In the image and likeness of God." Genesis 1-2.
**************************************
About John 20:28
ἀπεκρίθη Θωμᾶς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Ὁ (κύριός) μου καὶ ὁ (θεός) μου.
The words above in parenthesis are KYRIOS (the Greek word for Lord) and THEOS (the Greek word for God)
The word KYRIOS is a title of honor and respect given to a master by the servant. Yahshua was a leader, and the leader of his 12 disciples. Therefore it is no surprise his disciples called him KYRIOS, it is what we would expect.
The fact is, that the word KYRIOS is not an exclusive Greek word for the Almighty God. As I said above, the word KYRIOS is used for other men besides Yahshua, therefore are we going to now claim that all of those who are called Lord must be God? NO
Strong's lexicon translates the word THEOS a follows:
1. God’s representatives or vice-regents
2. Magistrates and Judges
The word “THEOS” does not exclusively have to refer to the almighty God, rather God's representatives can also be called THEOS, and the same applies for judges and magistrates.
Yahshua was God's representative, and in that sense one can call him a THEOS.
Throughout the Bible, Yahshua always identifies himself as the Son of God. That title does not denote divinity. The word divine in Hebrew and Greek, indicates someone without any limits.
In 2nd Corinthians 4:4
ἐν οἷς ὁ (θεὸς) τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου ἐτύφλωσεν τὰ νοήματα τῶν ἀπίστων εἰς τὸ μὴ αὐγάσαι τὸν φωτισμὸν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τῆς δόξης τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ.
In the Greek Bible we can see that many people are called THEOS, even the devil is described using the word THEOS in 2nd Corinthians 4:4, we read:
In English it says
In whom the god (THEOS) of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not
THE SAME WORD would not be used if it was exclusive for the One Almighty God.
If calling someone Lord and/or God was exclusive to the Almighty God, meaning Yahshua was Him (God), then the Hebrews (Jews) would have gotten so mad it would have been directed not just against the blasphemers, but against Yahshua himself too.
The chief priests and Pharisees would have arrested Yahshua if his followers had called him a word that only meant the Almighty God?
After all they were looking for a reason.
Nothing in scriptures suggest anyone ever got angry about Yahshua being addressed as Lord. The scriptures tell of some crowds being hostile to Yahshua (Matt 13.57), even ready to lynch him (Luke 4.28–29). But their anger didn’t stem from his being called the LORD God
Using LOGIC, you can see that when his followers called him Lord and God no one understood them to be calling him the Almighty God.
Lord and God was everyday language.Good point. But in John 10:28, as even you have above it is "ho kurios [not kryios]" and "ho theos", the "ho" is the definite article or "the". So Thomas did not just say my Lord and my God, he literally said "the Lord of me and the God of me." Not a Lord, not a God, the Lord and the God.
And Stong's does not define it that, this is what it says, I copied and pasted directly: deity, especially (with G3588) the supreme Divinity; figuratively, a magistrate; by Hebraism, very. And look at how it is used, even if words have different meanings, look at the context because the context determines the meaning, theos is used of Jesus in multiple places: John 20 Thomas fell down and worshiped Jesus calling my the Lord and the God of me, in Titus 2 and 2Peter 1 it says "our great God and Savior Jesus Christ," and "our God and Savior Jesus Christ," only God/the Creator is Savior, thus Jesus is God/the Creator, the Son of the Godhead. In John 1 it says that all things were made through Jesus and without Him nothing was made that has been made, a direct reference to Genesis 1 when God/the Created created the heavens and the earth, the whole trinity is seen in Genesis 1 creating, "God the Father created...God the Son Spoke/Word...the Spirit of God/Holy Spirit was hovering over the waters."
Okay, but 2Corinthians 4 says that satan is the god/mighty ruler of the world system, obviously if God created the world/planet then satan didn't, and if God created the world/people then satan didn't, so what's left is the world system/beliefs, these are the three meanings of the word "kosmos"/"world."
But He did say that, as said below in John 10 Jesus said I and the Father are one and the Greek word one is hen and means to the exclusion of another/identical, and then they crowd goes on to say how you can you a mere man claim to be God and that they got mad at Him because He was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God, and they wanted to kill him for this. Yes it did, in John 8 Jesus said "before Abraham was, I am/I AM/Yehweh/Ekue anah/Exodus 3, and they got so angry and picked up stones to stone Him but He teleported out of their midst.
With simple ground level comprehension, it's clear that they got angry multiple times and in multiple places for Him calling Himself God, even right before they executed Him (Mark 14, "are you the Christ the Son of the Blessed One?" "I AM").
However, Jesus did not use His divinity/Godness/deity/whatever you want to call it, being the Creator, in His human life, but He lived as a man rightly related to the Father fully dependent on Holy Spirit. John 5 He said the Son can do nothing of Himself, but only what He sees His Father doing. Philippians 2 says that He emptied Himself and took on human form being made int he likeness of men. Therefore He could give us an example to follow because now we can be rightly related to the Father and fully dependent on Holy Spirit, if we believe the Gospel/Good News of God Jesus Christ dying for our sins and rising for out life anew. Amen. Thank you.***********
You might want to read my post about what Godhead means.
And I pay no attention to Paul's writings.It doesn't matter what you say it means, it doesn't necessarily matter what I say it means. It matters what it is, that is what it means. Whatever word you want to use, it is describing the plurality of God, as when there are four river heads in Genesis 1-2 that flow into one, so there are three "heads" of God that flow into one. There are passages that show the attributes of God in all three, the Father, Son, Holy Spirit.
The guy who wrote a third of the New Covenant? Because you wish he said different things, like "our great God and Savior Jesus Christ," doesn't line up with what you want it to be.******************************
S&T Please comment
Milás Elliniká?
Mía glóssa then íne poté arketí
Adat HaE-L ChaiComment on what? Phrases? Who cares? Please post something worth commenting about. It's not a showoff game battle. Thank you though.
THIS READING TOOK ME TO ANOTHER LEVEL OF LEADERSHIP. IT TAUGHT ME HOW JESUS HIMSELF RAN HIS COMPANY OF 12 WORKERS SPREAD HIS NAME LEFT A LEGACY FOR ALL TO KNOW HIM AFTER HE WAS CRUCIFIED, ... HIS MANAGEMENT STYLE WAS AWESOME..DYNAMIC, HE MOTIVATED PEOPLE, HE INSPIRED..., BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY,.. HE KNEW WHO HE WAS.
ONLY AFTER JESUS WENT INTO THE WILDERNESS TO BE TEMPTED BY SATAN DID HE COME TO REALIZE HIS TRUE DESTINY. IT IS THE SAME WITH OUR OWN LIVES..IF YOU HAVE NOT BEEN TESTED BY THE FIRE, YOU DO NOT KNOW WHO YOU ARE. AND IF YOU DO NOT KNOW WHO YOU ARE, YOU CANNOT BE A LEADER.
IN THE OLD TESTAMENT, WHEN THE JEWS ASKED GOD FOR A SELF-DESCRIPTION, THE ONLY ANSWER THEY RECEIVED WAS "I AM THAT I AM"..EXODUS 3:14-15...SIMPLE.
FINALLY AFTER BEING TESTED AND REFINED FOR FORTY DAYS IN THE DESERT, A PERSON EMERGED WHO WAS CLEAR ABOUT WHO HE WAS AND WHAT HE WAS CALLED TO DO. ----
IT IS NO COINCIDENCE THAT ONLY AFTER HIS WILDERNESS EXPERIENCE DID JESUS USE THE WORDS "I AM"---....THE WORDS "I AM" REFLECT ALL CREATIVE POWER IN THE UNIVERSE...MATTHEW 4:1-11
ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING THAT JESUS SAID ABOUT HIMSELF IN THE BIBLE WAS POSITIVE!
"I DECLARE A THING AND IT IS DONE FOR ME. MY WORD ACCOMPLISHES THAT WHICH I SEND IT OUT TO DO."----ISAIAH 55:11
THERE IS AN OLD PROVERB THAT SAYS " A MAN'S CURSES WILL FALL AND WRAP THEMSELVES AROUND HIM LIKE A CLOAK."
WHAT A POWERFUL VISUAL IMAGE THAT IS!..WHAT IF EVERY WORD WE SAID FELL AND WRAPPED ITSELF AROUND US LIKE A GARMENT? WHAT KIND OF WARDROBE WOULD YOU HAVE?!----This I am was because the power of the WORD. Which is made flesh so that what ever we "name things" it shall be. Jesus taught this. If he knew that WORDS became flesh and conscious about who he was, I AM was to teach others this same valuable lesson. He did not sepreate himself from GOd, even though he was flesh.***********
It doesn't matter what the Devil was called the God of. They still used the word Theos.
And the word is not exclusive to the Almighty God.
You totally missed my point.
John 20. Revelation 4-5.
John 7. John 11. Matthew 8.*******************
Nope, he states God did all the works-through himNo, He said "I have made a man whole on the sabbath," John 7.
Also:
Matthew 8:7
And he said to him, “I will come and heal him.” ("I")
And multiple other verses, including Acts 3-4 that you quoted from below where Peter says "men of Israel why do you stare at us as if by our own power or godliness WE have made this man whole? It is by faith in the name of Jesus Christ that healed him."
It's a paradox, the Father in and through Jesus, and Jesus in and through the Father, the Father in and through us and us in and through the Father, but God is the power source, not ourselves. Jesus said in Matthew 10, Luke 9, Luke 10, Mark 3, Mark 6, "heal the sick," He did not say ask Me to heal the sick, but He anointed them with healing and then commissioned them go use it in His name. Ambassadors. Amen.
Deborah, you need to seek help from a doctor, because I don't know what Bible your reading but it isn't the Bible. Your just taking up space on the discussion, and you're a total waste of my time.
************************
You've done nothing but insult me. A natural Christian reaction.
You spoke to me first. I don't want to waste your time so don't speak to me.
I need to see a doctor? That's a personal attack not allowed here.
I know it bothers you that I don't believe your ridiculous doctrine.
Amazing how many have fanned me since this thread started. I don't think I'm a waste of their time.
Now run along to your fantasy land and worship your idol.
See everyone can be rude but when I give it back, I'm the only one who hears about it.I'm sorry that you feel insulted. I do not see that. I do not see that intent. I see true honest exhortation and encouragement toward wholeness. Well the desire is for truth, and your doctrine/teaching is thought to be ridiculous due to lack of support. Numbers don't equal truth, Hitler had millions follow him, so did Stalin, numbers itself does not equal truth. Bless you and all your fans though. Look at your lack of support and see what is true and not/fantasy. Actually now Brian is "hearing about it" too, from you, so you are not the only one, and it was not meant that way. But grace grace to you.
here is a short excerpt whoich touches on the points of interest.
"What is worship? The answer to this question is important, not only because Christians should know what worship is, but in discovering what worship is, we also find out who can be worshipped. Since the Bible was originally written in Hebrew and Greek, we need to begin our study of worship by looking at the Greek and Hebrew words that are translated “worship.” Unfortunately, because of the way the Greek and Hebrew words for “worship” have been translated into English, it can be difficult to learn correctly about worship from an English version of the Bible.
The Hebrew word shachah and the Greek word proskuneo account for more than 80% of the appearances of the word “worship” in most English versions of the Bible, so these are the two words with which we want to concern ourselves. There are a few other words that are occasionally translated “worship” but have a more specific meaning outside of the idea of worship, and really should be translated differently. An example would be the Greek word latreuo, which means “to serve,” but in a few cases is translated “to worship.”
A study of the Hebrew word shachah and the Greek word proskuneo reveals that both these words mean “to bow down.” The Hebrew word shachah (Strong’s number 7812) is used of bowing or prostrating oneself, often before a superior or before God. [1] In the King James Version, it is translated by a number of different English words, including: “worship” (99 times), “bow” (31 times), “bow down” (18 times), “obeisance” (9 times), and “reverence” (5 times).
The Greek word proskuneo (Strong’s number 4505) comes from the Greek words pros, “to” or “toward,” and kuneo, “to kiss.” It literally means to kiss the hand to (toward) someone in token of reverence, and among the Orientals, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence. Hence, in the New Testament it means kneeling or prostration to do homage or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication. [2]
The examples of “worship” in the Bible confirms that in the biblical culture, people bowed down before those to whom they wanted to show respect or honor. Lot “worshipped” (shachah) the strangers who came to Sodom even though he had never seen them before. He prostrated himself before them to show them respect (Gen. 19:1). Moses “worshipped” (shachah) his father in law, whom he respected and honored (Ex. 18:7). Abigail “worshipped” (shachah) David. She honored him by prostrating herself before him. These three examples can be multiplied many times over, but they show that when someone wanted to honor another, he would fall down before him. The act of falling down is called “worship,” and reveals the heart of the worshipper—respect and honor towards the one being worshipped."
If you read on you will see that many times where "worship" is used, another phrase could very easily be just as valid and not attribute "worship" as to God, to Christ.
but that might take too much effort to accomplish.
It is all in the translation.
http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/articl … sus-christPhilip asked Jesus to show them the Father, and Jesus said, "Philip said to him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us."
Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? John 14 :7-8
God came into this world in the form of a man, and that man's name was Jesus Christ. He came to save us from our sins. That's why He came. You either believe it or you don't.********************
They should have seen God by the works done through Yahshua, not that he was God.
Jesus Christ was not his name. Yahshua was.
Jesus is a Latin name-said Hey-susThen why did Jesus say I and the Father are one (Greek is "hen", "to the exclusion of another, identical") in John 10? Why did He say if you see Me you see the Father, John 14?
Actually, they pronounced His name "Ishoa Mashikha" (ee-show-uh muh-shee-khuh [guttural "h"]) because they all spoke Aramaic, not Hebrew. And, even if it was Hebrew it's Yeshua (yeh-shu-uh) not Yahshua, because Yahshua is Joshua, but Yeshua is Jeshua/Jesus.
The pronunciation/original language does not matter in this context, Yeshua and Jesus are the same name in two different languages, both obviously meaning the same thing, "Savior," or "Salvation." That's what matters, that He's the Savior, not J-e-s-u-s versus Y-e-s-h-u-a. That's missing the forest for the trees and the trees for the forest, nonmajor important detail.**********************
It's Yahshua.
Yah SavesWhy? Because you say so? What I wrote can be looked up to confirm.
In Hebrew it's Yehshua, His name is not Joshua but a variant of Joshua. Joshua Christ? No Jeshua/Jesus Christ. Jesus/Yesous/Savior.
In any event, He is Yah/Yehweh, and He Saves. That is the point. Not the pronunciation. You can pronounce "salsa" as "salsa" or "selsa" with a slight Hispanic accent and your waiter will still bring you that red liquid that is tomatoes with vegetables in it for your chips. So you can call Jesus Yahshua or Yeshaua or Ishoa or Jesu or Yesu or Isous or whatever (Heberw, Hebrew, Aramaic, Italian, African, Russian) and He will Save. Thank you.**********************
Please tell me how to say Torah. Most say it incorrectly.
You can use other words to demonstrateWho cares? What does it matter? The pronunciation? It means Way, Teaching, Instruction, Law. That's what matters. Tomato, tomato.
*********************
Because you claim to know Hebrew and GreekThe teachers of the Law--the well-trained--the ones who were supposed to understand the ways of God--the ones who had His Word memorized--the smartest of the smart: Even they, with Jesus right in front of their eyes, missed the point.
I don't think this is a game of "who knows more languages" and the winner gets to be right in his/her assertions. The point is to know the meaning of the words and to understand its message. Sometimes we try to make things too complex. God's ways are higher than our ways and of course there is mystery and complexity we will never understand, but even a child can understand the basic message of the Gospel and the message of love.
It's been interesting to read your messages back and forth--but time to turn of the computer and talk with God instead of just reading about Him or talking about Him.
Tzetcha leShalom veShuvcha leShalom*****************
I am not playing a Language game. I am saying the Bible is different and I read the original. Come on don't judge me as arrogant. I am just stating truth. And Language does matter when you are studying something as deep as the bible and salvation.
You feel you are just as right as I feel I am....so
Well, I am not missing the point. I feel others are.
Yahshua came to show us our sins so we wouldn't sin anymore. He covered sins he did not take them away.
So I don't have to go to the Christian church, adopt their doctrine or respect Paul.
Hundreds believe as I do.
My Hebrew husband does too
Let me ask you, is it OK to lie?
I said that about Hebrew and Greek because I believe someone lied to me.
Paul thought it was OK to lie for God too. To prove his pointsThat's what they want though, just another robot in the machine. Life is a journey, not a burden. Love life and you love yourself. Truly love all life and you truly love yourself. We are absolutely the one and we are all playing the same game, we just think that we are playing separate roles.
Okay, I said I study the Hebrew and Greek, nowhere did I say I am fluent in Hebrew and Greek. And what does it matter, if we talk in English or Greek? I use the Interlinear Scripture Analyzer (www.scripture4all.org), which is so awesome and the best interlinear Bible I have seen because it gives the actual Greek tenses, like instead of Ephesians 5:18 saying "be filled with the Spirit" the Greek tense is "be being filled with the Spirit," a continuous action. I definitely recommend it, you just gotta click all the boxes in the interlinear tab for all the stuff to show up. Grace.
************
No person who understands Hebrew would call God Yahweh that is a mis transliteration.
It's YHVH and/or YHWH
Yod Hey Vav Hey that's why they think it says YahwehNo person who understands Hebrew? Is that Love/Unconditional Kindness? That is accusation. If you will not speak respectfully I will not talk with you. Regardless, the statement is false, someone can fluently read and understand Hebrew and still call God Yahweh, or whatever, missing one word does not negate all the rest. If I pronounce deborah as "deh-boh-ruh" it doesn't meant I don't understand English.
Yes, I'm familiar with Yod He Vah He. This is also why some say Jehovah, taking the Yod as a J.
Yod in the ancient Hebrew is a pictograph of an arm with a closed hand, meaning to work or throw. He is a pictograph of a figure with arms raised, meaning to look, reveal, breathe/breath/spirit. And vah is a pictograph of a tent peg, meaning to secure or increase. So God/YHWH is a spirit, Who reveals, looks on all, works/power/moves, that secures. The point is, we're talking about God, the Creator.
*************
The name is very important
Acts 4:12
Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.Okay, the name/character is. Not the pronunciation or language of the name.
And, this is not all of what Peter said, this is the last part, he says that it's the name of Yesous Christos (Greek) or Jesus Christ of Nazareth that we are saved, not YHWH or whatever, because Jesus Christ is God and so Jesus Christ is YHWH/Yayway:
8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders, 9 if we are being examined today concerning a good deed done to a crippled man, by what means this man has been healed, 10 let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead—by him this man is standing before you well. 11 This Jesus[a] is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone.[b] 12 And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men[c] by which we must be saved.”I would have to disagree with Jesus being God. He was sent by God to save us from sin but by no means is he God. Otherwise. Why would he say the father is greater than I and teach us to pray to HIS father? He could not be his own father. Could he?
The name is important ONLY because it is the Son of God's name.
The PERSON makes the name, not the other way around.
Christ will not deny a person who does not know His spoken name, and He proves it in scripture when they called to Him by many names.
The Son of God knows who is speaking to Him, of Him, and/or gives Him His due reverence.
He knows all things, and yes it is verified by scripture that He knows all things. John 21:17
I am not saying His given name is not important, but rather that it is indeed His name because, and only because, He IS the Son of God.
Therefore, if I call unto Him by the only name I know for Him in my native tongue, [which I know a few other translations for His name, this is an example] then He will not reject me on such a basis.
If we were to be so picky about His name as to narrow it down to one, we would be saying all the other prophetic references or names people in His day used to call to Him are meaningless, which is simply not so.
Otherwise the Bible would not contain them, as it doesn't contain a word, especially not referring to the Messiah, that is meaningless. They are the words of almighty God and mean more than any others.
Including all the names Jesus Christ is called by His sheep. He knows their voice just as His sheep know His, because He is The Good Shepherd. John 10:3-5 & 14 & 16
We are a part of the trinity. All things are part of the trinity. The only thing which exists is the trinity. In truth, only God exists.
And we are a physical manifestation of the creator. We look just like dad/mom
At least on that we agree.
@Deb... yes it is one of many tests. And it does it no favors that the translators had their own agenda.So your saying that God is unable to preserve His own Word for mankind to know about Him?
Or that God does not care enough about people to make sure that a preserved translation would be available for us today, so that we can actually get to know Him and obey Him.I believe that every word is the word of God. Spoken, written, or just thought. We are a divine creation, and our own divinity is what we are here to determine, on an individual basis. Everything is everything. All that truly is...is God. And if we are a dream...let us hope that it doesn't end soon.
Ok. Point taken but, where did you learn this? What is your belief based on?
