Jesus is God vs. Jesus is YHVH

Dartman · Mar 8, 2019

Jacob said:
It says that all of the fullness of Deity dwells in Him in bodily form.

That's what I said.
All the fulness of God's attributes dwells in Jesus, who is a body.
The problem is, most people INTERPRET this statement WITHOUT properly considering the REST of Scripture .... while being influenced GREATLY by the traditions/brain washing of their theology.

Jacob · Mar 8, 2019

Dartman said:
That's what I said.
All the fulness of God's attributes dwells in Jesus, who is a body.
The problem is, most people INTERPRET this statement WITHOUT properly considering the REST of Scripture .... while being influenced GREATLY by the traditions/brain washing of their theology.

How do you read it yourself?

Dartman · Mar 8, 2019

Jacob said:
How do you read it yourself?

Are you asking how I interpret the text?

Jacob · Mar 8, 2019

Dartman said:
Are you asking how I interpret the text?

That is acceptable.

Dartman · Mar 8, 2019

Jacob said:
That is acceptable.

For me, the first step in exegesis is reading the text.
The second step is looking at the context..... who is speaking, who is being spoken to, what is the topic of that context, etc.
The third step for me is, looking at ANY words that seem to teach something unusual .... checking the Greek/Hebrew word, and it's definition.
The fourth step is USUALLY, I research every text that uses that specific Greek/Hebrew word, (Englishman's Dictionary is AWESOME for that purpose).
The fifth step is to examine any synonymous terms, to get an even more detailed view of the greater context of Scripture.
A sixth step would be to examine any other passages that discuss the topic.
A seventh step would be to keep my mind open for God's guidance. All of these steps should include prayer for guidance.

I am convinced the Scriptures all are in harmony, and it is MY responsibility to study every Scripture I can find, to get the details of that harmony.

Jacob · Mar 8, 2019

Dartman said:
For me, the first step in exegesis is reading the text.
The second step is looking at the context..... who is speaking, who is being spoken to, what is the topic of that context, etc.
The third step for me is, looking at ANY words that seem to teach something unusual .... checking the Greek/Hebrew word, and it's definition.
The fourth step is USUALLY, I research every text that uses that specific Greek/Hebrew word, (Englishman's Dictionary is AWESOME for that purpose).
The fifth step is to examine any synonymous terms, to get an even more detailed view of the greater context of Scripture.
A sixth step would be to examine any other passages that discuss the topic.
A seventh step would be to keep my mind open for God's guidance. All of these steps should include prayer for guidance.

I am convinced the Scriptures all are in harmony, and it is MY responsibility to study every Scripture I can find, to get the details of that harmony.

Sounds good to me.

Do you see a difference between

Jesus is FULL of God

and

all the fullness of Deity dwells in Him in bodily form?

Colossians 2:9 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
9 For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form,

New American Standard Bible (NASB)
Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation

Dartman · Mar 8, 2019

Jacob said:
Sounds good to me.

Do you see a difference between

Jesus is FULL of God

and

all the fullness of Deity dwells in Him in bodily form?

Colossians 2:9

Yes. The Greek does NOT support the pagan term "Deity". The Greek indicates attributes belonging to God.

Jacob · Mar 8, 2019

Dartman said:
Yes. The Greek does NOT support the pagan term "Deity". The Greek indicates attributes belonging to God.

I do not know why you say this. I feel that this is the word Deity in the Bible and in relation to Jesus God's Son.

JudgeRightly · Mar 9, 2019

Dartman said:
Yes. The Greek does NOT support the pagan term "Deity". The Greek indicates attributes belonging to God.

Strong's g2320

- Lexical: θεότης
- Transliteration: theotés
- Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
- Phonetic Spelling: theh-ot'-ace
- Definition: deity, Godhead.
- Origin: From theos; divinity (abstractly).
- Usage: godhead.
- Translated as (count): Deity (1).

You were saying?

JudgeRightly · Mar 9, 2019

Dartman said:
I am convinced the Scriptures all are in harmony, and it is MY responsibility to study every Scripture I can find, to get the details of that harmony.

You focus too much on the details, and never om the overview.

It's called missing the forest for the trees.

Dartman · Mar 9, 2019

JudgeRightly said:
You focus too much on the details, and never om the overview.

It's called missing the forest for the trees.

That would ONLY be true if the overview actually STATED "Jesus is God".
It doesn't.

On the other hand, the Scriptures state .... over an over, Jesus is a man.

Your overview is inaccurate.

Dartman · Mar 9, 2019

JudgeRightly said:
Strong's g2320

- Lexical: θεότης
- Transliteration: theotés
- Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
- Phonetic Spelling: theh-ot'-ace
- Definition: deity, Godhead.
- Origin: From theos; divinity (abstractly).
- Usage: godhead.
- Translated as (count): Deity (1).

You were saying?

Are you really surprised to be able to find a trinitarian biased publication of man????

Dartman · Mar 9, 2019

Jacob said:
I do not know why you say this. I feel that this is the word Deity in the Bible and in relation to Jesus God's Son.

I say this because the three times KJV translates the Greek into "Godhead", are each a unique variation of the word "Theos"... indicating is is God's attributes we are discussing.
The Scriptures are exquisitely clear, there is "ONLY one true God".... and that is Jesus' Father.

On another note, it is not in the least remarkable that God is full of Godly attributes.
It is UNIQUE when a MAN is full of Godly attributes.

JudgeRightly · Mar 9, 2019

Dartman said:
That would ONLY be true if the overview actually STATED "Jesus is God".
It doesn't.

On the other hand, the Scriptures state .... over an over, Jesus is a man.

Your overview is inaccurate.

On the contrary...

If you have an overview of what the Bible says about Jesus, it unequivocally shows Him to be both man AND God.

In the Old Testament, Whenever God uses men to speak for Him, they say, "Thus says the LORD," about 420 times.

But that's not used in the New Testament, NOT ONCE.

Jesus Himself, with all the red ink devoted to His words, never once used "Thus says the Lord." Instead, He says, "I say unto you," 135 times.

"Thus says the LORD" and "I say unto you" indicate the same thing: God is speaking. Jesus Christ made it clear that He Himself was at the heart of His teaching, that the focus of His message was Himself, unlike all the righteous priests and kings, prophets and the apostles.

[The rest of this post is directly from http://kgov.com/deity. I strongly recommend that you read through all of it, as long as it is. I will break it up so you don't have to scroll so much.]

Christ's Self-focus:

Spoiler

The Forest for the Trees:

Spoiler

The Deity of Christ and Eternal Separation:

Spoiler

Jesus Is God:

Spoiler

Three in the Bible:

Spoiler

God exists as three persons in one Godhead, whom we refer to as the Trinity. Thus human beings made in His image also have a triune nature, and the cosmos itself is understood in threes, in the most fantastic ways. Before considering this, first see the Bible's extraordinary use of this number. Christ was three days in the tomb, which Jonah’s three days foreshadowed, as did Abraham’s three days of thinking that he would sacrifice his son Isaac on that same hill called Golgotha and Mt. Moriah (Gen. 22:14; 2 Chron. 3:1). Israel's three patriarchs are Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The priestly tribe of Levi is from Jacob's third child (Gen. 29:34), as Leviticus is the third book of the Bible. And the day the law was given, the sons of Levi killed “about three thousand men” (Ex. 32:28), whereas the day the Spirit was given, “that day about three thousand souls were [saved] (Acts 2:41; and see 2 Cor. 3:6). The Hebrew Scriptures comprise three sections, the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings (Luke 24:44), and God created three archangels. The most noteworthy women are Eve, Sarah, and Mary. The magi brought gold, frankincense and myrrh. Three persons (one being the Son) started their public service at thirty years of age: Joseph (Gen. 41:46), a deliverer of his people; David (2 Sam. 5:4) seated on the messianic throne (2 Sam. 7:12-13); and "Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age" (Luke 3:23). God could have led Esther to fast for two days, or four; and He could have kept Jonah in the whale for one day, or a week, but three days and three nights prefigures God’s plan of salvation for Christ’s time in the grave. For Jesus "rose again the third day according to the Scriptures" (1 Cor. 15:4). And thus, the triune Christian God, the mystery of the Trinity, Three Persons in One God, is the one God whose testimony we can trust (answering both the philosophical problem of the origin of the one and the many, and Euthyphro's Dilemma by Socrates), having imprinted our world and even ourselves with His triune nature.

Threes Everywhere:

Spoiler

Tripartite Man:

Spoiler

The Plurality in God:

Spoiler

The very first verse of Genesis presents the plurality of God, with Genesis 1:1 using a plural subject and a singular verb, that is, In the beginning, gods He created the heavens and the earth. Elohim is the plural of the typical Hebrew word for God, which is El (cherub and seraph for example become plural as cherubim and seraphim, with Elah likely being the dual form, and Elohim being a plurality, in this case, three). So, did Moses make a grammatical error in the first sentence of the first book of Scripture, in what has become not only the world's best-selling book, but in the most well-known sentence in the history of the world by using a singular verb with a plural subject? Of course not. For this was intentional. The Hebrew Scriptures in the most solemn texts presents God as a unified plurality. What grammarians refer to as the "royal we" comes from God's references to Himself using the plural: "Let Us make man in Our image," (Gen. 1:26). The solemn Hebrew prayer, called the Shema Yisroel, to the "one God" uses another plurality. For "The Lord our God, the Lord is One (of plurality)" at Deuteronomy 6:4 uses neither of the expected terms, yachad or even bad, words meaning a singularity, but God's Word uses the word echad, which is one in plurality as used by God at the Tower of Babel, "the people are one," and by Joseph "the dreams of Pharaoh are one," and by Moses, "the people answered with one voice," and back again to the beginning of Genesis at the institution of marriage when God says, "and they shall become one flesh." So this foundation prayer to God does not the use the Hebrew words for one, which mean a singularity (which words are never used in the Bible referring to God), but God describes Himself in the Bible using the One of plurality. So the Shema says: the Jehovah (who is the one God) our Elohim (plural) Jehovah is a Plural Unity! And Deuteronomy 6:4 is the central passage to all theology of God. Then the Scriptures go on to teach that the three persons of the Trinity are God the Father (Isa. 63:16; Mal. 2:10), God the Son (Ps. 2:12; Zech. 12:10 and as in the chart above), and God the Spirit (Gen. 1:2; Isa. 48:16; Isa. 6:3).

And finally, denial of Christ's deity is a central teaching of many of today's cults, including for example the Jehovah's Witnesses. A lack of understanding of the plurality of the Godhead creates philosophical dilemmas such as the problem of the one and the many. And Socrates' pre-Christian argument against God called Euthyphro’s Dilemma is resolved by none of the world's religions except for the Christian Answer to Euthyphro in the eternal corroborating testimony of the three Witnesses of the Trinity.

Postscript -- Is the Father-Son Relationship Eternal?

Spoiler

The Scriptures help us see the errors in two claims about the Son that are held by a minority of believers, many of whom, thankfully, do assent to the Trinity and the deity of Jesus Christ. One false teaching is the claim that no triunity existed in God until He decided to express Himself in that way. The link above, the Christian Answer to Euthyphro's Dilemma in the eternal corroborating testimony of the three Witnesses of the Trinity, presents the biblical rebuttal to that first claim. The second related erroneous claim, as written about by Zeller and Showers, admits that the Persons of the Trinity have existed eternally, but that the Second Person did not become the "Son" until the Incarnation. This teaching at least has a proof text, which however appears to have been misapplied. One form of this second error is that through eternity past the second Person of the Trinity was the "Word" but not the "Son". This position claims that it was not until the Incarnation, or thereabouts, when the Father's prophecy was fulfilled, "This day have I begotten Thee", that the Word became the Son. The claim here is that the First Person of the Trinity sent the Second Person, the Word, to the world, who thereby became the Son. Let's look at four rebuttals to this claim.

Spoiler

A second way of recognizing from Scripture that the Son is eternal is that the "Father" is eternal. Without a Son, the First Person of the Trinity would not have been the Father. Further, with all the Old Testament passages referring to God as Father notwithstanding, He would not have become the Father until about 2,000 years ago with the Incarnation. However, while the famous messianic prophecy of Isaiah 9 raises the deep mystery of the separateness within, yet also the oneness of, God, its description of Him as "Everlasting Father" has long been held by Christians to teach that throughout eternity past, the Father has been the Father. As the Apostle Paul wrote, "there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things" (1 Cor. 8:6), such that everything that has flowed from Him has flowed from Him as "the Father". Likewise, to the Ephesians, the Hebrew poetry places in proximity the "one Spirit" with the "Father of all", reinforcing that as the Holy Spirit has been eternally the Spirit, so too with the Father, as likewise when Luke recorded, "Jesus rejoiced in the Spirit and said, 'I thank You, Father'" (Luke 10:21) and Matthew, "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Mat. 28:19). Of course also, in the Hebrew Scriptures, prior to the Incarnation, God was referred to as Father. "Have we not all one Father? Has not God created us?" (Mal. 2:10; see also Deut. 32:6; Ps. 68:5; Isa. 63:16; 64:8; [43:10]; John 8:41; 5:21 [evidently referring to the three Old Testament resurrections]). Yes, of course, "Father" could be used as a metaphor, like the Father of our Country or the Father of Creation. However, that metaphor does not hang on nothing. It is "Our Father who art in heaven" that gives rise to the use of the Father metaphor. Also, the parallel passages to those above, regarding that the "Son" was sent, are those that teach us that the "Father" is the one who sent Him, such as Jesus' own frequently repeated statements about "the Father who sent Me" (John 5:30, 36-37; 6:39, 44, 57; 8:16, 18, 29, 42; 12:49; 14:24) and "I have come in My Father's name" (John 5:43). That is, the First Person who sent the Second Person to Earth, at the time of the sending, was already the Father. So to be the everlasting Father, of necessity, eternally, He has had a Son.

Spoiler

Thirdly, the burden of proof for such a new doctrine is on the person claiming that the Godhead's relationships were different prior to the creation, or prior to the Incarnation, than they are today. However, with its one proof text, the scriptural evidence will fail to make the case if that passage is not making a claim about the past First and Second persons relationship, but rather, is referencing the future Incarnation when God the Son will be begotten to become the Son of Man. For Psalm 2:7 is a messianic Incarnation prophecy. "You are My Son, today I have begotten You." The immediate context, and the three times that this passage is quoted, shows that this relates to the messianic plan for the Second Person rather than to the First Person's past relationship with the Second Person. In context, this is about Jesus as God's "King on My holy hill of Zion" [i.e., Jerusalem] (Ps. 2:6). That description applies because of and sometime after the Holy Spirit overshadows Mary, for "that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit" (Mat. 1:20). So too, each of the three quotes of Psalm 2:7 refer explicitly to its fulfillment in the First Advent of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:5; 5:5). "And we declare to you glad tidings—that promise which was made to the fathers. God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He has raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm..." (Acts 13:32-33). Thus while some see Psalm 2 as claiming no past Father-Son relationship, the alternative traditional understanding is that it is referring to when God the Son becomes the Son of Man taking upon Himself the messianic role, with the Godhead as the Progenitor, so to speak, begetting Jesus' earthly existence. The writer of Hebrews quotes Psalm 2 and then explicitly connects it to a prophecy of the Incarnation, for Mary, Jesus' true earthly mother, descended from the line of David. "I will set up your seed after you, who will come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom... I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his Father, and he shall be My son" (1 Sam. 7:12-14). This messianic Incarnation prophecy is then quoted in Hebrews 1:5, again reinforcing that Psalm 2:7 refers to the Incarnation. Likewise, when quoted in Hebrews 5, the passage is associated with the prophecy that Christ would "become High Priest", another reference to His role through the Incarnation. Thus, the New Testament interprets Psalm 2:7 not as referring to some past spiritual begetting of the Son by the Father, but to God's begetting of His eternal Son through the virgin Mary whereby He became "the Son of Man", His favorite title for Himself.

Spoiler

JudgeRightly · Mar 9, 2019

Dartman said:
Are you really surprised to be able to find a trinitarian biased publication of man????

Publication?

I used a Interlinear Bible app for that screenshot.

Dartman · Mar 9, 2019

JudgeRightly said:
On the contrary...

If you have an overview of what the Bible says about Jesus, it unequivocally shows Him to be both man AND God.

This is simply not true.... and you have offered ZERO evidence to support your claim.

JR said:
In the Old Testament, Whenever God uses men to speak for Him, they say, "Thus says the LORD," about 420 times.

Sure.
So that's about 4 times per year, from Moses (1500BC) ... to the minor prophets (400BC .. ish).
But Jesus said that he was "SENT BY" his God, Jehovah/YHVH, the God of the Jews, about 39 times, which is more than 10 times per year of his ministry.
he NEVER said "remember, I already told you 1,500 years ago".

Jesus DID proclaim many times "it is written" in reference to those things that Jehovah had said.

JR said:
Jesus Himself, with all the red ink devoted to His words, never once used "Thus says the Lord." Instead, He says, "I say unto you," 135 times.

Sure, Jesus most certainly DID speak his Gospel, and his commandments. Nobody is denying that Jesus was speaking!

But JESUS HIMSELF makes it UNMISTAKABLY CLEAR.... Jesus is NOT the source of the "logos", the commandments, the gospel .... his GOD is!!

John 12:49-50 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. 50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I 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.

John 14:24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.

JR said:
[The rest of this post is directly from http://kgov.com/deity. I strongly recommend that you read through all of it, as long as it is. I will break it up so you don't have to scroll so much.]

Nope. I have no intention of wasting time reading someone's opinion, that I have ZERO reason to respect, I will instead spend the time looking into God's logos, those writings are credible ... your source is WAY not.

JudgeRightly · Mar 9, 2019

Dartman said:
This is simply not true.... and you have offered ZERO evidence to support your claim.

My entire post was me offering you evidence. But won't even consider it because you...

...have no intention of wasting time reading someone's opinion

So why are you even on this forum where opinions are shared? Are you just here to troll? to proselytize, all without budging an inch off of your own position?

We call those people trolls.

that I have ZERO reason to respect,

And why is that, I wonder? Is it because he doesn't hold the same views you do?

Is it because he, unlike you, has spent the past 40 or so years studying God's word?

Is it because he, unlike you, is the pastor of a church?

Is it because he, unlike you, is a talk show host?

Why not simply respect him because he is a human being, made in God's image.

Go on, I dare you to read what he wrote. You might just find it illuminating.

But you won't, because you're not interested in reading someone else's opinion.

Don't respond to me again unless you can tell me honestly that you've read through kgov.com/deity, or even just through the portion I quoted.

glorydaz · Mar 9, 2019

JudgeRightly said:
Spoiler

My entire post was me offering you evidence. But won't even consider it because you...

So why are you even on this forum where opinions are shared? Are you just here to troll? to proselytize, all without budging an inch off of your own position?

We call those people trolls.

And why is that, I wonder? Is it because he doesn't hold the same views you do?

Is it because he, unlike you, has spent the past 40 or so years studying God's word?

Is it because he, unlike you, is the pastor of a church?

Is it because he, unlike you, is a talk show host?

Why not simply respect him because he is a human being, made in God's image.

Go on, I dare you to read what he wrote. You might just find it illuminating.

But you won't, because you're not interested in reading someone else's opinion.

Don't respond to me again unless you can tell me honestly that you've read through kgov.com/deity, or even just through the portion I quoted.

Gotta bookmark that one. :thumb:

Dartman · Mar 9, 2019

JudgeRightly said:
My entire post was me offering you evidence.

I responded to your post, and provided my explanation where you are confused.

I have no problem responding to YOUR points, but I am not interested in looking at linked information ...... ESPECIALLY lengthy ones!!

JR said:
So why are you even on this forum where opinions are shared?

There are actually several reasons. I will list the ones I can think of, and not in any particular order;
* To try and verify the TRUTH by engaging other perspectives.
* To keep my knowledge of the Scriptures rehearsed, and as sharp as I can.
* To help others to find the TRUTHS I have been taught.

JR said:
And why is that, I wonder? Is it because he doesn't hold the same views you do?

I read your posts, regardless of the differences in doctrine. So, obviously that isn't the issue.

JR said:
Is it because he, unlike you, has spent the past 40 or so years studying God's word?

Is it because he, unlike you, is the pastor of a church?

Is it because he, unlike you, is a talk show host?

LOL ..... you are wrong about 2 out of three ..... but it's irrelevant. Truth isn't guaranteed based on how many years one has studied. Truth isn't limited to pastors .... and I as a pastor am no better than the lady doing the janitorial service for our congregation. You need o read more of the Scriptures! Your perspective is very worldly.

glorydaz · Mar 9, 2019

Dartman said:
I responded to your post, and provided my explanation where you are confused.

I have no problem responding to YOUR points, but I am not interested in looking at linked information ...... ESPECIALLY lengthy ones!!

There are actually several reasons. I will list the ones I can think of, and not in any particular order;
* To try and verify the TRUTH by engaging other perspectives.
* To keep my knowledge of the Scriptures rehearsed, and as sharp as I can.
* To help others to find the TRUTHS I have been taught.
I read your posts, regardless of the differences in doctrine. So, obviously that isn't the issue.
LOL ..... you are wrong about 2 out of three ..... but it's irrelevant. Truth isn't guaranteed based on how many years one has studied. Truth isn't limited to pastors .... and I as a pastor am no better than the lady doing the janitorial service for our congregation. You need o read more of the Scriptures! Your perspective is very worldly.

You should know you're never to old to learn. Did you know that Jesus was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel? Do you have any idea why Paul was even necessary...what with the Twelve and all?

I'm thinking you're a lot like I was before I learned what changed in Mid Acts. Things that are not the same are different. You just have to learn to recognize WHY things changed with Paul.

Jesus is God vs. Jesus is YHVH

Active member

BANNED

Active member

BANNED

Active member

BANNED

Active member

BANNED

裁判官が正しく判断する

裁判官が正しく判断する

Active member

Active member

Active member

裁判官が正しく判断する

裁判官が正しく判断する

Active member

裁判官が正しく判断する

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member