Jesus is God !

[Lonster]

Greetings again JudgeRightly,

Yes, there is, Jesus is the Son of God.

In the same sense that the "Word was 'with' and 'was' God." It means that something can be both. Son of God is a position rather than a hereditary description. There is no 'when I became, from the Father' scripture. It's very important to recognize at which point men start 'making it up' when scripture stops. Unit-arian is made up of the 'missing pieces' as if God doesn't know what He is conveying or doing. It because presumptuous and human-centered because of it. The irony is the Watchtower quotes Romans 3:4, unfortunately out of context, to try and prove themselves 'right.' Because it is violently ripped (meaning they completely (completely) changed the meaning of that verse) out of context of man being able to affect God's salvation faithfulness, to meaning that they are right, that they believe God, not man. :doh: Thus by their ignorant arrogance, they not only don't read scripture for THEIR need of Salvation from God, building off works salvation instead, they ALSO make up the differences between what they don't understand from revelation of God, thus being the biggest offense to the already wrong idea, they took from scripture.

For a start he had so absorbed God’s words that they were completely his own thoughts and thus when he spoke they were both his words and God the Father’s thoughts and words. One example of this flow is given in the following:

Awkward sentence

Isaiah 55:8–11 (KJV): 8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. 10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater: 11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
In the above God’s spoken word takes on a semi-personification and accomplishes God’s purpose and is depicted as returning to Him. This is a good introduction in understanding how the Word that is spoken about in John 1:1 finding its continuity and focalisation in the birth, development and ministry of Jesus.

Also awkward and vague. It is 'fuzzy' in conveyance, and I think fuzzy in logic as well and the sentence structure is grammatically broken, making it hard to ascertain your theological intent (if there was any). John 1:1 simply says "Was God." Easy enough, "AND was with God," which is clear enough, but difficult to explain. The Watchtower took it upon itself in horrible grammatical fashion, to say "was a god." It is not what the Greek, which does translate well "word for word" into English, says. It literally says "The Word was 'the' God," word for word. There is no 'a' (which Greek does have and could have been used) in the text. None.

No, it is not blasphemy, as God’s words had become his own thoughts and words.

Er, no. That is problematic and not logically consistent with scripture. AT ALL. There is no "God became His words" in all of scripture. It is a man-made construct that does indeed trample other scriptures and a Biblical concept of God. Because it is inaccurate, it becomes idolatry, attributing to God an attribute that YOU (and other Unitarians) assumed, rather than found in scripture. Blasphemy is a profaning of what is sacred, thus one might see this misconception of God's nature 'profaning'/sacrilegious (harming), thus blasphemous. Generally it is a correction that needs to be made and the one with the wrong perception corrected. I've seen the above often from Arians/Unitarians and it is truly human rationalizing. There is no scripture that says such a thing so it is obviously coming extra-Biblically from Arians/Unitarians, from their own minds and not the Bible.

Jesus was and is very special as he is the only one that is THE Son of God in all of its full meaning. The prophets of old quite often did not fully understand the Word of God that was given them and therefore they were not really all their own words, but they were the messengers of God's words:
1 Peter 1:10–12 (KJV): 10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: 11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. 12 Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.
Some of the exhortations and denunciations were also in effect their own words. To some extent they became what they taught.

A continued problem of those who have rejected the rest of us, is that they piece together 'what they think is right' rather than what is very clear from scripture. It is the 'made-up' parts of narrative/commentary that are problematic unless one can show clarity from scripture. I don't have a problem with 'very special' as God is so but from there, we finite beings cannot qualify nor quantify one who never had a beginning or end (Hebrews says Melchizedek had none and The Lord Jesus Christ is given as equivalent in Hebrews "without any beginning and with no end." When a mere man/men come and say "Yes he did have a beginning" they are contradicting scripture and God Himself. THAT is problematic regardless of what you've bought wholesale as true. It isn't AND goes against scripture thus we Trinitarians must necessarily seek God, not mere men and inadequate words and explanations, as Arians/Unitarians do. It doesn't matter if it 'looks' right to you, we collectively have double checked our work and looked again to see if such tramples God's words, and it does. Whether you agree or not, this is WHY we reject it: We see it as bad math and poor human rationalization rather than the words and truth of God because, specifically, it genuinely is extra-biblical in nature.

I started a thread called “The Yahweh Name” and I did a search and it only ran from May 11 2018 to May 15 2018. This is part of my understanding of the continuity of God the Father’s revelation in and through Jesus, The Son of God. This is partly based upon the understanding that Exodus 3:14 should be translated as “I will be”, not “I AM”. God the Father was to become revealed in a Son, Jesus, the Son of God, to be born of Mary, with God the Father as the father of the child, who would in his ministry be revealed as being full of grace and truth. No prophet before shows this fullness of revealing God the Father.

You make grammatical mistakes in English, how could you give us a grammatical lesson in Hebrew (or Greek for that matter)?

Yes. They were also his own thoughts and words and we have the expression "Great minds think alike".

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Lonster,

In the same sense that the "Word was 'with' and 'was' God." It means that something can be both. Son of God is a position rather than a hereditary description. There is no 'when I became, from the Father' scripture.

The following from the promises to David indicate that it was to be a future event:
2 Samuel 7:14 (KJV): I will be his father, and he shall be my son.

Also awkward and vague. It is 'fuzzy' in conveyance, and I think fuzzy in logic as well and the sentence structure is grammatically broken, making it hard to ascertain your theological intent (if there was any).

Yes, I am not very good at English and explanation. I am a technical person and enjoyed Maths and Physics.

The Watchtower took it upon itself in horrible grammatical fashion, to say "was a god."

I am not a JW and do not agree with their treatment of John 1:1. They understand Jesus to pre-exist, most probably as Michael the archangel. I understand The Word in John 1:1to be similar to the wise woman Wisdom in Proverbs 8 who was with God in the creation.

I don't have a problem with 'very special' as God is so but from there, we finite beings cannot qualify nor quantify one who never had a beginning or end (Hebrews says Melchizedek had none and The Lord Jesus Christ is given as equivalent in Hebrews "without any beginning and with no end."

Melchizedek's priesthood did not have a beginning and an end, but I do not believe that Jesus is the historical Melchizedek, nor is Melchizedek alive today or acting in his priesthood. The man Jesus had a birth and a beginning. The Word was continuous and is a quality and characteristic of God the Father, not a separate being before the birth of Jesus.

You make grammatical mistakes in English, how could you give us a grammatical lesson in Hebrew (or Greek for that matter)?

I am not qualified in that sense, but I assent to what some scholars have taught such as Tyndale, RV and RSV margins and other Hebrew scholars. When I first joined another forum 16 years ago there was a long running thread on the subject of the Yahweh Name, and the member was advocating that “Ehyeh” in Exodus 3:14 should be translated as “I will be” and not “I AM”. He was at first opposed by three Trinitarians, and yet they agreed with him after there was 143 posts. For the first time in 16 years I encountered one of these Trinitarians again, and he is a Hebrew scholar, and I was able to ask him if he still subscribed to the idea that “Ehyeh” should be translated as “I will be” and he said: Yes. I received instruction from one of our Youth Leaders on this subject in a systematic way when I was 19, and have been interested in this subject since then.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[keypurr]

Matt 19:16-26

16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,

19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?

21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.

24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

25 When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?

26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.


This passage actually is teaching the Truth that Jesus is God ! Notice vs 17 As the young man had addressed Jesus as good, and Jesus responded accordingly, why callest thou me good, for none is good but ONE, that One Being God

Now , notice Jesus did not say, none is good but One and that is my Father, but He said that One, Being God !

Now if Jesus by this is not insinuating that He is God, then the alternative is that He was not good, seeing He just said only ONE, not Two, but ONLY ONE is good.

Now, if Jesus was not good, being that He was not the Only One Good God, then His commanding him, the young ruler, in order to be perfect, that he must go sell all his possessions, then give to the poor, and follow Him; Such an commandment exposed that the young man loved his possessions above God, which was a violation of the very first commandment, now if Jesus was not God, then the young mans refusal to obey and follow Jesus, could not be a proper standard to gauge his Love to God !

For there could not have been nothing amiss about not making such a great sacrifice as that Jesus told him, and then following Him if the One speaking was not the One God, who Only was good !

Come on lets do the twist....

 

[keypurr]

keypurr is one of the looniest of the loonie-toons here on TOL.

You think that because you do not wish to see truth when it conflicts with your traditions. But you got to admit I am loveable.

 

[keypurr]

I expect people to consider the points made in the article before dismissing it out of hand.



I consider the article to be strong evidence for Jesus being the Creator God, evidence that is not normally considered when the topic comes up.



First, I completely agree with scripture, the above not withstanding.

Second, while I see what you're trying to say, I think you're missing the point completely.

The point is that Jesus was taking the place of God when he used the phrase "I say unto you."

Regardless of which prophet said, "Thus says the Lord," they are speaking in place of God, while still attributing to God the words they are about to utter.

This is NOT the case with the phrase Jesus used, which focuses the attention on Himself, BECAUSE He is God.

And verses such as the one you just quoted make that abundantly more clear.

The verses you quoted, while yes, do "summarise the difference between the revelation in the past, and the revelation through Jesus," what it DOESN'T do is exclude Jesus from BEING God. Here's why:

God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets,has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. - Hebrews 1:1-4 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews1:1-4&version=NKJV

In other words, while in the past, God spoke through prophets to the nation of Israel (instead of speaking directly to them (which utterly terrified them)), however, God spoke through Jesus directly to them, and didn't terrify them, because He came as a man, the Man, Christ Jesus. The catch is that Jesus claimed the words He spoke as His own, and not the words of God.

The dichotomy is this:

If Jesus was not God, then simply using the words "I say unto you" is blasphemy, because Hebrews specifically states that God was speaking using Jesus, because Jesus is claiming God's authority as His own.

On the other hand, if Jesus IS God (and He is), then by Him using the phrase "I say unto you," He is rightly claiming to be God, because He takes the authority of God as His own.

The fact is that Jesus claimed to be God.

Whether you believe Him or not is on you. (John 12:48)



It teaches EXACTLY BOTH! And there is no contradiction in that!

It teaches that God the Son is speaking, and that God the Father is speaking through His Son, because what the Son says is what the Father has said.

[JESUS]For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak.And I know that His command is everlasting life. Therefore, whatever I speak, just as the Father has told Me, so I speak.”[/JESUS] - John 12:49-50 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John12:49-50&version=NKJV



Yes it does. On that we firmly agree. But you leave out that it also teaches that Jesus is God the Son of God.

Ever wonder what Jesus was anointed with? What is the power in Acts10:38?

 

[keypurr]

I expect people to consider the points made in the article before dismissing it out of hand.



I consider the article to be strong evidence for Jesus being the Creator God, evidence that is not normally considered when the topic comes up.



First, I completely agree with scripture, the above not withstanding.

Second, while I see what you're trying to say, I think you're missing the point completely.

The point is that Jesus was taking the place of God when he used the phrase "I say unto you."

Regardless of which prophet said, "Thus says the Lord," they are speaking in place of God, while still attributing to God the words they are about to utter.

This is NOT the case with the phrase Jesus used, which focuses the attention on Himself, BECAUSE He is God.

And verses such as the one you just quoted make that abundantly more clear.

The verses you quoted, while yes, do "summarise the difference between the revelation in the past, and the revelation through Jesus," what it DOESN'T do is exclude Jesus from BEING God. Here's why:

God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets,has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. - Hebrews 1:1-4 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews1:1-4&version=NKJV

In other words, while in the past, God spoke through prophets to the nation of Israel (instead of speaking directly to them (which utterly terrified them)), however, God spoke through Jesus directly to them, and didn't terrify them, because He came as a man, the Man, Christ Jesus. The catch is that Jesus claimed the words He spoke as His own, and not the words of God.

The dichotomy is this:

If Jesus was not God, then simply using the words "I say unto you" is blasphemy, because Hebrews specifically states that God was speaking using Jesus, because Jesus is claiming God's authority as His own.

On the other hand, if Jesus IS God (and He is), then by Him using the phrase "I say unto you," He is rightly claiming to be God, because He takes the authority of God as His own.

The fact is that Jesus claimed to be God.

Whether you believe Him or not is on you. (John 12:48)



It teaches EXACTLY BOTH! And there is no contradiction in that!

It teaches that God the Son is speaking, and that God the Father is speaking through His Son, because what the Son says is what the Father has said.

[JESUS]For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak.And I know that His command is everlasting life. Therefore, whatever I speak, just as the Father has told Me, so I speak.”[/JESUS] - John 12:49-50 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John12:49-50&version=NKJV



Yes it does. On that we firmly agree. But you leave out that it also teaches that Jesus is God the Son of God.

Ever wonder what Jesus was anointed with? What is the power in Acts10:38

I expect people to consider the points made in the article before dismissing it out of hand.



I consider the article to be strong evidence for Jesus being the Creator God, evidence that is not normally considered when the topic comes up.



First, I completely agree with scripture, the above not withstanding.

Second, while I see what you're trying to say, I think you're missing the point completely.

The point is that Jesus was taking the place of God when he used the phrase "I say unto you."

Regardless of which prophet said, "Thus says the Lord," they are speaking in place of God, while still attributing to God the words they are about to utter.

This is NOT the case with the phrase Jesus used, which focuses the attention on Himself, BECAUSE He is God.

And verses such as the one you just quoted make that abundantly more clear.

The verses you quoted, while yes, do "summarise the difference between the revelation in the past, and the revelation through Jesus," what it DOESN'T do is exclude Jesus from BEING God. Here's why:

God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets,has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. - Hebrews 1:1-4 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews1:1-4&version=NKJV

In other words, while in the past, God spoke through prophets to the nation of Israel (instead of speaking directly to them (which utterly terrified them)), however, God spoke through Jesus directly to them, and didn't terrify them, because He came as a man, the Man, Christ Jesus. The catch is that Jesus claimed the words He spoke as His own, and not the words of God.

The dichotomy is this:

If Jesus was not God, then simply using the words "I say unto you" is blasphemy, because Hebrews specifically states that God was speaking using Jesus, because Jesus is claiming God's authority as His own.

On the other hand, if Jesus IS God (and He is), then by Him using the phrase "I say unto you," He is rightly claiming to be God, because He takes the authority of God as His own.

The fact is that Jesus claimed to be God.

Whether you believe Him or not is on you. (John 12:48)



It teaches EXACTLY BOTH! And there is no contradiction in that!

It teaches that God the Son is speaking, and that God the Father is speaking through His Son, because what the Son says is what the Father has said.

[JESUS]For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak.And I know that His command is everlasting life. Therefore, whatever I speak, just as the Father has told Me, so I speak.”[/JESUS] - John 12:49-50 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John12:49-50&version=NKJV



Yes it does. On that we firmly agree. But you leave out that it also teaches that Jesus is God the Son of God.

I suggest you reread HEB 1:3 Again, slowly. God is a spirit and so his express image. The true son is not a man, its a spirit. It needed a body prepared for it. HEB 10:5. It became flesh in John 1. It came to Jesus with the dove. God was pleased that IT contained his fullness. Col 1. Open your mind to see what scripture is showing you. Whom are you serving? All images are creations, the son is a creature, Col 1:15.

 

[keypurr]

And your particular opinion isn't important. You've had PLENTY long enough to state ANY kind of biblical case and you've failed miserably (means you aren't doing anything particularly compelling on TOL, just wasting time arguing for what you think, rather than know). MOST, likely 99.9% of all scholars, are in fact, Triune. You lost before you started as one who has never been in that league.


Mine are (Your sentence is missing an important adverb or pertinent punctuation)! 2 Corinthians 10:5 5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

As I said, every scholar worth any salt is Triune. You are making lame and shallow claims as befitting one with a lot of lack of knowledge. Did you actually think anybody on TOL would go to you for truth before going to one of these scholars? The only reason anybody listens to me is because I've learned a bit perhaps they haven't from these scholars and have taken time to read languages. You literally (literally) have nothing for your family or to offer on TOL. Do you realize that (I don't think you do, you seem to think you are contributing in some meaningful way).

Well, partial delusion then. NOBODY thinks that about you on TOL. Aren't they the actual ones who 'should' give that assessment? I'm pretty sure I know what most on TOL would say about my prowess: "Lon makes theology easier to understand so I read him. He isn't the most brilliant scholar but he has certainly studied. I disagree with him on a number of theological points but believe he is in the faith."

Something along those lines, I may not have hit all they'd hit upon, but I'm pretty sure I'm not delusional but am fairly accurate. You just aren't seen as having a ton of theological prowess, Keypurr, ESPECIALLY when the ONLY theology you seem to erringly know anything about is this single issue one-trick pony of Unitarian thought. I've never seen you post in any other theology thread, that's how unmemorable. You really DON'T know theology when the only thread you post in is "Jesus is not God" for 20 years.


You are mistaken. You really DON'T understand trinitarian thought/theology if you think that. You've never bothered to learn what we believe. There is ONLY one God. Isaiah 9:6? Never heard of it?

Hebrews 2. Simply making shallow statements/soundbytes isn't really seen as academic or scholarly (means nobody but you thinks you are good at theology or faithful in Bible reading).

I care not what you think also Lon. Your full of church dribble. You have closed your eyes to truth. You fail to understand that many are called but few are chosen. Most means nothing in theology. Go study the Militia and see what it comes up with. Never stop learning. Turn the pages in the Bible and seek his truth.

 

[keypurr]

Prove it. Show ANY scripture (ANY) that says Jesus is created. Show it. "You have prepared a body for me" is NOT creating Him! Find ANY scripture that says so. No? Means you are "Making it up as you go" Keypurr. You 'think' you are good at theology with this kind of rationalization mess from human minds, not God's? You are arrogant and attempting to take His place. Its a sin, frankly. You've said, here and now "created" and have literally (literally) no scripture that says He is. THAT, is not only not good theology, it isn't scholastic either. You go beyond scripture with 'rationality' thus elevating YOUR thoughts above those revelations of God. That idolatrous man is you!

"Thus saith Keypurr." There is NO scripture that says this. It is rather YOUR math answer. While some math is very simple, scripture gives Jesus with Algebraic terms. There is no way you can simplify "was God" AND "was with God." NO way. You tried, but 'simplistic' is wrong (let alone you being 'good' at math or theology). :nono:

:yawn: "I and the Father are One." "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was 1) with God and the Word 2) WAS God." "The Word (Jesus) 'became' flesh and dwelled among us." I have a whole thread on this with scripture after scripture. JudgeRightly JUST posted another. Did you read it???


BECAUSE John 1:1 says He both "was with" AND 'was' --> GOD! Doesn't make sense? Good! Listen to Him even if you can't! This much is CRYSTAL clear and you are remiss for not listening to Him, going off on a tangent of YOUR rationalization rather than His revelation AND ignoring/trampling scriptures with your 'theories.' Theories are proven wrong yet you cling to them as if they are gold. : Plain:


Yes He did (was 'with' AND 'was' Keypurr! Pay attention!).

No, you are LEAVING the rest of us intelligent beings and going off on your own thus make many mistakes for your mavericking. You just are NOT this good. I am pretty savvy yet I'd never go it alone. Galatians 6:6 YOU ignored/are ignorant of this directive scripture from God! You went ahead and didn't bother to have anybody correct you. That isn't 'brilliant' its shallow and delusional. ALL you have to do is ask, like you did above AND listen to the answer. Nope, Keypurr is exactly this arrogant, he and .01% of the Christendom steeped in cultism actually, arrogantly, thinks he is that .01% superior and "THE REST OF US" are idiots. Yes you do! You just said so, arrogantly, that you are sensational at theology implying the rest of us are slouches. : Plain: You are audacious, Keypurr. You know that, right? Do you REALLY not see yourself how the rest of us think of you? Do you really not?

Jesus was BORN, that makes him a man, every man is a creature not God.
Even the EXPRESS IMAGE is a creature/creation for ALL IMAGES are creations.
Col 1:15 tells you the son is a creature, not God.
And then there is John 17:3..
I do not see most as idiots, just misguided, as I WAS. How you think of me matters not because I love you all anyway. But your not in the light and I feel maybe I can get some to question their faith which will drive them to learn more.

 

[Right Divider]

You think that because you do not wish to see truth when it conflicts with your traditions.

The beauty is that I don't have traditions.

But you got to admit I am loveable.

In a perverse sort of way.

 

[Trump Gurl]

Jesus was BORN, that makes him a man

Yes, I have said a billion time, Jesus is fully man, and he is also fully God.

Why are you mentally unable to grasp that.

The union of Christ's humanity and divinity in one hypostasis, or one individual existence, is called the Hypostatic union (from the Greek: ὑπόστασις hypóstasis, "sediment, foundation, substance, subsistence").

Jesus Christ is both God and man. He is both perfectly divine and perfectly human.

Jesus Christ is . . . the Only Begotten Son of God . . . God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through him all things were made.

I believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.​

​

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages. God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven, and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate, he suffered death and was buried, and rose again on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and his kingdom will have no end.​

​

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets.​

​

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.​

The beauty is that I don't have traditions.

You disobey Paul.

So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold to the traditions you were taught, whether by what we said or what we wrote.
2 Thessalonians 2:15

Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.
2 Thessalonians 3:6

 

[Right Divider]

Jesus was BORN, that makes him a man, every man is a creature not God.

For the Biblically ignorant... do we have to go over this again?

The WORD was GOD and the WORD was MADE FLESH. (John 1:1,14)

Jesus is not JUST a man. He is GOD MADE FLESH.

Even the EXPRESS IMAGE is a creature/creation for ALL IMAGES are creations.

You repeated ignorance is bad for your health. It's leading you to the lake of fire.

Col 1:15 tells you the son is a creature, not God.

NO, it does NOT!

Jesus is GOD and MAN. The WORD MADE FLESH.

And then there is John 17:3..

This says that the Father is the one God... it does NOT say that ONLY the Father is the one God.

Father, Son and Holy Spirit.... the ONE GOD!

I do not see most as idiots, just misguided, as I WAS. How you think of me matters not because I love you all anyway. But your not in the light and I feel maybe I can get some to question their faith which will drive them to learn more.

You are currently unsaved and in danger of hell fire.

 

[Right Divider]

You disobey Paul.

No, I don't. Stop lying as that makes you a liar.

So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold to the traditions you were taught, whether by what we said or what we wrote.
2 Thessalonians 2:15

Those traditions are NOT the abominations of the RCC.

Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.
2 Thessalonians 3:6

US refers to Paul and those that preached HIS message with him... the one that Jesus gave DIRECTLY to him.

1Co 3:10 KJV According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

How did PAUL lay the foundation? (Hint: because HE received a dispensation of the gospel that was NOT the same as the one that the circumcision apostles preached). See Galatians 2

Rom 15:20-21 KJV Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation: (21) But as it is written, To whom he was not spoken of, they shall see: and they that have not heard shall understand.

Paul did NOT build on the foundation laid by Jesus (during His early ministry to the circumcision [Romans 15:8]) and the twelve, but on the foundation that HE LAID (he got HIS foundation from the RISEN Lord Jesus Christ).

You need to get out of the bondage of the RCC and get into God's plan for today.

 

[Trump Gurl]

Stop lying.

I am not lying, you are

 

[Right Divider]

I am not lying, you are

You did lie and your pride is showing AGAIN.

That's one thing that I can say for sure about RCC's, they are so proud of their "church".
But, then again, so are JW's, Mormons, etc. etc. etc.

 

[Trump Gurl]

. . . . The true son is not a man, its a spirit. . . .

The Son became flesh and dwelt among us.

 

[Lonster]

Greetings again Lonster,

The following from the promises to David indicate that it was to be a future event:
2 Samuel 7:14 (KJV): I will be his father, and he shall be my son.

Such is NOT a statement of creation. Position? Sure.

Yes, I am not very good at English and explanation. I am a technical person and enjoyed Maths and Physics.

I understand The Word in John 1:1to be similar to the wise woman Wisdom in Proverbs 8 who was with God in the creation.

d

I know you do, which is the problem here: "The Word became flesh and dwelled among us." It is a poor and contrived comparison for the sole purpose of attempted undergirding of one's derived philosophy. Why not listen to God instead of making it up? Theology SHOULD be from God and not simply pieced together in our heads. It is really the difference between Christians and the rest of the world, we take scripture as 'our' authority and don't attempt the other way around or theology becomes anthropology cast back upon God and His nature. Man's rationalizations are not theology.

Melchizedek's priesthood did not have a beginning and an end, but I do not believe that Jesus is the historical Melchizedek, nor is Melchizedek alive today or acting in his priesthood. The man Jesus had a birth and a beginning. The Word was continuous and is a quality and characteristic of God the Father, not a separate being before the birth of Jesus.

:doh: Hebrews 7:3 3 Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.

Read it. Be taught by it, THEN (and only then) make your observations. Your observations trample all over the written word of God. If you are only interested in your thoughts and what you think about things, that isn't theology ("study" where learning is required, about God), nor is it really theological discussion. It becomes fantasy/fanciful discussion of what Trevor thinks and/or makes up, at that point. I'm not really interested in that. I'm interested in theology, what the Bible actually says.

I am not qualified in that sense, but I assent to what some scholars have taught such as Tyndale, RV and RSV margins and other Hebrew scholars. When I first joined another forum 16 years ago there was a long running thread on the subject of the Yahweh Name, and the member was advocating that “Ehyeh” in Exodus 3:14 should be translated as “I will be” and not “I AM”. He was at first opposed by three Trinitarians, and yet they agreed with him after there was 143 posts. For the first time in 16 years I encountered one of these Trinitarians again, and he is a Hebrew scholar, and I was able to ask him if he still subscribed to the idea that “Ehyeh” should be translated as “I will be” and he said: Yes. I received instruction from one of our Youth Leaders on this subject in a systematic way when I was 19, and have been interested in this subject since then.

Kind regards
Trevor

Be careful with consensus. Somewhere on TOL, there has been a Jewish rabbi who gives corrections but the Tetragrammaton (G-d's name in four letters) is translated contextually (as are all Hebrew names). Abram (father) was changed to Abraham (Father of many), thus the initial names given in Hebrew, mean what their lives stand for. G-d's (used here in case Jew participates, they do not spell out His name even in English out of reverence) name given to Moses was contextual "I Am" continuing "the only G-d above any other of Pharaoh's gods that don't exist," etc. Thus "I will be" is also promised in the name to mean "Even though you feel inadequate to task (Moses was not believing himself up to the task), It was G-d's message, Moses was rather the vessel G-d was using to deliver Himself to Pharaoh.

Our lives, then, often are the description of our names. "Lon" by definition, will be whatever your conception of me is by interaction, thus the 'definition' of Lon in your mind. Likewise, the tetragrammaton YHWH given to Moses, is defined by what immediately follows in the text. YHWH meant that He was all Moses needed (I will be) and the only true G-d that Pharaoh needed to recognize (I Am (the only One).

 

[Lonster]

Ever wonder what Jesus was anointed with? What is the power in Acts10:38

I suggest you reread HEB 1:3 Again, slowly. God is a spirit and so his express image. The true son is not a man, its a spirit. It needed a body prepared for it. HEB 10:5. It became flesh in John 1. It came to Jesus with the dove. God was pleased that IT contained his fullness. Col 1. Open your mind to see what scripture is showing you. Whom are you serving? All images are creations, the son is a creature, Col 1:15.

The above is confusing issues. I am spirit, but I dwell in flesh. My identity is 'all' that I am, including the flesh I dwell in. There are times to parse (separate) that, for instance in the command to love God with all my heart (desire) Mind (my cognition/learning/conception) soul (essence), and strength (where all this rubber meets the road). All of this just and only "me" but broken down to what I consist of to ensure every fiber and essence of me is loving God. It helps one see if their devotion to God is compartmentalized, that they are only 'partly' loving God.

But any 'separation' should not be artificial in imposition. John 1:1 says clearly "BOTH." Clearly.

The Lord Jesus Christ wasn't just flesh, but He was here in the flesh. He was Spirit. He is God. Whatever else you get, YOU BETTER get that scripture intermixes and DOES NOT SEPARATE God the Son from God the Father when discussing His nature. When YOU do so, you are busting up what God intended to be 'One.' That is always the sin of the Arian/Unitarian: Busting up what God unified, and unifying wrongly what God separates and has reveal to us. It is extra-biblical and wrong.

 

[Lonster]

I care not what you think also Lon. Your full of church dribble

Arrogance and defiance. You don't even know what church I belong to, just use it as a dismissal point. Its sloppy and meaningless.

You have closed your eyes to truth.

I close my eyes to you. I'm a LOT smarter and better read in scriptures. I can prove it, this isn't arrogance showing. You KNOW I can prove it too! Why then would you posture absurdly? Arrogance and pride is such a sin! You just aren't seen as anybody's guru on TOL, so why do you posture thinking so??? Nobody comes to you and asks "what does this mean, Keypurr?" You are delusional about yourself. Don't believe me? Pride, at this very minute, is trying to gloss over my statements. You even said, just above, that You don't care (even though my education and years of study are far and above your own). You are so arrogant (and ignorant) that you then proceeded to post as if you are a pip on anybody's radar for spiritual matters. :nono: Not at all. You are here as a place-holder for the opportunity of teaching correct theology and showing how bad it is when you don't know what you are talking about. You are simply a commercial we use to point people to correct theology. Your disdain, being .01% of anything even noticeable in every Christian's life. We just don't think much of you. You go ahead and KEEP taking your eyes off of Jesus and make this about me and you, however. You are exactly this arrogant.

You fail to understand that many are called but few are chosen.

You are making a huge assumption. Careful lest it is YOU that He says "Depart, I never knew you." James and John 'presumed' they'd sit on His right and left hand. Such was arrogance, and so is your's.

Most means nothing in theology.

Says every uneducated JW where they are so ignorant, they don't even know what goes on in seminary. They just make soundbytes against us that other ignorant uneducated JW's who have their dismal pride stroked, believe. : Plain:

Go study the Militia and see what it comes up with. Never stop learning. Turn the pages in the Bible and seek his truth.

Ironic, coming from you. I know my bible incredibly better than you. You just aren't as bright as you think you are AND are too arrogant in your dismal learning to realize you really don't have the skills ESPECIALLY when you've arrogantly separated, thinking you had nothing else to learn from the rest of us. God is really going to judge you for that. I don't know if I can convince you of that, but we all should have a little tremble in our reverence to God and your's is sorely-lacking pride. Your whole post is posturing defending yourself and totally getting in the way of God and His Scriptures all about your 'feigned' superiority that you've literally no right to, you NEVER earned it! God judge between you and I: I've had the years and hard study. You? Not at all. God judge! You are arrogant and wrong and WAY too arrogant that you will not be shown wrong, though I've carefully shown, from scripture, honoring God, that you are wrong. Get over yourself and love the Lord Jesus of your God, not just the God of Him. Your arrogance and shortsighted love and allegiance are yet showing over these past ten years of your wasted time on TOL. YOUR arrogance (in genuine ignorance) is showing.

 

[Right Divider]

Jesus was BORN, that makes him a man, every man is a creature not God.

False claim. The Lord Jesus Christ was not JUST a man. He was PREXISTING His being MADE FLESH.

(17:5) And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

Jesus was with God (and was God) BEFORE the CREATION. Which makes sense since Jesus IS THE CREATOR.

The rest of the message was thrown in the trash with the rest of the garbage.

 

[Lonster]

You think that because you do not wish to see truth when it conflicts with your traditions. But you got to admit I am loveable.

Prideful. And arrogant. You actually 'think' that is lovable? Is ignorant, you even misspelled lovable. Nobody thinks you are any kind of scholar. How delusional and self-interested are you? I don't care if you remember Lon. You WILL remember scripture and the Lord Jesus Christ was unable to even get you to listen, however. Arrogance can never be corrected. One day you will stand before Him (as will I) and you will indeed be corrected for this.