Jesus SEPARATE from Jehovah; calls Jehovah "my God."

[Jerry Shugart]

Daqq and I have already been over this with you. You continue to diminish the significance of Jesus being anointed, adopted and declared as being God's Son at his baptism

No, not at His baptism. We can see that the day when the Lord Jesus was begotten was at His resurrection:

"But God raised him from the dead: and he was seen for many days of them that came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are now his witnesses unto the people. And we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers, that God hath fulfilled the same unto our children, in that he raised up Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, he hath spoken on this wise, I will give you the holy and sure [blessings] of David. Because he saith also in another [psalm], Thou wilt not give Thy Holy One to see corruption. For David, after he had in his own generation served the counsel of God, fell asleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption: but he whom God raised up saw no corruption" (Acts 13:30-37).​

We can clearly see that that all of these verses are speaking of the Lord Jesus bing raised from the dead. But you say that despite the fact that the first two verses are speaking of His resurrection and the last four verses are speaking about the same thing you say that the verses in "bold" are in regard to something entirely different from His resurrection.

According to your strange idea the words "raised up Jesus" in these verses have nothing to do with His resurrection!

You have got to be kidding!

 

[drbrumley]

The Jehovah of the Old Testament and the Jesus of the New Testament are one and the same.

 

[Nihilo]

But remember that I was speaking only of the Rock foundation for the New Covenant writings which are, of course, the Gospel accounts which contain the Testimony of Yeshua. The epistles of Paul can really be misunderstood and-or twisted without first adhering to the premises laid out in the Gospel accounts. There is a hierarchy of sorts, like building blocks consisting of precepts and principles: Torah, Prophets and Writings, Gospels, Epistles.

What does that mean? Are you saying that the epistles have kurios/n without the article, where it applies to Christ and not to the Father?

 

[daqq]

What does that mean? Are you saying that the epistles have kurios/n without the article, where it applies to Christ and not to the Father?

The epistles are indeed a little more, shall we say, crafty.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Genesis 3:22 - 4:1 KJV Restored Name Version
3:22 And YHWH Elohim said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know [H3045] good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

The primary meaning of the Hebrew word translated "to know" is "to See; and hence to perceive, to acquire knowledge, to know, to be acquainted" (Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon).

And that is the meaning of the word as used at Genesis 3:22. Adam received the "knowledge" of good and evil when he ate of the tree of good and evil:

"And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" (Gen.2:16-17).​

Adam acquired the knowledge of good and evil when he ate of that tree.

Are you saying that the LORD does not perceive nor have the knowledge of the evil found in the world? The LORD which I worship does:

"Nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account" (Heb.4:13).​

 

[daqq]

The primary meaning of the Hebrew word translated "to know" is "to See; and hence to perceive, to acquire knowledge, to know, to be acquainted" (Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon).

And that is the meaning of the word as used at Genesis 3:22. Adam received the "knowledge" of good and evil when he ate of the tree of good and evil:

"And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" (Gen.2:16-17).​

Adam acquired the knowledge of good and evil when he ate of that tree.

Are you saying that the LORD does not perceive nor have the knowledge of the evil found in the world? The LORD which I worship does:

"Nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account" (Heb.4:13).
​

The Seven Eyes have been explained to you herein but your eye is not singular. :chuckle:

 

[Jerry Shugart]

The Seven Eyes have been explained to you herein but your eye is not singular.

There you go again!

Changing the subject as fast as you can in the hope that no one will notice the errors of your teaching!

 

[KingdomRose]

Ah, but that is not what it says now is it?

It has been explained to you what it says. Jehovah is the Savior in Isaiah and Jesus is said to be the Savior in Titus' letter. Why is that? As it has been explained: Jehovah is the SOURCE of all power and authority, and it was His plan that Jesus come to Earth. Therefore, He is the source of mankind's salvation. Jesus' sacrifice is the means by which Jehovah saves. Therefore, technically Jesus can be called the Savior because it was his life that was sacrificed. But "Savior" is also what Jehovah is because He set the plan in motion and SENT Jesus down here.

Catch up, drumbum. You're way behind.

 

[KingdomRose]

1 Kings 8:27 is speaking about the omnipresent God. The Lord Jesus was in the form of God until He put ona flesh and blood body. When the following prophecy will be fulfilled His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives:

"Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee. For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. Then shall the LORD (JHWH) go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle. And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east" (Zech.14:1-4).​

Neither Jesus nor Jehovah will literally stand on the Mt. of Olives. It is a metaphorical situation, merely highlighting the reality of Jehovah's interaction with the events on the Earth. To think that He will literally set foot on the Earth is reducing the magnificent, glorious God that is unbounded by any limits, to the restrictions of a physical man. Your view is astoundingly narrow.

 

[freelight]

Titus 2:13 on trial.................

Titus 2:13 on trial.................

In order for your interpretation of Titus 2:13 to actually mean what you think it means, it would have to read thus.

while we wait for the blessed hope and appearing of the glories of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.

Adding from this post here......

I think Brother Kel's article here on this passage is good for starters, and a general survey of most commentaries on it, which do present an alternative translation order and interpretation upon the verse that is possible, so you'd need to consider some important points that do NOT insist or necessitate that this verse is claiming that Jesus is the 'great God', but he is the glory of God that appears in his 'coming', of course, and we must also consider that it is the "glory" of God that is being highlighted here as well (its appearing), the appearing of God's glory, and that 'glory' is revealed in and thru the Son. The Great God and Savior, our Father, saves by means of the Son. 'God' alone is Savior, for there is no other source of salvation.

Your assumption of there being 2 glories above is unnecessary, for God and his glory are One. God and his logos are One. God and His Messiah are One, and so on. One GLORY, although in a sense Jesus comes in the clouds during his parousia in his own glory, and in the Father's glory, (even in the glory of the angels, as one verse says) but all 'glory' is derived and given by The Father ALONE, who is the SOURCE of all. We would also note that in most all instances, Paul in his writings distinguishes 'God' from 'Christ' as they are two distinct persons, so the glory being spoken of here is the glory that is God's, revealed in the appearing of Jesus. There are two personalities here who both share the Father's glory, whose glory is One. Jesus is the glory of God, the revelation of God,...there is no problem here in a classical traditional monotheistic Unitarian View which is wholly consonant with Jewish Monotheism. Reading anything further into this passage is unnecessary and unwarranted, if you want to keep it within a 'biblical' context.

Yeah, that isn't happening. So back to the drawing board with you. You failed this question. Please try again.

No failure here. I recommend more study on your part. Here are 3 more articles illuminating key points on this passage -

Is Jesus God in Titus 2.13? ....by Kermit Zarley

Titus 2:13 - God and Savior

- Titus 2:13 - weak 'proof text'

Regarding Titus 2:13 Paul S. L. Johnson states

Tit. 2:13 is also alleged as a proof of the trinity by some, who to find in their thought, render the words in question as follows: 'the appearing of the glory of our Great God and Savior Jesus Christ.' This rendering is not preferred by a majority of learned trinitarians, though it is a possible rendering. Rendered as in the A.V., A.R.V. text, and a majority of modern translations, not our Lord Jesus but the Father is here called God. The fact that, properly translated, Paul never calls Jesus God, but always contrasts Him as Lord with the Father as God, is decisive on which is the right translation. Again, the connection (v. 11) naturally suggests that the bright shining is of the Father and of the Son. St. Paul's use of language, calling the Father God over 500 times and never once calling Jesus God, must rule in this case as to which is the right translation. Force, too, is added to our view by the words [A.R.V.] *the glory of the Great* God." -- Ephiphany Studies in the Scriptures, Volume 1, God, pages 525,526. -- (One should note that this was written back in the 1930s, before many of the modern translators had sought to translate this to read in favor of the trinitarian view.)

Brother Kel, again explains it well below -

In light of all this evidence of the most probable and likely translation/interpretation of Titus 2:13, I see no reason or justification of assuming or believing that this verse presents any actual proof or evidence to support a traditional orthodox Trinitarian interpretation therein. The verse does NOT prove Jesus is our Great God and Savior,...but in his parousia indeed, is the glory and manifestation of our Great God and Savior,...and that Great God and Savior is the Most High God, the Father-YHWH-Elohim-Almighty.

 

[Bright Raven]

Neither Jesus nor Jehovah will literally stand on the Mt. of Olives. It is a metaphorical situation, merely highlighting the reality of Jehovah's interaction with the events on the Earth. To think that He will literally set foot on the Earth is reducing the magnificent, glorious God that is unbounded by any limits, to the restrictions of a physical man. Your view is astoundingly narrow.

Acts 1:9-11 New King James Version (NKJV)

Jesus Ascends to Heaven
9 Now when He had spoken these things, while they watched, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight. 10 And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as He went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel, 11 who also said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven.”

 

[steko]

Neither Jesus nor Jehovah will literally stand on the Mt. of Olives. It is a metaphorical situation, merely highlighting the reality of Jehovah's interaction with the events on the Earth. To think that He will literally set foot on the Earth is reducing the magnificent, glorious God that is unbounded by any limits, to the restrictions of a physical man. Your view is astoundingly narrow.

Where does one obtain a metaphorical license to freely interpret Scripture according to their own imagination?

 

[meshak]

It has been explained to you what it says. Jehovah is the Savior in Isaiah and Jesus is said to be the Savior in Titus' letter. Why is that? As it has been explained: Jehovah is the SOURCE of all power and authority, and it was His plan that Jesus come to Earth. Therefore, He is the source of mankind's salvation. Jesus' sacrifice is the means by which Jehovah saves. Therefore, technically Jesus can be called the Savior because it was his life that was sacrificed. But "Savior" is also what Jehovah is because He set the plan in motion and SENT Jesus down here.

Catch up, drumbum. You're way behind.

drumbum? cute nickname.

 

[KingdomRose]

That's a lie

Sent from my SM-G920V using TheologyOnline mobile app

Just how is that a lie? The religious organizations which you are familiar with support going to war and killing everyone on the other side of the conflict, whether it be people of your same beliefs or people who are merely an "enemy." You would kill another person of your religion if you were taking part in a war. Jesus said that his followers would not do that. (John 13:35) He also said that his followers would love their enemies! (Matthew 5:44)

But YOU would argue against Jesus' teaching, wouldn't you. You would lamely say, "Well we have to protect our country," blah, blah, blah. But Jesus said NOT to kill your fellow believer OR your enemy.

YOU are lying when you say you follow him.

 

[meshak]

Just how is that a lie? The religious organizations which you are familiar with support going to war and killing everyone on the other side of the conflict, whether it be people of your same beliefs or people who are merely an "enemy." You would kill another person of your religion if you were taking part in a war. Jesus said that his followers would not do that. (John 13:35) He also said that his followers would love their enemies! (Matthew 5:44)

But YOU would argue against Jesus' teaching, wouldn't you. You would lamely say, "Well we have to protect our country," blah, blah, blah. But Jesus said NOT to kill your fellow believer OR your enemy.

YOU are lying when you say you follow him.

well said

 

[daqq]

There you go again!

Changing the subject as fast as you can in the hope that no one will notice the errors of your teaching!

There you go again: changing the subject and trying to blame it on me again!

Originally Posted by Jerry Shugart
The God I worship knows the evil things which some men do:

"For My eyes are on all their ways; they are not hidden from My face, nor is their iniquity concealed from My eyes" (Jer.16:17).

Does the God you worship not know the evil deeds of some men?

The Seven Eyes of YHWH are not YHWH Himself, but as it is written: the Eyes of YHWH.
Behold, upon one Stone whose name is Tzemach-Branch: Seven Eyes, (Zec 3:9).
And those Seven are the Eyes of YHWH sent forth into all His Land, (Zec 4:10).
And the same are the Seven Spirits before His throne, (Rev 5:6).
Just as Noah found grace in the Eyes of YHWH, (Gen 6:8).

Uriel, Raphael, Raguel, Miykael, Sariel-Yisrael, Gabriel, Raamiel.

Stop ignoring what is said to you from the scripture and perhaps you will stop chasing yourself in circles like a dog chasing its own tail. This is why it is so exasperating even dealing with you because you ignore everything that is said and continue spouting the same things over and over again. What is the point in conversing with you when you are not actually conversing but simply repeating yourself, over and over again like a robot, without hearing anything that is said to you? There are four base level scripture passages quoted with what I said in the above post and they are simply that: the base introductory level passages which need to be studied with much more depth. Do you not think you need to study those things so that you might understand what I meant by what I said? I did not speak from and of myself. Moreover, as anyone else but you might easily see, what I said was not a change of subject but the same topic: my heavenly Father does not "know" evil. Same topic! :duh:

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Daqq and I have already been over this with you. You continue to diminish the significance of Jesus being anointed, adopted and declared as being God's Son at his baptism, and emphasize his resurrection as being the primary event of he being declared the 'Son of God', - both are significant, but his baptism remains as the first event where the divine decree important to his ministry was confirmed, having the actual seal of the ancient proclamation, by the Voice of 'God' and the manifestation of the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove. So, there is something about the Adoptionist view here, that has meaning.

As far as Jesus being 'begotten', one can speculate outside of specific instances in scripture of a 'time' of his 'begetting', but whats most important from a Christological perspective that He is the specially 'begotten' of God, begotten in a unique way as the Firstborn, and we who are also begotten by God via the 'new birth' of the Spirit...are his brethren. The special begetting, allows for the corporate or community begetting, where all incorporate in the Messiah as God's Son. While Jesus may have a more unique and special 'begetting',...we also take part of the divine nature thru the 'begetting'.

I don't know if you remember or not but some time back I shared a story with PPS, about how a guy workin' for me asked if I believed there was a trinity, and I told him kinda. The dude went back to work with a smile on his face.

 

[KingdomRose]

Daqq and I have already been over this with you. You continue to diminish the significance of Jesus being anointed, adopted and declared as being God's Son at his baptism, and emphasize his resurrection as being the primary event of he being declared the 'Son of God', - both are significant, but his baptism remains as the first event where the divine decree important to his ministry was confirmed, having the actual seal of the ancient proclamation, by the Voice of 'God' and the manifestation of the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove. So, there is something about the Adoptionist view here, that has meaning.

As far as Jesus being 'begotten', one can speculate outside of specific instances in scripture of a 'time' of his 'begetting', but whats most important from a Christological perspective that He is the specially 'begotten' of God, begotten in a unique way as the Firstborn, and we who are also begotten by God via the 'new birth' of the Spirit...are his brethren. The special begetting, allows for the corporate or community begetting, where all incorporate in the Messiah as God's Son. While Jesus may have a more unique and special 'begetting',...we also take part of the divine nature thru the 'begetting'.

Well-said, referencing those who are anointed by the Spirit to be Christ's co-rulers in his Kingdom government. There are many of us, though, who are not spirit-begotten children of God and who will be the subjects of that Kingdom arrangement, living here on the earth. (Psalm 37:9-11,29; Isaiah 11:6-9)

 

[KingdomRose]

In order for your interpretation of Titus 2:13 to actually mean what you think it means, it would have to read thus.

while we wait for the blessed hope and appearing of the glories of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.

Yeah, that isn't happening. So back to the drawing board with you. You failed this question. Please try again.

Hey, remember me? I already explained to you that it reads in the Greek EXACTLY AS YOU POSTED ABOVE. No commas or any other punctuation. You didn't know that? YOU are failing miserably.

 

[KingdomRose]

The Jehovah of the Old Testament and the Jesus of the New Testament are one and the same.

Then explain how Jehovah can be talking to the Messiah in Psalm 110, and how Jehovah can be anointing Jesus and sending him in Isaiah 61:1,2. I don't know why you refuse to answer this, as I've asked you and others before.