John 10:30 – Jesus is The Son of God

[Jerry Shugart]

Did Thomas really identify Jesus as 'God'?

Yes, and the Apostle John also made it plain that the Lord Jesus is God. Let us look at this passage and pay attention to the word "this":

"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" (1 Jn.5:20).​

The Greek word translated "this" is a demonstrative pronoun and "it refers to a subject immediately preceding, the one just named" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

When when we read "this is the true God" we can know that these words are referring to the Lord Jesus, the One just named.

 

[daqq]

So....you don't honor the Son to the same degree to which you honor the Father?

Joh 5:23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

Thanks for confirming what was just said to JS about why it is useless to try to explain in-depth things to people who are not going to believe what you say anyways. In fact I already responded to Freelight about this very question, and you were here in this thread at that time, so your current false insinuation only reveals that you choose to ignore what others put forward simply because they do not agree with your mindset.

Originally Posted by freelight
Hi Daqq

Thanks. Could you address what word is used for 'worship' in John 4:24, and perhaps why it wasn't used in John 5:23, as in my last post addressed to JS? I just don't see that verse demanding a worship that could be equated with the quality of worship that is to be given the Father alone. I'm sure you follow :thumb:

John 4:24 uses proskeuneo but really can be read as to do obeisance or to bow, as if to a king, as it is often used in the Septuagint. The Septuagint also helps to explain the way different Greek words are used, in what contexts, and for what purposes, such as phobos and phobeo which are most often used in "the fear of the Lord" statements, and which really means reverential fear, (for example "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom"). One may just as easily read John 4:24, (proskeuneo), to be saying, "God is Spirit: and they that bow to Him must bow in spirit and truth." But if one reads it this way it would dramatically affect doctrine because now, all of the sudden, things must be seen in a completely different light. This is because in modern times when you say worship people automatically think of a church service with their eyes closed and their hands maybe raised up singing worship songs to God. I do not believe that is what Yeshua is saying here at all, but rather, imo, it concerns how we walk with the Father, (it must be in spirit and in truth; which is a paradigm shift in understanding). To bow is to do obeisance but not just during a prayer, or "worship service", but in everything we do, say, and believe in our doctrine. As for honor it is the same word used for honoring your father and your mother, (not about "worship" but respect). You can show an awful lot of respect for someone without worshiping them. If Messiah is the Word of Elohim then he delivers those who honor and respect him because they do what the Word says, (because he is the Word of the Father).

 

[marhig]

What other translations can you read?



No, John recorded the "testimony" of the Lord Jesus so it is the Lord who testified:

"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: Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw" (Rev.1:1-2).​

John only recorded the "testimony" of the Lord Jesus so when John speaks of "He who testifieth" he can only be speaking of the Lord Jesus.

You believe that part, so why don't you believe the part where it says that God gave it to Jesus through revelation? It says God, not the father, so it's clear that God is the God of Jesus Christ. If Jesus was God he wouldn't be receiving revelation from him.

 

[marhig]

"Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ" (Acts 2:36).​

Dr. Stanley D. Toussaint, Senior Professor Emeritus of Bible Exposition at Dallas Theological Seminary (Acts 2), writes the following commentary on Acts 2:36:

"Here is the conclusion to Peter's sermon. The noun 'Lord', referring to 'Christ', probably is a reference to Yahweh. The same word 'kyrios' is used of 'God' in verses 21, 34, and 39 (cf. Phil. 2:9). This is a strong affirmation of Christ's deity" (The Bible Knowledge Commentary; New Testament, ed. Walvoord & Zuck, [ChariotVictor Publishing, 1983], 359).​

Even stronger affirmation that God is the God of Jesus is the part in Acts 2:36 where it says that God MADE Jesus both lord and Christ. It also says in the Bible that God exhalted Jesus. God wouldn't have had to exalt Jesus, or make him lord and Christ because he would have been that already because he would have been God! But he isn't, he's the son of God!

 

[marhig]

Thanks for confirming what was just said to JS about why it is useless to try to explain in-depth things to people who are not going to believe what you say anyways. In fact I already responded to Freelight about this very question, and you were here in this thread at that time, so your current false insinuation only reveals that you choose to ignore what others put forward simply because they do not agree with your mindset.

Hi Daqq, there are people here who are not believing Jesus's own words when he says that God is his God, and that life eternal is to know the only true God and Jesus Christ whom he has sent. And the apostles who clearly say that God is the God and father of Jesus. We are not trying to make verses suit our doctrine, we are believing what is clearly written, we are quoting not only the apostles, but Jesus himself and they still can't see it. Jesus even said that without the father he could do nothing and that God his father has given him commandments and he has given him what to speak, and he came to do his will and bare witness to the truth.

But as for us, we believe the truth, as Paul told it here.

1 Corinthians 8:6

But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

I hope that God forgives those who condemn others who don't believe in the trinity as belonging to Satan, especially as there is nowhere in the Bible that tells us that we have to believe in a triune God. But rather to obtain life we are to believe in Jesus the son of God who bore witness to the truth, and have faith in both God and his son. Which we do. And God will judge the heart of every single one of us who have heard the truth and only he knows who is living it out and who truly loves him from their hearts.

 

[freelight]

More lessons......

More lessons......

I forced myself to endure this video all the way through in order to get his main point, which in the end was repeated like a mantra again and again ad infinitum. Okay, okay, Swami Rasputin! Aargh!

Commendations for keeping an open mind Brother Kel, actually has about 4 or 5 videos on this passage, so explores different nuances of it

His claim is that when Thomas said to the Lord Jesus, "My Lord and my God", that Thomas was referring to two different persons, one being the Lord Jesus and the other one being God.
He referred to the Greek which says literally, "the Lord of me and the God of me". On this point he is correct.
However, he says the used of the two definite articles in the text proves that Thomas was referring to two different persons.

Several years ago while reading the Psalms, I ran across a line in Psalm 5 that grabbed my attention because it was stated in such familiar language to a verse in the NT which I have paid a lot of attention to over the years. That verse is the verse in question, Joh 20:28.

I read this in Psalms:

Psa 5:2 Hearken unto the voice of my cry, my King, and my God: for unto thee will I pray.

I said, "Wow. I wonder how the Jews translated that verse in the LXX Greek."
This is what I found:

Psa 5:2 (5:3) πρόσχες τῇ φωνῇ τῆς δεήσεώς μου, ὁ βασιλεύς μου καὶ ὁ θεός μου. ὅτι πρὸς σὲ προσεύξομαι, κύριε·-LXX



As one can see, they translated the Hebrew into the Greek,

ho basileus mou kai ho theos mou, which translates "the king of me and the God of me".

But who is being referenced by this verse?

It's obvious by the plain reading of the text that David is referring to YHVH in verse 1.

Psa 5:1 To the chief Musician upon Nehiloth, A Psalm of David. Give ear to my words, O LORD, consider my meditation.
Psa 5:2 Hearken unto the voice of my cry, my King, and my God: for unto thee will I pray.


In the Greek King David is saying to GOD/YHVH, "the King of me and the GOD of me".

Is David speaking to two persons or to one?

It is exactly the same Greek grammar as Jn 20:28, therefore Thomas is saying to the Lord Jesus as to one person, "the Lord of me and the GOD of me".

While the idiom-phrase style is similar, we have to interpret within the appropriate context. By the way Bill Williams addresses similar idioms in the post I shared here. Remember, to see Jesus is to see the Father,...there is Jesus and there is the Father....TWO separate persons. The Father is the invisible incorporeal One. Jesus was ever speaking of his Father to Thomas and the 12....they kept hearing him say "if you have seen me, you have seen the Father". They had to have known and understood the Father was the One True God, incorporeal, infinite, immortal. Jesus was in the Father, and the Father was in Jesus,...the 'Father' is an invisible Spirit.

David in your example above is speaking to YHWH himself, in prayer.....there is no human person or representative of God that he speaking to. In John's account Thomas is making a statement before Jesus, an 'exclamation'... "my lord and my god!". In this he was addressing both Jesus and the Father, since Jesus is the Father's representative. The response of Thomas includes all that is visible, and invisible, to the glory of God! God was present there, in form....and beyond form. Jesus and the Father, simultaneously present. The honor and glory was given to BOTH. Thomas and David's experience are DIFFERENT. Thomas makes an exclamation in Jesus presence, which must acknowledge also the Father's presence. David is uttering a prayer to the invisible YHWH, one divine personality. Lets consider and respect the different situational contexts.

 

[daqq]

Originally Posted by Jerry Shugart

"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: Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw" (Rev.1:1-2).​

You believe that part, so why don't you believe the part where it says that God gave it to Jesus through revelation? It says God, not the father, so it's clear that God is the God of Jesus Christ. If Jesus was God he wouldn't be receiving revelation from him.

Let alone receiving such a new Revelation from the Father circa 95 AD, as they teach, even after Messiah was clearly already seated at the right hand of the Father. You might want to ask him about that too but I doubt you will get a sufficient answer as to how it is that Messiah, being already at the right hand of the Father and all the Power of the Glory On High could receive a new Revelation some sixty years later according to the futurist-historicist viewpoint.

 

[daqq]

Let alone receiving such a new Revelation from the Father circa 95 AD, as they teach, even after Messiah was clearly already seated at the right hand of the Father. You might want to ask him about that too but I doubt you will get a sufficient answer as to how it is that Messiah, being already at the right hand of the Father and all the Power of the Glory On High could receive a new Revelation some sixty years later according to the futurist-historicist viewpoint.

Mark 1:12-13 KJV
12 And immediately the Spirit driveth him into the wilderness.
13 And he was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted of Satan; and was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered unto him.

The only "wild beasts" that count are those found within the Word which the Father says He will use to teach us, (Hosea 13:7-11, Daniel 7:1-14, Revelation 13:1-7, Jeremiah 31:27-31). So where indeed does Paul tell us that he received and learned his doctrine and his Gospel from? He went into Arabia, (the desert), with an immersion, (which is immersion into the Word), which was likely given him from Ananias, (house of Zadok), at Damascus-Qumran when the Master sent Hananiah to him so that he might again receive his sight:

Galatians 1:11-12 KJV
11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

That is to say (the book or scroll of the) Revelation of Messiah Yeshua.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Even stronger affirmation that God is the God of Jesus is the part in Acts 2:36 where it says that God MADE Jesus both lord and Christ. It also says in the Bible that God exhalted Jesus. God wouldn't have had to exalt Jesus, or make him lord and Christ because he would have been that already because he would have been God! But he isn't, he's the son of God!

You fail to understand what is said here:

"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men" (Phil.2:5-7).​

Here we see that the Lord Jesus was made in the likeness of men. In fact, He was made like us in every way (Heb.2:17). And every "man" has a God:

"The LORD hath prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom ruleth over all" (Ps.103:19).​

The LORD is in total control over the universe which He created, so therefore He rules over it all and that includes all "men." The Lord Jesus subjected Himself to everything in regard to being a "man," including things like hunger, exhaustion, sorrow and all the other emotions experienced by man.

And since the Lord Jesus was made like a man in all things that means that in His role as "man" He has a God. That fact cannot be disputed!

 

[freelight]

Yes, the man Jesus has a God.......

Yes, the man Jesus has a God.......

You fail to understand what is said here:

"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men" (Phil.2:5-7).​

Here we see that the Lord Jesus was made in the likeness of men. In fact, He was made like us in every way (Heb.2:17). And every "man" has a God:

"The LORD hath prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom ruleth over all" (Ps.103:19).​

The LORD is in total control over the universe which He created, so therefore He rules over it all and that includes all "men." The Lord Jesus subjected Himself to everything in regard to being a "man," including things like hunger, exhaustion, sorrow and all the other emotions experienced by man.

And since the Lord Jesus was made like a man in all things that means that in His role as "man" He has a God. That fact cannot be disputed!

Yes, of course Jesus as a man, is subordinate to 'God', has a 'God', etc. Very good. The intricacies within one's Christology determine whether Jesus had a pre-existence as a divine being before his incarnation, either being 'God the Son' within an eternal Trinity, or some kind of subordinate deity, demi-god, aeon or angelic being, still subordinate to God within the divine hierarchy (variations on this theme exist). OR if Jesus only had his beginning at his human birth and was merely a man empowered, anointed or specially mantled by the 'Christ' or 'Holy Spirit, etc. (variations on this theme also exist).

Perhaps TrevorL the creator of this thread can describe or clarify which view he takes with some of the points above. - since a Unitarian view can include various Arian, Gnostic or Ebionite strains.

 

[jamie]

Titus 2:11-14 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age, looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for us that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works.

Our great God and Savior Jesus Christ has redeemed us from every lawless deed.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Yes, of course Jesus as a man, is subordinate to 'God', has a 'God', etc. Very good. The intricacies within one's Christology determine whether Jesus had a pre-existence as a divine being before his incarnation, either being 'God the Son' within an eternal Trinity, or some kind of subordinate deity, demi-god, aeon or angelic being, still subordinate to God within the divine hierarchy (variations on this theme exist).

jamie just quoted the following passage which demonstrates that the Lord Jesus is indeed God and therefore He had a pre-existence:

"Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works" (Titus 2:13-14).​

OR if Jesus only had his beginning at his human birth and was merely a man empowered, anointed or specially mantled by the 'Christ' or 'Holy Spirit, etc. (variations on this theme also exist).

Of course the Lord Jesus existed before His human birth:

"And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the son of man which is in heaven" (Jn.3:13).​

"What and if ye shall see the son of man ascend up where he was before?" (Jn.6:62).​

That is why He said that He is from above:

"And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world. I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins" (Jn.8:23-24).​

I believe that by saying that He is "from above" the Lord Jesus was telling these people that He is God. And those who refused to believe that truth died in their sins.

 

[freelight]

God is our Savior ultimatey,...working thru His logos........

God is our Savior ultimatey,...working thru His logos........

jamie just quoted the following passage which demonstrates that the Lord Jesus is indeed God and therefore He had a pre-existence:

"Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works" (Titus 2:13-14).​

I don't find Titus 2:13 as being adequate proof that Jesus here is being identified as 'God', in the sense as being the Almighty Supreme DEITY, since the 'glorious appearing' is both an appearance of 'God' and 'Jesus Christ', as they are both co-operate as being 'Savior', Jesus being the Father's agent. A good article supporting this, objective and fair IMO is here

You'll see that thru-out Titus, a distinction between God and the Lord Jesus is held, while 'God' is the ultimate Savior working thru Jesus. Remember, to see Jesus is to see the Father. God is glorified in Christ, and Christ glorifies the Father, they are inseperable. We might also NOTE here that it is possible to believe Jesus had a pre-existence before his human birth, but is NOT God Almighty...as we see in the Arian view and similar schools.

Of course the Lord Jesus existed before His human birth:

"And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the son of man which is in heaven" (Jn.3:13).​

"What and if ye shall see the son of man ascend up where he was before?" (Jn.6:62).​

That is why He said that He is from above:

"And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world. I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins" (Jn.8:23-24).​

I believe that by saying that He is "from above" the Lord Jesus was telling these people that He is God. And those who refused to believe that truth died in their sins.

Yes,...the language appears to have Jesus saying such,...note that is mostly in the gospel of John only. As you may know, the 'pre-existence' of Jesus is an interesting subject, not only from a Trinitarian POV, but also from more liberal Arian and Gnostic schools. The fun question is however is whether Jesus was 'God the Son' as part of the Trinity or a lesser god, divine being or angel of some kind before incarnating. No matter what Christological perspective or 'belief' you choose, I think what is most important is that you recognize the glory of God the Father in the person of Jesus and receive the Spirit of Christ in all its healing, regenerative and transforming power. This is KEY, no matter what school or sect within Christendom you affiliate with.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Freelight,

OR if Jesus only had his beginning at his human birth and was merely a man empowered, anointed or specially mantled by the 'Christ' or 'Holy Spirit, etc. (variations on this theme also exist).

Perhaps TrevorL the creator of this thread can describe or clarify which view he takes with some of the points above. - since a Unitarian view can include various Arian, Gnostic or Ebionite strains.

I appreciate the invitation. I left following all of this thread as it covered too many areas and my initial purpose of looking at John 10:30-36 had been mainly completed. To answer your question without getting deeply involved, I am a bit reticent to accept the phrase "merely a man", as I believe, yes, he was a man, but he was also The Son of God from birth. I believe that Jesus did not pre-exist, but that God the Father is the father of Jesus through the creative power of the Holy Spirit, and Mary is his mother.
Luke 1:35 (KJV): 34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

Concerning Philippians 2, I consider this to be speaking of the humility of the mind of Jesus as a man, even though he was born the Son of God. This is in contrast to Adam who grasped at equality with God.

I consider the explanation of John 20:28 in the video appears to be correct. I had previously used the concept of the Judges being called gods to explain that “God” as used in John 20:28 was simply using the same language of representing God.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I don't find Titus 2:13 as being adequate proof that Jesus here is being identified as 'God', in the sense as being the Almighty Supreme DEITY...

Before we get distracted I am still waiting to your response about what I said earlier about this verse and others from the book of Revelation:

"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men" (Phil.2:5-7).​

When we look at this verse we can see that the Lord Jesus is in the "form" of God.

The Greek word translated "form" means "the form by which a person or thing strikes the vision; the external appearance" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

So since the Lord Jesus was in the form of God then the verse is speaking about how He will appear to the inhabitants of heaven:

"And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads" (Rev.22:3-4).​

The Lord Jesus couldn't appear that way to those inhabitants unless He is God. And from this verse which describes the ONE sitting on the throne we can know that the Lord Jesus is God:

"And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son" (Rev.21:5-7).​

Since Jehovah God is the only one who can be identified as the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, then we can know that the following words of the Lord Jesus identify Him as God:

"And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last" (Rev.22:12-13).​

We can know for certain that there are the words of the Lord Jesus because later we can see that the Apostle John knew that those words were spoken by the Lord Jesus. He said:

"He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus" (Rev.22:20).​

Perhaps TrevorL might want to comment as well. Thanks!

 

[daqq]

Before we get distracted I am still waiting to your response about what I said earlier about this verse and others from the book of Revelation:

"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men" (Phil.2:5-7).​

When we look at this verse we can see that the Lord Jesus is in the "form" of God.

The Greek word translated "form" means "the form by which a person or thing strikes the vision; the external appearance" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

So since the Lord Jesus was in the form of God then the verse is speaking about how He will appear to the inhabitants of heaven:

"And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads" (Rev.22:3-4).​

The Lord Jesus couldn't appear that way to those inhabitants unless He is God. And from this verse which describes the ONE sitting on the throne we can know that the Lord Jesus is God:

"And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son" (Rev.21:5-7).​

Since Jehovah God is the only one who can be identified as the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, then we can know that the following words of the Lord Jesus identify Him as God:

"And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last" (Rev.22:12-13).​

We can know for certain that there are the words of the Lord Jesus because later we can see that the Apostle John knew that those words were spoken by the Lord Jesus. He said:

"He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus" (Rev.22:20).​

Perhaps TrevorL might want to comment as well. Thanks!

Philippians 2:6a -- ος εν μορφη θεου υπαρχων

How many times have you said elsewhere, "there is no article", (blah, blah, blah), and yet here you insert an article as if it says, "the form of God"? Elohim Most High is Spirit and non-corporeal: there is no shape or form of Elohim Most High as you have imagined it. Therefore it cannot be "the form of God" because there is no form of God as you have tried to explain it in such anthropomorphic terms, (quoting Thayer's Lexicon). That is yet another reason why the Son is not equal to the Father, just as Messiah himself clearly says, how that the Father is greater than himself. It clearly must be that he subsists-exists, (υπαρχων), in a form of Elohim. Additionally "heaven" is here and now and not in some far away external physical location; the anthropomorphic mindset is revealing the error of itself, which is why we should not be using visions, dreams, and first century apocalyptic writings for doctrine, (unless everything we understand already complies with the Torah and the full Testimony of Yeshua).

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Philippians 2:6a -- ος εν μορφη θεου υπαρχων

How many times have you said elsewhere, "there is no article", (blah, blah, blah), and yet here you insert an article as if it says, "the form of God"?

The verse reads the same even though there is no definite article.

Elohim Most High is Spirit and non-corporeal: there is no shape or form of Elohim Most High as you have imagined it.

Then why do we read this?:

"And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads" (Rev.22:3-4).​

Our earthly bodies are not equipped to see non-corporal things but the bodies spoken of here will indeed be able to see non-corporal things:

"So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body" (1 Cor.15:42-44).​

We cannot enter the eternal kingdom of God in our flesh and blood bodies so we are raised in a "spiritual body":

"And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption" (1 Cor.15:49-50).​

 

[freelight]

Back to Phillipians 2:5-7

Back to Phillipians 2:5-7

Before we get distracted I am still waiting to your response about what I said earlier about this verse and others from the book of Revelation:

"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men" (Phil.2:5-7).​

When we look at this verse we can see that the Lord Jesus is in the "form" of God.

The Greek word translated "form" means "the form by which a person or thing strikes the vision; the external appearance" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

First I'll say, your definition above of 'form' (morphe) is one definition, there are different descriptions, aspects and expansions of what 'morphe' means. We must consider all of them. But if we agree that it means a visible or outward appearance, then it can also indicate any visible 'expression', 'appearance', 'image', 'likeness', etc. This passage also does not prove or necessarily indicate that the 'form' of Jesus pre-existed. BTW,...the NIV mis-translates 'morphe' as 'nature' in this passage, which is clearly a gesture towards giving Jesus a divine status, but is a poor translation.

I'm still researching Phil.2:5-7 and will post more soon. I will say at this point the entire chapter needs to be read in context, as the 'form' (morphe) of God does not have to imply a pre-existent or even refer to a pre-existent Jesus anywhere, but is being related or compared to the 'form' of a servant. Jesus being in the 'form' of God points to the 'visual' of Jesus representing God and doing the works of God,...he was the 'figure' or 'appearance' of God in his activity (or vocation/office as Messiah),...being a 'likeness' or 'image' of God. While he was operating in the 'morphe' of God, he did not seize upon the opportunity to make himself equal to God, but instead operated in the 'morphe' of a servant, humbling himself...emptying himself of any accolades or honor. The whole point of the chapter is to encourage believers to have this same 'mentality' that Jesus had. Let this same mind be in you. This very passage interpreted another way is actually against any idea or concept that Jesus was God, since he did not accept being equal with God. Otherwise as noted, the context of this chapter is NOT a dogmatic doctrinal dissertation at all, but a call for believers to serve with humility, with no regard to personal rank or egoity. I think the exhortation to have the same 'mind' of Jesus is much more important than translating the text into a 'proof-text' about Jesus being 'God'. The idea of Jesus having some eternal pre-existent 'form' is also being imposed into the equation, when such is not really necessary. - your allusion to Jesus having a form in order for souls to be aware of him or "see his face" as recorded in Revelation, we shall address later.

An intro. vid by Brother Kel, (his lecture style is slow and extensive but a good resource of much study and research over the years.)

 

[Jerry Shugart]

First I'll say, your definition above of 'form' (morphe) is one definition, there are different descriptions, aspects and expansions of what 'morphe' means. We must consider all of them. But if we agree that it means a visible or outward appearance, then it can also indicate any visible 'expression', 'appearance', 'image', 'likeness', etc.

No, that is not the definition given by Joseph Henry Thayer, which is "the form by which a person or thing strikes the vision; the external appearance" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

On the biblicalunitarian web site we read:

"The real definition of 'morphe' should become apparent as we check the sources available at the time of the New Testament. After all, the word was a common one in the Greek world. We assert that a study of the actual evidence clearly reveals that morphe does not refer to Christ’s inner essential being, but rather to an outward appearance."​

On the same site we read:

"The Gospel of Mark has a short reference to the well-known story in Luke 24:13-33 about Jesus appearing to the two men on the road to Emmaus. Mark tells us that Jesus appeared 'in a different form (morphe)' to these two men so that they did not recognize him (16:12). This is very clear. Jesus did not have a different 'essential nature' when he appeared to the two disciples. He simply had a different outward appearance."​

This fits perfectly with the idea that the word means "the form by which a person or thing strikes the vision."

Even the Unitarians definition of the word matches the one given by Thayer. Therefore, since the Lord Jesus was in the form of God then the verse is speaking about how He will appear to the inhabitants of heaven:

"And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads" (Rev.22:3-4).​

The Lord Jesus couldn't appear that way to those inhabitants unless He is God. And from this verse which describes the ONE sitting on the throne we can know that the Lord Jesus is God:

"And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son" (Rev.21:5-7).​

Since Jehovah God is the only one who can be identified as the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, then we can know that the following words of the Lord Jesus identify Him as God:

"And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last" (Rev.22:12-13).​

We can know for certain that there are the words of the Lord Jesus because later we can see that the Apostle John knew that those words were spoken by the Lord Jesus. He said:

"He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus" (Rev.22:20).​

I'm still researching Phil.2:5-7 and will post more soon.

I would suggest that you should first look at what I said about the verses which I quoted from the book of Revelation. Those verses provide postitive proof that the Lord Jesus is God.

 

[daqq]

The verse reads the same even though there is no definite article.



Then why do we read this?:

"And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads" (Rev.22:3-4).​

Our earthly bodies are not equipped to see non-corporal things but the bodies spoken of here will indeed be able to see non-corporal things:

"So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body" (1 Cor.15:42-44).​

We cannot enter the eternal kingdom of God in our flesh and blood bodies so we are raised in a "spiritual body":

"And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption" (1 Cor.15:49-50).​

Revelation 22:4 has προσωπον which is countenance and sometimes even presence. It is clearly figurative language because the kingdom of Elohim is within us. The countenance and Presence of the Most High is not something that may be seen with the physical eyes of the flesh; however, by the SPIRIT, we have the capability to "see" such things even now, (if you can "see" Messiah you will likewise "see" the Father). Again, you are taking apocalyptic writings from the first century which are clearly full of visions, and heavenly symbolism, and passages referencing things which are spoken in the Prophets, and you are then creating doctrine out of that apocalyptic literature while not yet having fully integrated the Testimony of Yeshua concerning the Father, and concerning himself, and concerning the Son of Elohim and the Son of man, and all the related things likewise spoken in the Torah and the Prophets. The fact that Messiah even has a form, any form whatsoever, is sufficient to prove that he is not YHWH Himself, (as your other thread of a similar topic and title proclaims). You are fusing the idea of "God" with "YHWH", basically equating the two terms as if they both mean the same thing or "person", which is a false assumption that is not supported in the scripture. "God" or Elohim can mean quite a few different things; from Elohim-Angels, to judges, to even "godly", as in a "godly seed", (an "elohim seed" as in Malachi 2:15, the nativity narratives, and may even be implied in "the seed of the Word" in the parable of the sower). Just because you read Elohim or Theos somewhere does not necessarily mean it can only be speaking of the Most High at all times. In other words saying "Elohim", or "Theos", or "God", does not necessarily always mean the Father in the way those words are used in the scripture. There is only One who is "The Almighty" and that is YHWH (Kurios) Elohim (ho Theos) and He alone is the Father whom Yeshua honors, exalts, prays to, and worships.