Rosenritter
New member
Unsubstantiated accusation.
John 20:28 and the Trinity
- Thread starter Jacob
- Start date
Unsubstantiated accusation.
Rosenritter
New member
So in that context and understanding I also say that Jesus IS God with every fiber of his being. But what do you say to someone who can prove that "dartman" came into being at a specific date as recorded by the servers at Theology Online?
That wasn't rhetorical. What do you say to my proof that dartman didn't exist not that long ago?
Rosenritter
New member
John 20:28-29 KJV
(28) And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
(29) Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
Where does it say that Jesus interrupted Thomas and prevented him from speaking? The text says that Thomas answered.
I know you do. Jesus doesn't, in fact ZERO Scriptures do. By contrast, Jesus says VERY specifically, his Father (his God) is "the ONLY true God". This agrees with HUNDREDS of Scriptures, and they are unanimous .... Jehovah/YHVH God alone is "the ONLY true God", our Creator... and Christ's creator.
[/quote] But what do you say to someone who can prove that "dartman" came into being at a specific date as recorded by the servers at Theology Online?[/QUOTE]I would say your definition of "came into being" is inaccurate. They would be confusing merely one account starting on that "specific date" is the same as "came into being".... which is a transparent, and pathetically weak attempt to circumvent the obvious.
Greetings again Apple7,
Kind regards
Trevor
Like you, I am not sure that we need to spend much more time and effort on this, as you stated we covered this a year ago. I was simply pointing out that you translate and expound and insist that mê·’ĕ·lō·hîm should be translated as God in Psalm 8:5. So I ask again “Could you explain why the writer to the Hebrews translates this as “angels” and actually bases his argument upon this translation?” The end result is that we have two voices, the writer to the Hebrews who translates this as “angels” and Apple7 who translates this as “God”. You now also try to divert attention by accusing me of belonging to a cult. I am not sure of your definition of this as well, but it seems that it is you that has gone off on a tangent in this matter. Jesus was made a little lower than the angels. Does this agree with your theology?
Kind regards
Trevor
Greetings john ,w
Kind regards
Trevor
I appreciate your input, but slightly question your style of expression. I do not mind some of your flair altogether as it breaks the ice of being too serious, but I suggest that you should be more careful and discerning before you shoot from the hip. I do not “have” the Spirit inspired interpretation. Hebrews 2:5-10 is the Spirit inspired interpretation and commentary of mê·’ĕ·lō·hîm in Psalm 8:5. Jesus was made a little lower than the angels
Kind regards
Trevor
Then you lied:
No, it is not, as you are clueless as to the difference between objective revelation, given by objective words, in print, i.e., scripture, "It is written," and interpretation/understanding/illumination.
Hebrews 2:5-10 KJV, Psalm 8:5 KJV, is objective revelation, not "the Spirit inspired interpretation," interpretation/illumination/understanding. If it were, we need no study, and there would be no disagreement.
You can't be this ignorant. But, then again, you reject that the Lord Jesus Christ is God in the flesh, so I retract my doubt that you are ignorant.
Verse 28, Thomas has not made a complete sentence, and Jesus interrupts in verse 29, praising him for relieving the others of his skepticism. There seems to be some humor in Jesus' statement to Thomas.
Apple7
New member
I have shown the exegetical reasoning for my position.
You have been unable to exegetically rebut my reasoning for the past year.
Thus, my position stands.
The writer of Hebrews consulted the LXX, obviously.
I consulted the original Hebrew.
Either way, Jesus' deity remains intact....of which, could be the ONLY reason for you to be so fascinated with this tiny portion of Hebrews to the complete exclusion of the rest of the book....is your cults' very basis for existence is to deny Jesus' deity and The Trinity.
Show us the word(s) 'was made' in either Hebrew or Greek.
Good luck on word-smything this to mean 'created'.
Give it a go...or not....probably not.....just continue to talk AROUND it for yet another year...
way 2 go
Well-known member
text does not say how satan hindered Paul , it says who hindered Paul which was satan .
1Th 2:18 Wherefore we would have come unto you, even I Paul, once and again; but Satan hindered us.
how was David incited to number Israel by satan , text does not say . ( just who not how)
1Ch 21:1 Then Satan stood against Israel and incited David to number Israel.
Greetings again john w and Apple7,
Kind regards
Trevor
You (Apple7) translate mê·’ĕ·lō·hîm in Psalm 8:5 as God, while the writer to the Hebrews translates this as angels and bases his exposition on this.
Kind regards
Trevor
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
I don't know with whom you are lumping me in when you say to me, in your juvenile way, "you peeps".
Parroting meaningless slogans like "Context is always king" is always a ploy to try to draw attention away from the fact that you can't defend the nonsense you've handed out.
The specific context I'm talking about is 1 John 2:11. Do you not have that verse in your Bible?
1 John 2:11 says that DARKNESS blinded so-and-so's eyes, not that JESUS blinded so-and-so's eyes. Can you not distinguish the name 'Jesus' from the word 'darkness'? A grade-schooler could; why can't you?
You say that Satan has been bound, and that he doesn't blind anybody's mind now, and that the god of this world spoken of in 2 Corinthians 4:4 is not Satan, but is Jesus. So, are you saying that Satan, at some point, long ago, ceased from blinding peoples' minds, and that, since then, Jesus has taken over the task, from Satan, of blinding peoples' minds? Was Satan not doing a good enough job at blinding peoples' minds?
When it's all said and done, the fact remains that the word "blinded", in 1 John 2:11, is completely useless to your attempt to prove that "the god of this world" spoken of in 2 Corinthians 4:4 is Jesus Christ, rather than Satan.
Do you not believe Satan is real?
Do you not believe Satan has blinded anybody's mind?
Oh. Are you trying to escape The Trinity? That would be a stupid thing for you to do. But, are you in the habit of accusing people of being non-Trinitarian, or anti-Trinitarian, when they disagree with you in your assertion that a certain Scripture passage (which virtually nobody considers to be a Trinity proof-text) is a "potent" proof-text of Trinitarianism?
You said, yourself, that the belief that Paul's phrase, "the god of this world", denotes Satan, is a "popular, modern belief":
So, when, exactly, did the period begin that you are referring to, here, as "modern"? Who was the originator of that "popular, modern belief", and when did they first disseminate it amongst the populace?
Oh, and, if your spin on 2 Corinthians 4:4 is the truth, that means all who have adopted the "popular, modern belief" (which is contrary to your view) are in darkness, blinded to the truth that you are blessed to believe. So, who, exactly, would you say is blinding people's minds against believing your "truth" that Paul's "the god of this world" is NOT Satan, and is really Jesus?
Apple7
New member
Context, that you OMIT, informs the reader that Satan hindered Paul THROUGH the Jews.
Therefore, Satan was NOT present.
Context states that it was Satan, himself, who stood against Israel....just as we would expect in pre-Cross scripture.
Apple7
New member
We already know this.
Others do likewise...
The writer of Hebrews referenced the LXX.
Now what.....this all you got?
Apple7
New member
One verse does NOT constitute context.
Where was that stated?
Scripture makes this declaration, not me.
Show us relevant scripture OUTSIDE of 2 Cor 4...
It proves my point quite well.
Just like John 12, which uses another inflection of 'blinded', again attributed to Jesus Christ....of which, you are completely silent on...
No scripture thwarts The Trinity.
You fell for it.
Go ahead and give kudos to Satan...if that makes you feel better...
Apple7
New member
When I said Luke 10, I meant Luke 10...not just one out-of-context passage, chap.
You have already proven legions of times that the witness-cult that you adhere to, does NOT bother to use context...thus, you are not conditioned to use context.
Pretty simple concept.
Luke 10.1 - 20
And after these things, the Lord also appointed seventy others, and sent them two by two before His face into every city and place, even to where He was about to come. Therefore He said to them, Indeed, the harvest is much, but the laborers are few. Therefore, pray to the Lord of the harvest, that He send out workers into His harvest. Go! Behold, I send you out as lambs in the midst of wolves. Do not carry a purse, nor a moneybag, nor sandals; and greet no one by the way. And into whatever house you may enter, first say, Peace to this house. And if a son of peace is truly there, your peace shall rest on it; but if not so, it shall return to you. And remain in the same house, eating and drinking the things shared by them; for the laborer is worthy of his hire. Do not move from house to house. And into whatever city you enter, and they receive you, eat the things set before you. And heal the sick in it, and say to them, The kingdom of God has drawn near to you. But into whatever city you enter, and they do not receive you, going out into its streets, say, Even the dust clinging to us out of your city, we shake off against you! Yet know this, that the kingdom of God has drawn near to you! And I say to you that it shall be more bearable for Sodom in that day than for that city! Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the works of power which have been occurring in you had occurred in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago sitting in sackcloth and ashes! But it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon in the Judgment than for you. And you, Capernaum, were you not exalted to the heaven? "To hell you will be thrust down!" (Isa. 14.13, 15) The one hearing you hears Me, and the one rejecting you also rejects Me, and the one rejecting Me also rejects the One having sent Me. And the seventy returned with joy, saying, Lord, even the demons are subject to us through Your Name. And He said to them, I saw Satan falling out of Heaven as lightning! Behold, I have given you the authority to tread on snakes and scorpions, and on all the power of the hostile one , and nothing shall hurt you, no, never! But stop rejoicing in this, that the spirits submit to you. But rather rejoice that your names are written in Heaven.
The 'Power of Satan' is referred to numerous things in this passage:
• Demons
• Snakes & Scorpions
• The spirits
Greetings again Apple7,
Kind regards
Trevor
Yes, they also ignore the importance of Hebrews 2:5-10.
Can you prove that the writer is only quoting the LXX? Are you suggesting that the LXX is incorrect. Are you suggesting that the writer to the Hebrews also got it wrong and your exposition from the Hebrew is better?
This is sufficient for the moment as it is reveals the quality of your exposition.
Kind regards
Trevor
Rosenritter
New member
My hand would point to the only true me which would do nothing to demonstrate that my hand was not me.... and the scripture tells us directly that Jesus created all things things, that he made all things that were made. That makes him both Creator and un-created. Your proof text doesn't prove what you want it to.
I would understand this misunderstanding better if it weren't for the many direct statements as to the whom of whom Jesus actually was. Such as where he is designated "the Word was God" and "I am the first and the last" and "the mighty God" and "without him was not anything made that was made" and "Who is this King of Glory? The LORD of Hosts..."
... well said then. "A pathetically weak attempt to circumvent the obvious" is exactly what I am addressing here. We know that we have one God and one Creator, we are told that Jesus is our God and Jesus is our Creator, this isn't that hard to figure out, but all I keep seeing are weak pathetic arguments that "there is only one true God" which ignores the obvious declaration (and scriptural assertion) that he that was manifest in the flesh that we called Jesus is that one true God.
I would like to think that someone here could calmly and logically address the issues without the typical chaff and distraction chants that might as well have been cut and pasted out of Unitarian-Help websites. The offer is open.
Rosenritter
New member
It's a perfectly complete statement that is well understood. "My Lord and my God" needs little else. The subject of the sentence is implied, being the person being addressed. It's a form of address and acknowledgment, and you'd see similar usage when someone kneels before a sovereign and says "My Lord."
Somehow I don't think you would be making this same argument had Thomas simply said "My Lord" but it didn't stop there. "My Lord and my God" stops there because there is nothing else to be said. Now he waits for the word from his Lord and his God standing in front of him.
The text doesn't say Thomas was interrupted mid-sentence, but had he been interrupted it would have been imperative upon John (the gospel writer) to have said so. As John wrote the gospel, Thomas addressed the risen Christ as his Lord and his God. Which is hardly surprising considering that Jesus as our God and Creator seems to be a constant theme in all of his writings.
Apple7
New member
All of Hebrews proves Jesus' deity and The Trinity.
Can you prove otherwise?
Are you suggesting that it is correct?
Are you suggesting that the author got it correct, and that the Hebrew is incorrect?
Heb 1.6 And again, when He brought the First-born into the world, He said, "And let all the angels of God worship Him."
Deal with Jesus' deity.