For trinity believers: Does your world come unravelled if Jesus is not God,but ONLY Gods Son?

[cataway]

Jesus became human (in form) in order to accomplish the goal of freeing people who believe in Him from the power of sin.

because of sin we have death . under Jesus' kingdom rule death will be removed. until that time you still sin and we continue to die .

 

[jimb]

''He assumed His eternal position as fully God.'' which means when he, Jesus , on earth he was half a god ? and yet his father the God the almighty who was fully God was still in heaven ? my but you do have some problems.

So you don't understand the Bible. Not my problem.

 

[YoursTrue]

''He assumed His eternal position as fully God.'' which means when he, Jesus , on earth he was half a god ? and yet his father the God the almighty who was fully God was still in heaven ? my but you do have some problems.

Thank you for your reply. Interestingly, Wikipedia comments on John 1:1 explains that the traditional rendering in English is: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." But there are others.
For instance:

• 1808: "and the Word was a god" – Thomas Belsham The New Testament, in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome's New Translation: With a Corrected Text, London.
• 1822: "and the Word was a god" – The New Testament in Greek and English (A. Kneeland, 1822.)
• 1829: "and the Word was a god" – The Monotessaron; or, The Gospel History According to the Four Evangelists (J. S. Thompson, 1829)
• 1863: "and the Word was a god" – A Literal Translation of the New Testament (Herman Heinfetter [Pseudonym of Frederick Parker], 1863)
• 1864: "the LOGOS was God" – A New Emphatic Version (right hand column)
• 1864: "and a god was the Word" – The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson, New York and London (left hand column interlinear reading)

Further, we also know that many, many translations cover up God's name by using the term LORD.

 

[jimb]

So in the first part of the 19th Century, some uncommon translations had "was a god" (5 of 6 uncapitalized) instead of "was God".

The Jehovah's Witness' New World Translation has John 1:1 as, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god."

And do you know what that proves? Absolutely nothing.

 

[YoursTrue]

So in the first part of the 19th Century, some uncommon translations had "was a god" (5 of 6 uncapitalized) instead of "was God".

The Jehovah's Witness' New World Translation has John 1:1 as, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god."

And do you know what that proves? Absolutely nothing.

That is interesting about the Word WAS God. Interesting...

 

[YoursTrue]

So in the first part of the 19th Century, some uncommon translations had "was a god" (5 of 6 uncapitalized) instead of "was God".

The Jehovah's Witness' New World Translation has John 1:1 as, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god."

And do you know what that proves? Absolutely nothing.

There's more.

• 1955: "so the Word was divine" – The Authentic New Testament, by Hugh J. Schonfield, Aberdeen.[16]
• 1956: "And the Word was as to His essence absolute deity" – The Wuest Expanded Translation[17]
• 1958: "and the Word was a god" – The New Testament of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Anointed (J. L. Tomanec, 1958);
• 1962, 1979: "'the word was God.' Or, more literally, 'God was the word.'" – The Four Gospels and the Revelation (R. Lattimore, 1979)
• 1966, 2001: "and he was the same as God" – The Good News Bible.
• 1970, 1989: "and what God was, the Word was" – The New English Bible and The Revised English Bible.
• 1975 "and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word" – Das Evangelium nach Johnnes, by Siegfried Schulz, Göttingen, Germany
• 1975: "and the Word was a god" – Das Evangelium nach Johannes (S. Schulz, 1975);
• 1978: "and godlike sort was the Logos" – Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider, Berlin
• 1985: "So the Word was divine" - The Original New Testament, by Hugh J. Schonfield.[18]

 

[jimb]

There's more.

• 1955: "so the Word was divine" – The Authentic New Testament, by Hugh J. Schonfield, Aberdeen.[16]
• 1956: "And the Word was as to His essence absolute deity" – The Wuest Expanded Translation[17]
• 1958: "and the Word was a god" – The New Testament of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Anointed (J. L. Tomanec, 1958);
• 1962, 1979: "'the word was God.' Or, more literally, 'God was the word.'" – The Four Gospels and the Revelation (R. Lattimore, 1979)
• 1966, 2001: "and he was the same as God" – The Good News Bible.
• 1970, 1989: "and what God was, the Word was" – The New English Bible and The Revised English Bible.
• 1975 "and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word" – Das Evangelium nach Johnnes, by Siegfried Schulz, Göttingen, Germany
• 1975: "and the Word was a god" – Das Evangelium nach Johannes (S. Schulz, 1975);
• 1978: "and godlike sort was the Logos" – Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider, Berlin
• 1985: "So the Word was divine" - The Original New Testament, by Hugh J. Schonfield.[18]

Who cares!!!

The most authoritative translations clearly state that the Word (Jesus) was and is God.

 

[YoursTrue]

Who cares!!!

The most authoritative translations clearly state that the Word (Jesus) was and is God.

#1 - John 1:1 does not say there were 3 godpersons in heaven before the Word which WAS God came to the earth. #2 Which "authoritative" translation do you use? #3 - it can help to understand the Greek analyses and why translators differ.

 

[jimb]

#1 - John 1:1 does not say there were 3 godpersons in heaven before the Word which WAS God came to the earth. #2 Which "authoritative" translation do you use? #3 - it can help to understand the Greek analyses and why translators differ.

#1: So what? There are other verses in the Bible which clearly state that there are three "Godpersons". For example: John 15:26, "When the Advocate (1) comes, whom I (2) will send to you from the Father (3) , the Spirit of truth (1) who comes from the Father (3), he will testify on my behalf."

#2: I use a number of translations. If I had to choose one as the mots authoritative, it would be the full NET translation. It has more than 60,000 footnotes (!) that accompany the text that explain many things, including sources used, other interpretations, etc.

#3: See #2. BTW, the Bible is a translation of three languages: ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek.

Translations differ because it is impossible to exactly translate these languages into English. There are too many differences in vocabulary, exact meaning of words and phrases, figures of speech, idioms, how the ancient societies understood the languages, etc. And of course, there are no original manuscripts, and the copies differ.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

John 1:1-3a, "In the beginning was the Word [Jesus], and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being."

In the beginning was the plan, and the plan was with God, and the plan was God. (because the whole thing revolved around the Messiah) All things came into being through that plan, and without the plan not one thing came into being.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

mighty god, yes , but never called almighty god

He has all power in heaven and earth. That makes him the Almighty. He is the head of ALL principality and power.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

and yet he calls to his God even asking for permission that certain thing happen . if Jesus was almighty , he would not ask . he would just do what ever he wanted

The flesh (the body) cried out to the eternal Spirit dwelling in the body (God). He was both the Father and the Son as it points out in Isaiah 9:6 (The Son was the body) The question is who was in that body? - it was the Father

When he was asked to show them the Father. He said - if you have SEEN me, you have SEEN the Father.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

I have no problem with that, especially since the son was the first-born of all creation. Created through him and for him.

The son was the firstborn of all creation in the mind of God. The son (the body) didn't actually exist until he was made of a woman, made under the law. Galations 4:4

 

[TrueBeliever37]

and yet that body did die . it took an act of the god the almighty to put life ,spirit life ,back into Jesus

Yes, that was the whole point of him taking on a fleshly body. The Spirit of God couldn't die. No one would be able to live a sinless life to be that perfect sacrifice that was needed to redeem mankind. So God said my arm is not too short, I will do the job myself. He made a body to dwell in and sacrifice for sins. That body had to live a perfect life, so it was necessary to cry out to the eternal Spirit for strength. Then after the perfect sacrifice was made. The eternal Spirit raised that body up as a glorified spiritual body, and he ascended to take the throne, and rules forever.

And that was why he said destroy this temple and in 3 days I will raise it up. Because the eternal Spirit was dwelling in that body. It was his body. That body was the image of the invisible God.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

When I look at the verses in question, he could have been directing his question to humans. None of them were with him when He created the heavens and the earth.

He was talking to the angels when he said Let us make man in our image. He had already made the angels in that image. Whenever you are allowed to see an angel they always look like a man.

 

[YoursTrue]

He has all power in heaven and earth. That makes him the Almighty. He is the head of ALL principality and power.

the problem with that is that Jesus has a God. He said he was going to HIS God and Father, right? John 20:17 - "Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” So Jesus clearly said he has a God.

 

[YoursTrue]

and yet,Col1 15 He is the image of the invisible God,+ the firstborn of all creation;+ 16 because by means of him all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible,+ whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All other things have been created through him+ and for him. 17 Also, he is before all other things,+ and by means of him all other things were made to exist"

i'd say he had a major part in the work that was done

Yes. I was looking up Colossians 1 and came across this scripture: 3 :We give thanks to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying continually for you," So yes, Jesus was the Word in heaven and did nothing without his Father. I see verse 3 where Paul wrote to his fellow believers they give thanks to the God (and Father) of their Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[YoursTrue]

He was talking to the angels when he said Let us make man in our image. He had already made the angels in that image. Whenever you are allowed to see an angel they always look like a man.

That is true that in the Bible angels always came in the form of men. As I was looking at Colossians 1 again, I see that Paul wrote about the God and Father of Jesus. I'm sure you're familiar with that scripture. 3 "We give thanks to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying continually for you", So Paul wrote they give thanks to the God (and Father) of their Lord -- who was, of course, Jesus Christ.

 

[YoursTrue]

The son was the firstborn of all creation in the mind of God. The son (the body) didn't actually exist until he was made of a woman, made under the law. Galations 4:4

Paul called him (Jesus) the Lord -- 3We give thanks to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying continually for you,

 

[YoursTrue]

Translations differ because it is impossible to exactly translate these languages into English. There are too many differences in vocabulary, exact meaning of words and phrases, figures of speech, idioms, how the ancient societies understood the languages, etc. And of course, there are no original manuscripts, and the copies differ.

There are reasons why translations differ, but you are right when you say that ancient (and even modern societies) have differing genders for words we take in common. So the fact that the holy spirit is in the male term does not mean it is equal to the other two godpersons. Furthermore, when Jesus spoke of the holy spirit, he said soon thereafter that God is greater than he (Jesus) is. While the holy spirit is referenced in the male gender, there is nothing to say that it is equal to the other two godpersons. In fact --
John 14:28 - You heard that I said to you, ‘I am going away, and I am coming to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I." (New American Standard Bible)