Genesis 1:26

[nPeace]

The physical man Jesus was the first human to be raised from the grave. He was the first to experience the second birth. His spirit was called the Word and made all things. It says he was the first born of all creatures not creation.

My head hurts. Enjoy. Bye again.

 

[Desert Snake]

No it doesn't make sense in English.

You seem to disagree with this, since Genesis 1:26 is a singular plural. You are even arguing from that basis.

 

[ACEofALLaces]

Are you serious? I was about to rate this funny, because it did give me a good laugh, but then I thought to myself, you may actually be serious about this. Are you?
I find each time I am on a religious forum, I always hear a number of new versions on the father and son. I'm sure I haven't heard the last either.
Don't worry, you can take your armor off and rise up. I'm not going to throw anything. Besides, if I did, a flak Jacket would be the last thing to save you, and ducking.... I think you would find it more comforting in a hole curled up with a beaver.

Anyhow. I'll go ahead and rate it funny, because I can't stop laughing. Thanks.

You thought that was "funny"....that I was joking".....when in fact, I was dead serious about it.

That being the case, I believe my tenure is over and done with on this forum. Ciao

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

No. The translation there is saying 'father', from a speculation that it means father, even though the word isn't even father. The word is 'Eli'.

Last try. Luke 23:34 "Father forgive them for they know not what they do" Is this also talking to Eli? Why can't there be a true father / son relationship? Don't many people say they are God's children? Jesus is called God's only begotten son. Sure sounds like there is a father / son relationship. I can't see any reason for you or anyone to deny that. I really do not understand.

 

[nPeace]

You thought that was "funny"....that I was joking".....when in fact, I was dead serious about it.

That being the case, I believe my tenure is over and done with on this forum. Ciao

Don't take it personal. No need to get upset. Sometimes we do joke around. It's hard to tell sometimes. Gee, what's life if we can't laugh once in a while. Just carry on and pay me no mind. This is my last post on this thread, so come back and enjoy yourself. Peace.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

You seem to disagree with this, since Genesis 1:26 is a singular plural. You are even arguing from that basis.

Don't take it personal. No need to get upset. Sometimes we do joke around. It's hard to tell sometimes. Gee, what's life if we can't laugh once in a while. Just carry on and pay me no mind. This is my last post on this thread, so come back and enjoy yourself. Peace.

Yes you could not seem to prove your point so you might as well quit.

 

[nPeace]

Yes you could not seem to prove your point so you might as well quit.

Have fun.

 

[Desert Snake]

Last try. Luke 23:34 "Father forgive them for they know not what they do" Is this also talking to Eli? Why can't there be a true father / son relationship? Don't many people say they are God's children? Jesus is called God's only begotten son. Sure sounds like there is a father / son relationship. I can't see any reason for you or anyone to deny that. I really do not understand.

The word there isn't father. In the verse. The 'forsaken me', verse.
In
Luke 23:34
The word is father, there.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

The word there isn't father. In the verse. The 'forsaken me', verse.
In
Luke 23:34
The word is father, there.

So do you believe that Jesus and his father are one and the same or two separate "people"? Obviously not people but I do not know what to call them. Your ideas.

 

[Desert Snake]

So do you believe that Jesus and his father are one and the same or two separate "people"? Obviously not people but I do not know what to call them. Your ideas.

Colossians 3:17
Matthew 3:3
Matthew 2:4
Matthew 16:16
Matthew 16:20
Matthew 23:8
1 Corinthians 8:6

I believe that God is 1, as the Bible says, and that is the real belief, as far as I'm concerned.
Jesus is called
Christ
Lord
God
'Our God'.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

Colossians 3:17
Matthew 3:3
Matthew 2:4
Matthew 16:16
Matthew 16:20
Matthew 23:8
1 Corinthians 8:6

I believe that God is 1, as the Bible says, and that is the real belief, as far as I'm concerned.
Jesus is called
Christ
Lord
God
'Our God'.

Colossians 3:17
Matthew 3:3
Matthew 2:4
Matthew 16:16
Matthew 16:20
Matthew 23:8
1 Corinthians 8:6

I believe that God is 1, as the Bible says, and that is the real belief, as far as I'm concerned.
Jesus is called
Christ
Lord
God
'Our God'.

Of course there is only one God. But why can't there be more than one "person" in that God? One football team has eleven players. One family can have from two to many members. And don't you see how some of the Bible verses you listed above agree with this? Col 3:17 says give thanks to God and the Father by him. Sounds like Jesus is a go between for humans to approach the Father. Mat 16:16 says Jesus is the "Son of the living God". I never knew anyone who was his own father or his own son. Must be two "persons" involved. Otherwise the verse would say son of himself. Completely impossible and makes no sense. ICor 8:6 says "there is but one God, the Father ... and one Lord Jesus Christ." It does not say they are the same. It seems very clear that there is only one God but that God is like a family or ball team. There is more than one member. Your own verses that you listed support this idea.

 

[Desert Snake]

Of course there is only one God. But why can't there be more than one "person" in that God? One football team has eleven players. One family can have from two to many members. And don't you see how some of the Bible verses you listed above agree with this? Col 3:17 says give thanks to God and the Father by him. Sounds like Jesus is a go between for humans to approach the Father. Mat 16:16 says Jesus is the "Son of the living God". I never knew anyone who was his own father or his own son. Must be two "persons" involved. Otherwise the verse would say son of himself. Completely impossible and makes no sense. ICor 8:6 says "there is but one God, the Father ... and one Lord Jesus Christ." It does not say they are the same. It seems very clear that there is only one God but that God is like a family or ball team. There is more than one member. Your own verses that you listed support this idea.

I don't believe the persons are separate in the way that you seem to be implying.

 

[Skwim]

Of course there is only one God. But why can't there be more than one "person" in that God? One football team has eleven players. One family can have from two to many members. And don't you see how some of the Bible verses you listed above agree with this? Col 3:17 says give thanks to God and the Father by him. Sounds like Jesus is a go between for humans to approach the Father. Mat 16:16 says Jesus is the "Son of the living God". I never knew anyone who was his own father or his own son. Must be two "persons" involved. Otherwise the verse would say son of himself. Completely impossible and makes no sense. ICor 8:6 says "there is but one God, the Father ... and one Lord Jesus Christ." It does not say they are the same. It seems very clear that there is only one God but that God is like a family or ball team. There is more than one member. Your own verses that you listed support this idea.

Is that what god is: not an entity unto itself, but a being comprised of several or many entities, each with its own identity? God isn't a singular being, but a team or family of different beings? Interesting, but aside from giving a nod to the concept of the Trinity, I don't think the idea will sell. And as far as the Trinity goes, I've always thought that the Son part didn't come into the game until Jesus was born, and that the Holy Spirit (Ghost) never dealt with material stuff, like the actual making of humans.

.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

I don't believe the persons are separate in the way that you seem to be implying.

All I can do is go back to Mathew 16:16 which YOU suggested in YOUR list of scriptures. the Son of the living God." There is no logical way to have a father and a son unless there are two "persons" or "beings" or even "aspects". What ever you want to call them. If you can think of a way to explain then I will listen. Maybe God will open your eyes and let you see.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

Is that what god is: not an entity unto itself, but a being comprised of several or many entities, each with its own identity? God isn't a singular being, but a team or family of different beings? Interesting, but aside from giving a nod to the concept of the Trinity, I don't think the idea will sell. And as far as the Trinity goes, I've always thought that the Son part didn't come into the game until Jesus was born, and that the Holy Spirit (Ghost) never dealt with material stuff, like the actual making of humans.

.

Well the idea is not meant to "sell". The Bible clearly says that there was something called the Word and the Word was WITH something called God (actually the Father). You can't be WITH something unless there are two things. And the Bible does not teach a trinity. Just two for now. Father and son. At the beginning there was no physical Jesus because Jesus was really the Word in human form. The Bible says "the Word was made flesh". God does not "sell" his ideas but gives them freely to people who are willing to give up ideas they have learned elsewhere and believe the truth.

 

[Earthling]

No, I do not think there was a time when Jesus did not exist. He just changed his name. At the beginning of time there was the Father and the Word. The Word actually did all of the work of creation. All things were made by Him. Later this Word was made flesh and called Jesus. So these two "persons" have always existed and together make up what should correctly by called "God". The confusion comes from the fact that many people use the word "God" when they are talking about the Father. The Father and Son are separate but are both part of God.

The mistake you are making, aside from confusing Jehovah with Jesus or Michael, is in the statement "At the beginning of time." If all things were created by Jehovah with Michael, who later came to Earth as Jesus, then that would include time. Time didn't exist until the universe existed, and the universe was created by Jehovah with Michael as master worker, so at the beginning of time they were both there.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

The mistake you are making, aside from confusing Jehovah with Jesus or Michael, is in the statement "At the beginning of time." If all things were created by Jehovah with Michael, who later came to Earth as Jesus, then that would include time. Time didn't exist until the universe existed, and the universe was created by Jehovah with Michael as master worker, so at the beginning of time they were both there.

Can you show where the Bible says Jesus was previously known as Micheal.

 

[Earthling]

Can you show where the Bible says Jesus was previously known as Micheal.

You have to get that on your own. Which do you agree with below?

Jesus was a spirit creature before he came to earth.
Jesus was created by Jehovah.
Jesus being created before all of the angels, and being master worker in all things created after his own creation, would have been a good candidate for arch angel.
The Bible mentions only 3 people who are an authority over the angels. Jehovah himself, Michael and Jesus.
Jesus will have a presence with the voice of an arch angel.
There is only one arch angel. Michael.

 

[Desert Snake]

In other words, contextually, the religious belief, that Jesus is one of the manifestations of God, affects how we call Jesus, generally. So, because Jesus is a different name, from JeHoVaH, and is another aspect of God, that would be why we don't call Jesus, Jehovah. Not because Jesus isn't God.


/\

All I can do is go back to Mathew 16:16 which YOU suggested in YOUR list of scriptures. the Son of the living God." There is no logical way to have a father and a son unless there are two "persons" or "beings" or even "aspects". What ever you want to call them.

I already explained my belief.

Right now, your creator deity is called the 'word', and and is talking to who again? Since its the sole creator? And you don't believe it's referring to angels?
Seems like you need to figure out your own argument , first.

 

[74x12]

So my question is: why does "God" refer to himself in plural? (Let us create...)

I did some research, and the Trinity isn't even mentioned in the Bible (at least not as "Trinity", there are hints of it). Why would a "God" that claims to be only God refer to what looks like others like him (as if he was one of many; "our likeness")?

*I'm an atheist (just in case)

It's messianic prophecy. God is speaking through the ages to Himself manifest in human form. That is God is talking to Jesus.

Jesus comes to remake man into His own image again. This is why Jesus came as the "express image" of God. Jesus wants everyone to be restored to the image of God again.