-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is Jesus God?
- Thread starter Orbit
- Start date
james2ko
Well-Known Member
Although I am not a JW, I suppose your post also applies to me:
That is a pretty strong accusation. I suppose I can equally conclude the devil (BTW..I would refrain from capitalizing "devil". Those under his influence tend to be the only one's who capitalize his name
) has deceived you into creating a confusing, corrupted, incomprehensible mess out of the Godhead----
----all because your finite mind has been corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ (2 Co 11:3)
Then the burden of proof is on you, KG, or anyone else on this thread to show me why my interpretation of these passages are incorrect by demonstrating the correct context and syntax of the original languages. If they cannot do both, how do you expect me to even consider your interpretation? Not to mention that it seems you are all deliberately ignoring the questions from my posts, which speaks volumes.
That is a pretty strong accusation. I suppose I can equally conclude the devil (BTW..I would refrain from capitalizing "devil". Those under his influence tend to be the only one's who capitalize his name
) has deceived you into creating a confusing, corrupted, incomprehensible mess out of the Godhead--------all because your finite mind has been corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ (2 Co 11:3)
2Co_11:3 But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
Then the burden of proof is on you, KG, or anyone else on this thread to show me why my interpretation of these passages are incorrect by demonstrating the correct context and syntax of the original languages. If they cannot do both, how do you expect me to even consider your interpretation? Not to mention that it seems you are all deliberately ignoring the questions from my posts, which speaks volumes.
Last edited:
james2ko
Well-Known Member
The way I understand it is Abraham saw at least three YHVH's. Verse 3 was altered to read "adonai", when it originally read YHVH (google "134 emendations of the sopherim" or click here). In verse 3, Abraham addresses one YHVH, as the pronouns are in the singular, but in vs 4-5 the pronouns transition to the plural, meaning Abraham is now addressing all three as YHVH. Suggesting YHVH is also a family name given to The Father's created agents.
We find the same scenario with Lot in Gen 19:18. Where he addresses the two angels (vs 1) as YHVH in vs 18, which is another instance where YHVH was changed to adonai.
So we see angels being addressed as YHVH. Not because they are YHVH-- The Father--, but because they are His representatives sharing The Father's name, as indicated in Eph 3:14-15.
Eph 3:14-15 For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named,
Jesus happened to be The Father's first, only of His kind, created being (Isa 43:10-11; Col 1:15; Rev 3:14). This is why He is referred to as YHVH/God in the OT. So in essence He is a/our created YHVH, but He is not "The" uncreated YHVH.
katiemygirl
CHRISTIAN
James, face it. You are in a very tiny minority of those who don't believe Jesus is Yaweh: Jehovah Winesses, Christadelphians, and a couple of other groups who mainstream Christianity has considered false teachers since the inception of your doctrine.Although I am not a JW, I suppose your post also applies to me:
That is a pretty strong accusation. I suppose I can equally conclude the devil (BTW..I would refrain from capitalizing "devil". Those under his influence tend to be the only one's who capitalize his name
----all because your finite mind has been corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ (2 Co 11:3)
2Co_11:3 But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
Then the burden of proof is on you, KG, or anyone else on this thread to show me why my interpretation of these passages are incorrect by demonstrating the correct context and syntax of the original languages. If they cannot do both, how do you expect me to even consider your interpretation? Not to mention that it seems you are all deliberately ignoring the questions from my posts, which speaks volumes.
You need to stop listening to men and start reading NOTHING but your Bible. The gospel of John is a good place to start. I suggest you read it daily, without so much as reading any other so-called religious literature. Clear your mind, and let the Holy Spirit guide you to the truth.
No, this is not a rant, as you love to suggest to those who disagree with you. I, and others here, are truly concerned for your eternal future. I realize you probably don't believe in eternal punishment, but what if you are wrong? I pray you repent before it is ever too late.
Sincerely,
Katie
Last edited:
katiemygirl
CHRISTIAN
Last attempt, and then I'm done. I can't waste my time on unbelievers who refuse the truth. (Prov. 9:7-9, Mt. 7:6)
Please pray to our heavenly Father to open your spiritual eyes. I will pray for you also.
Your whole argument is based on your belief that every translation of the Bible is corrupt.
All one needs to do is read your posts to see how you change the meanings of Greek and Hebrew words, making yourself to be a better scholar than the greatest Hebrew and Greek language experts in the world. You constantly post the carefully crafted talking points of your mentors, which you get from websites that support your theology, clearly showing that your conclusions have not been arrived at by prayer and personal study.That is exactly what the JW's on this thread do. I'm sorry to say that you are every bit as deluded as they are.
The angels are MEN. Yes, they are angels, which means they are messengers.
Two of those men/angels/messengers traveled to Sodom. They are NEVER identified as Yaweh.
One of the men stays behind and speaks with Abraham. HE alone is identified as YAWEH!
He is the same YAWEH, the same Almighty God, who appears to Abraham in Gen. 17:1. We know no man can see God and live, so we have to ask what Abraham saw. Common sense and Gen. 18-19 tell us he saw a man. Yaweh came in the form of man.
Yaweh has come to earth in the form of men on more than one occasion.
Yaweh came in the form of man 2000 years ago. Jesus is Yaweh. You can accept or reject who He is.
Done!
Last edited:
james2ko
Well-Known Member
1. So the majority has to be right and the minority has to be wrong? Not only is that a fallacy, it was also the thinking of the popular religious establishment towards the sect they called Christianity:
Act_24:5 For we have found this man a plague, a creator of dissension among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.
Act_24:14 But this I confess to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect, so I worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and in the Prophets.
Act_24:14 But this I confess to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect, so I worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and in the Prophets.
2. The very few quotes from outside religious literature I've quoted in this thread and others have been compiled by Trinitarians
I suggest you refrain from depending on the so-called popular Trinitarian commentaries/thinking and start learning the syntax, thinking, and grammar of the original languages.3. The difference between you and I is that I realize I was wrong, which is why the holy spirit compelled me to grow in knowledge, put aside my pride, and alter my beliefs (2 Pe 3:18). Being wrong on this issue is something you would never consider. A sign of the spirit of pride, which only comes from one source.
Being right or wrong on this issue has no bearing on our salvation. Nowhere in scripture will you find evidence requiring knowledge of the Godhead as a prerequisite for salvation.
james2ko
Well-Known Member
1. I am a believer in what the scriptures say about God. I'm just not a believer in your "traditional" view of God.
2. None of the translations were inspired. So yes they are subject to corruption.
.
3. This makes you one who depends on traditional opinions of bias scholars and experts instead of studying and learning the original languages to rightly divide His word and show yourself approved (2 Ti 2:15).
4. You constantly post the carefully crafted talking points of your mentors, which you get from websites that support your theology, clearly showing that your conclusions have not been arrived at by prayer and personal study.That is exactly what the Trinitarians on this thread do. I'm sorry to say that you are every bit as deluded as they are.
Simple as copy and paste. Religious delusion is so subjective, isn't it?
5. Addressed as YHVH
6. The plural personal pronouns in Gen 18:4-5 refute your traditional opinion.
7. Yes He does. And as you said in your reply of point 5 , they were all angels. That would include Christ.
8. If Christ, who is referred to as YHVH, comes in the form of created man on more than one occasion, logic would dictate He himself was created.
Last edited:
moorea944
Well-Known Member
Just a few points on angels. Angels are not men. They are immortal spirit beings. They can "appear" as men, but are not men. The are not flesh and blood. They also 'carry" the name of God or Yaweh. Just like Jesus said, I have come in my Father's name. God speaks through angels, they represent Him. Some can talk "as if" God was speaking. The angel of his presence did too. God also gave that angels the power and authority to forgive sins. So, in the "trinitarian world", that would make him God, for only God can forgive sins. But didnt some of the apostles authorized to forgive sins too in the book of Acts? Interesting.....
God does not lower His standards to come down to us and change into something that we are. We need to change the way we are into His ways of thinking. We need that spiritual mind, that way of spiritual thinking. His angels do that for Him. I gave some examples of angels speaking as if God was speaking. Very simple language here. But unfortunetly, we are so embedded in our traditions of our churches that we cant think any other way. We are so blinded by that, that we cant see simple things in scripture. It's really too bad.
In Hebrews 1, God said He spoke through the prophets, then in our times He spoke through Jesus. If Jesus pre-existed, this verse would have been written differently. God speaks through whomever He wishes, whether it's angels, prophets, or Christ.
If your cable goes out, a representitive will come to your house, representing "Verizon". He is not Verizon it self, but is authorized to speak on their behalf, he is part of that Verizon family. Sometimes we dont care what his name is, only that he does his job and fixes the problem. Angels come on God's behalf, speaking for him and God is speaking through them.
God does not lower His standards to come down to us and change into something that we are. We need to change the way we are into His ways of thinking. We need that spiritual mind, that way of spiritual thinking. His angels do that for Him. I gave some examples of angels speaking as if God was speaking. Very simple language here. But unfortunetly, we are so embedded in our traditions of our churches that we cant think any other way. We are so blinded by that, that we cant see simple things in scripture. It's really too bad.
In Hebrews 1, God said He spoke through the prophets, then in our times He spoke through Jesus. If Jesus pre-existed, this verse would have been written differently. God speaks through whomever He wishes, whether it's angels, prophets, or Christ.
If your cable goes out, a representitive will come to your house, representing "Verizon". He is not Verizon it self, but is authorized to speak on their behalf, he is part of that Verizon family. Sometimes we dont care what his name is, only that he does his job and fixes the problem. Angels come on God's behalf, speaking for him and God is speaking through them.
Last edited:
james2ko
Well-Known Member
How do you explain the end of verse 2 implying Christ, with God's help, made the ages, as Joh 1:3 also indicates?
Are you a prophet? I happen to work for Verizon
moorea944
Well-Known Member
How do you explain the end of verse 2 implying Christ, with God's help, made the ages, as Joh 1:3 also indicates?
Are you a prophet? I happen to work for Verizon
The end of verse 2 is implying that God made everything for his son. His son was in his mind and plans before the world was made. That's why Jesus said, Before Abraham was, I am. Jesus was in the world in his Father's plans before everything. That's why Jesus could say that.
John 1v3 is talking about God, not Jesus yet. The first few verses are about our Creator. Then in verse 14, God's logos, or ideas became real or flesh.
At Exodus 3:1-6, it says: "Now Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in-law, Jethro, the priest of Midian, and he led his flock to the west side of the wilderness and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. And the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush. He looked, and behold, the bush was burning, yet it was not consumed. And Moses said, “I will turn aside to see this great sight, why the bush is not burned.” When the Lord saw that he turned aside to see, God called to him out of the bush, “Moses, Moses!” And he said, “Here I am.” Then he said, “Do not come near; take your sandals off your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground.” And he said, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God.
Seems to me as if an angel spoke to Moses and claimed to be the God of his forefathers. Since it was clearly identified as a angel, we can see that he was speaking as God's representative just as the Angel did in Gen 17 & 18. Since John tells us that no one has ever seen God, then he must send representative to speak in his name...this included Jesus.
james2ko
Well-Known Member
That sounds plausible but it creates a grammatical inconsistency. "For" [dia] is "only" used in scripture when followed by an accusative noun. You are using it to precede a genitive noun. Not to mention the inconsistency it creates with many other passages in the Old and NT indicating His pre-existence.
The Greek term in Joh 1:1 "with" [pros] is better translated as "unto or toward'. John uses the term as a marker of association, with the implication of relationships requiring more than one entity (1 Jn 2:1; 3:21). In 1 Jn 2:1, John uses the term to associate Christ to the Father.
Furthermore, John calls Christ "The Word of God " and is referring to an actual spirit entity (Rev 19:13). This relates back to what John said about the Word (an actual spirit being) becoming a human being (Joh 1:18). John's word usage indicates to me the "Word" was a separate spirit being, not an idea or thought.
Last edited:
moorea944
Well-Known Member
Wow, ok. I dont see any pre-existence at all in the OT. Why do you want Christ to pre-exist anyhow? Cant we just say he was born? To pre-exist would mean he would have to be immortal to mortal and then back to immortal. Is this something that we want to believe in?
Everything in the OT is about future prophecy, not pre-existence.
Yes, Rev 19 is saying that Christ is the "Word of God". I agree, he is the Word made flesh. He was God's plans and idea right from the beginning of time all put into a man. His son. Rev 19 is a future prophecy when christ is already a spirit being. He is immortal now, not mortal like us anymore.
John 1v18 doesnt say that at all. John never indicates that Jesus pre-existed. John 1 is saying that only Jesus has seen God because he is in heaven.
moorea944
Well-Known Member
Well said. Your absolutely right! Angels can speak for God on His behalf. God can speak through the angels as if he was speaking.
@katiemygirl and @Mr Bede
I am still waiting for either of you to address the scriptures directed to you in post #1371
We have addressed the scriptures you posted but you have not responded to these at all. The one thing you notice about these verses is their lack of ambiguity.
These are direct statements so they need no one to force them to say otherwise....so please let's hear your explanation of how the trinity fits in with any of them.
This is just a few....there are lots more.
I am still waiting for either of you to address the scriptures directed to you in post #1371
deeje said:
We have addressed the scriptures you posted but you have not responded to these at all. The one thing you notice about these verses is their lack of ambiguity.
These are direct statements so they need no one to force them to say otherwise....so please let's hear your explanation of how the trinity fits in with any of them.
This is just a few....there are lots more.
Last edited:
james2ko
Well-Known Member
1. Can you parse and explain Isa 43:10-11? According to its grammar (forget about consulting the bias and perplexed commentators on this passage), who is the one of a kind "EL" who is claiming to have been created/formed (perfect tense, niphal stem, 3rd person) by a third person? BTW..This is no prophecy. It is a description of this EL's origin.
2. Sure. Angels did this all the time in the OT. Why would it be strange for a pre-existent Christ to do the same ? Besides angels, although spirits, are subject to termination, as God The Father alone is the only one who cannot die (1 Ti 6:16).
3. So when John calls Christ "The Word" in his epistle, he really meant Christ was merely God's idea or plan. But in Rev 19 John suddenly realizes The Word he thought was God's plan is really a spirit being?
4. You are making sweeping statements and assumptions about what John and the OT states, but not providing any evidence grammatical or otherwise, to support it . I'm always open to knowledge about the deity of Christ, but it's going to take a lot more than simply claiming, " I dont see any pre-existence at all in the OT" , "that's not what John says at all", or "He was God's plan and idea", to convince me.
Trying to imply that God was talking to Himself, that it's proof 'of a triune God', is ludicrous.
God was simply talking to someone else......easy to understand. God said it to His Son, Jesus, and/or to the Angels. They were all living at that time! (Job 38:7)
moorea944
Well-Known Member
Ok, I"ll say it another way. I"m talking about John 1v1. Not any other chapters. Jesus is not a spirit being in the beginning, he didnt even exist. He was born. What is the purpose of a pre-existence? Doesnt scripture tell us that he was born?
Rev 19, it talks about the coming of Christ. This "future" prophecy is not when Christ was mortal, he is now immortal. He is not God, he is a man that is immortal, not flesh and blood anymore.
james2ko
Well-Known Member
You basically repeated your last post without addressing any of my replies. Neither did you address all of my replies from the post before. Like I said, I'm open to learning more about the deity of Christ from anyone, but you have to come with more than just mere claims of what Jesus is and is not, or philosophical questions and baseless claims about the purpose of His pre-existence, His physical birth, or His prophetic role. None of which proves to me He did not pre-exist.
If you want to try and convince anyone, you have to address their points at their knowledge level, not yours. If you are unable, then there is no point continuing our discussion. Let's do it one point at a time. We can start with this one.
1. Can you parse the verb "formed " in Isa 43:10 and explain its role relative to the subject (EL)? According to its grammar (forget about consulting the bias and perplexed commentators on this passage), who is the one of a kind "EL" who is claiming to have been created/formed by a third person?
BTW..This is no prophecy. It is an assertion of this EL's origin, which refutes your sweeping claim that, "Everything in the OT is about future prophecy, not pre-existence"
If you ignore it, give me an inconsistent answer, or criticize my reply, I'll have to assume you are not ready to change my belief in a pre-existent Christ.
Last edited:
moorea944
Well-Known Member
Wow, strong words. No one is criticizing your words. I'm just saying that the pre-existence of Christ is not found in scripture. The verses you show do not show that at all.
Isa 43 is talking about God, not Jesus. How do you put Jesus in Isa 43? You put him in there because you believe in the pre-existence.
What or who is EL to you? In Hebrew, El is the power or strength of God. That's all. Show me something different.
Now let me ask you a question. Why does Jesus have to pre-exist? For what reason? Why cant we just believe he was born, like that bible says....