The Holy Trinity and John 17:3

[LegionOnomaMoi]

And it's worth noting that none of the 50 Bible versions I looked at

So why isn't it worth noting that you didn't read either the original greek or the (reconstructed) underlying Aramaic? And did any of these 50 versions include non-English translations?

 

[Ingledsva]

Matthew’s message probably means, if we believe in Jesus, God is with us.

Which has what to do with anything?

We have a Tanakh story about Immanuel being a sign in a war going on RIGHT THEN.

And we have a Christian story written long after Jesus was dead, - misinterpreting the Immanuel - war story, - and trying to give dead Jesus - with the WRONG name - a divine birth.

*

 

[sojourner]

Actually it does not say that in the Greek, - they fudge it to make it look like it says that.

Logos is not a being - it is words with meaning/a message/law/etc.

Jn.12.47-48: "Now if anyone hears my words (rhema) and does not keep [them], I do not condemn him. (For I did not come so that I could condemn the human world, but so that I could rescue the human world.) The one who is rejecting me and not accepting my words (rhema) has that which is condemning him. The message (logos) which I spoke, that will condemn him in the last day.

Jn 1:14 And logos (Divine command/Computation/law,) incased in flesh became, and dwelt among us, and we perceived the glory of the monogenes/sole/singular/special one from the Father, replete with grace/gifts and truth.

It does not say Jesus is the Logos. It says the Logos/divine command/law became enfleshed within a special human sent from God for that purpose. Again - it does not say Jesus is the Logos.

Jesus is claiming to be the Hebrew Messiah - whom is a SINGULAR-SPECIAL- awaited human, sent from God - with the true logos/truth/message/law.

The Hebrew were waiting for the Special HUMAN sent from God - to bring about the end - and final Judgment in Sheol.

*

Yes, of course, but if you understood the Greek way of thinking, something "encased in flesh became" means that it became that human being. The ancient Greeks didn't think atomistically, as we do. body/soul is the same thing. In other words, we are not bodies that encase souls (as many of we moderns believe). We are souls that are bodies.

 

[sojourner]

Actually none at all. They go backward trying to make sentences that include two or more of the words - to mean they are somehow one. Nowhere does it say or imply a trinity.

Also, ALL of the Hebrew are called Gods in the Bible, and special people like King David - are called Sons of God. SO - King David in modern eyes could be called - GOD - and son of God on earth.

Obviously it doesn't mean King David - or Jesus - are actually God. The word has other meanings such as CHOSEN ONES - Judges - etc.

*

Doesn't have anything to do with "son of God." I didn't say that it said "trinity." I said that there is some biblical concept of Jesus as Divine.

 

[Muffled]

But each color is not the same as white light, so Jesus is not the same as god. Glad we're both on the same track here.

I believe light is a bad metaphor because God is not an amalgum although His omnipresence makes people think so. Light can be separated int colors but God can not be separated into dinstinct entities.

I believe you are correct but the same God is in Jesus. This gives Jesus a different identity than any other human being.

 

[Muffled]

Matthew’s message probably means, if we believe in Jesus, God is with us.

I believe if he meant it he would have said it. The context of the statement of "God with us" is the birth of Jesus.

 

[Muffled]

I’ll let you in on a little secret. The Holy Trinity wasn’t originally in the Bible.

I believe then that you should give a source for the original Bible. I don't believe you can.

 

[roger1440]

I believe then that you should give a source for the original Bible. I don't believe you can.

The source of the Bible is man’s desire to find meaning, purpose and direction in life.

 

[roger1440]

I believe if he meant it he would have said it. The context of the statement of "God with us" is the birth of Jesus.

Explain

 

[Skwim]

I believe you are correct but the same God is in Jesus. This gives Jesus a different identity than any other human being.

Okay, but what does "in Jesus" mean? And in plain English. That is, without using terms that need further explanation.

 

[Ingledsva]

Doesn't have anything to do with "son of God." I didn't say that it said "trinity." I said that there is some biblical concept of Jesus as Divine.

Actually there isn't.

And the texts being misconstrued as such, - were written long after Jesus' death, by people that were NOT there.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Yes, of course, but if you understood the Greek way of thinking, something "encased in flesh became" means that it became that human being. The ancient Greeks didn't think atomistically, as we do. body/soul is the same thing. In other words, we are not bodies that encase souls (as many of we moderns believe). We are souls that are bodies.

It is not "encased " in flesh.

It "BECAME ENCASED" in FLESH.

The Logos/Divine message/Law was PUT into a human, - the human is NOT the Logos.

*

 

[sojourner]

Actually there isn't.

And the texts being misconstrued as such, - were written long after Jesus' death, by people that were NOT there.

*

Doesn't matter when the texts were written, nor by whom. The texts (as established by you, with your statement that the Trinity doesn't appear in the bible) are definitive for purposes of the mythology, no matter who wrote them, or when.

And actually, there is. One such example is Luke's portrayal of Jesus' miraculous birth is both typical of the mythic stories of other miraculous births of god-men, and an almost shameless ripoff of the birth of Augustus -- a historical figure who was also considered to be deific.

 

[sojourner]

It is not "encased " in flesh.

It "BECAME ENCASED" in FLESH.

The Logos/Divine message/Law was PUT into a human, - the human is NOT the Logos.

*

You missed the point entirely. If you don't understand how the ancient Greek works, there's no point in trying to help you save academic face here. Whether it was originally or afterwards encased in flesh isn't hardly the point in Greek thought. That which encased in flesh, is flesh.

 

[roger1440]

Which has what to do with anything?

We have a Tanakh story about Immanuel being a sign in a war going on RIGHT THEN.

And we have a Christian story written long after Jesus was dead, - misinterpreting the Immanuel - war story, - and trying to give dead Jesus - with the WRONG name - a divine birth.

*

If the virgin birth story in Matthew’s Gospel was to be interpreted literal, you would be right. That would imply the author or authors of Matthew’s Gospel were a nincompoop, no, that’s not a scholarly term. Matthew’s Gospel quotes Jewish scripture more than any other Gospel, including the non-canonical Gospels. Whoever wrote this Gospel was Jewish writing for a Jewish audience. Anyone reading Isaiah 7:14, “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel” would know, a hot Jewish chick being knocked up by God over 700 years after the death of King Ahaz could not possibly be a sign to King Ahaz. By anyone, I mean anyone, including non-Jews. Therefore, an alternative meaning to Matthew’s virgin birth story must be sought.

 

[Ingledsva]

You missed the point entirely. If you don't understand how the ancient Greek works, there's no point in trying to help you save academic face here. Whether it was originally or afterwards encased in flesh isn't hardly the point in Greek thought. That which encased in flesh, is flesh.

"save face," LOL!

This is your opinion.

We know for a fact that the other group before the Nicene Councils, taught Jesus WAS NOT GOD in any sense of the word!

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Doesn't matter when the texts were written, nor by whom. The texts (as established by you, with your statement that the Trinity doesn't appear in the bible) are definitive for purposes of the mythology, no matter who wrote them, or when.

And actually, there is. One such example is Luke's portrayal of Jesus' miraculous birth is both typical of the mythic stories of other miraculous births of god-men, and an almost shameless ripoff of the birth of Augustus -- a historical figure who was also considered to be deific.

Luke says nothing about a trinity. It says Jesus is the MESSIAH - (the Hebrew awaited special human sent by YHVH to bring about the end and final judgment of all in Sheol.)

2 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. (This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria. And everyone went to their own town to register.

4 So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. 5 He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child. 6 While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, 7 and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no guest room available for them.

8 And there were shepherds living out in the fields nearby, keeping watch over their flocks at night. 9 An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified. 10 But the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid. I bring you good news that will cause great joy for all the people. 11 Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord. This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a manger.”

13 Suddenly a great company of the heavenly host appeared with the angel, praising God and saying,

14 “Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests.”

15 When the angels had left them and gone into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, “Let’s go to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has told us about.”

16 So they hurried off and found Mary and Joseph, and the baby, who was lying in the manger. 17 When they had seen him, they spread the word concerning what had been told them about this child, 18 and all who heard it were amazed at what the shepherds said to them. 19 But Mary treasured up all these things and pondered them in her heart. The shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things they had heard and seen, which were just as they had been told.

From -https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+2:1-20

PS. Something I just noticed - in 5 - it says they were pledged - NOT MARRIED - when Jesus was born.

*

 

[sojourner]

"save face," LOL!

This is your opinion.

We know for a fact that the other group before the Nicene Councils, taught Jesus WAS NOT GOD in any sense of the word!

*

Judging from your posts? It's a pretty sustainable opinion.
We know for a fact that "the other group" taught things that didn't jibe with the prevailing Tradition concerning Jesus. That's why it was found to be "heretical."

 

[sojourner]

Luke says nothing about a trinity. It says Jesus is the MESSIAH - (the Hebrew awaited special human sent by YHVH to bring about the end and final judgment of all in Sheol.)

2 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. (This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria. And everyone went to their own town to register.

4 So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. 5 He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child. 6 While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, 7 and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no guest room available for them.

8 And there were shepherds living out in the fields nearby, keeping watch over their flocks at night. 9 An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified. 10 But the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid. I bring you good news that will cause great joy for all the people. 11 Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord. This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a manger.”

13 Suddenly a great company of the heavenly host appeared with the angel, praising God and saying,

14 “Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests.”

15 When the angels had left them and gone into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, “Let’s go to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has told us about.”

16 So they hurried off and found Mary and Joseph, and the baby, who was lying in the manger. 17 When they had seen him, they spread the word concerning what had been told them about this child, 18 and all who heard it were amazed at what the shepherds said to them. 19 But Mary treasured up all these things and pondered them in her heart. The shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things they had heard and seen, which were just as they had been told.

From -https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+2:1-20

PS. Something I just noticed - in 5 - it says they were pledged - NOT MARRIED - when Jesus was born.

*

Well, in that time period, a divine God-man was a savior -- that was the job of the God-man, so it's not surprising that Luke would refer to Jesus as such. The very fact that you're letting this misunderstood tidbit get in the way of the understanding of the general literary characteristics tells me that you don't understand nearly so much as you'd like us to believe.

 

[Ingledsva]

Judging from your posts? It's a pretty sustainable opinion.
We know for a fact that "the other group" taught things that didn't jibe with the prevailing Tradition concerning Jesus. That's why it was found to be "heretical."

LOL! Yeah! Like Jesus wasn't God!

*