The name Jesus. Who does it belong to?

[Katzpur]

Because of a discussion I was having with *Paul*, I decided to just ask this question of any and all trinitarian Christians who might be willing to give their input.

Is "Jesus" the name of the second person of the Trinity or is "Jesus" the name of the triune God (i.e. Father, Son and Holy Ghost)? I hope my question is clear. If not, I'll try to clarify further.

 

[Katzpur]

*bump*

Are you guys telling me this is a difficult question, or what?

 

[Radio Frequency X]

*bump*

Are you guys telling me this is a difficult question, or what?

Jesus is the name of the man within whom was God, but not God Himself; imo.

 

[JumboShrimp]

Jesus is the name of the man within whom was God, but not God Himself; imo.

thats what i was basically gonna say

 

[Katzpur]

Thanks for the answers! Since I'm non-trinitarian myself, I'm not going to get involved in this discussion except to ask questions, but I appreciate the input. Anyone else? Please...

 

[lunamoth]

I'm not sure I understand the question Kat. I would not refer to the Trinity as 'Jesus.' The Triune God is as you said: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Jesus (the annointed, the Christ) was the Son of God.

 

[Katzpur]

I'm not sure I understand the question Kat. I would not refer to the Trinity as 'Jesus.' The Triune God is as you said: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Jesus (the annointed, the Christ) was the Son of God.

You understood the question fine. You also gave the answer I had expected you would. *Paul* seemed to think most trinitarians would say that the name "Jesus" applies to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost collectively -- in other words, that they are "one God whose name is Jesus." I was trying to determine whether he was alone in his thinking or if that was the understanding common to mainstream Christians.

 

[Snowbear]

Jesus is an English translation of the Name of the Son.
The Son is fully God and fully Man.

 

[Seraphiel]

Jesus is just a name that belongs to the people who got that name from their parents. And like every name it has a meaning like Snowbear said. Maria and Joseph could have called their child John as well.

 

[Snowbear]

... Maria and Joseph could have called their child John as well.

They could have. Instead, they were obedient to God and Named Him as instructed.

 

[michel]

Jesus was the name of God incarnate; I have recently even started accepting (subconsciously) that Jesus was his name on Earth, but that his name in the trinity is Christ.

 

[*Paul*]

You understood the question fine. You also gave the answer I had expected you would. *Paul* seemed to think most trinitarians would say that the name "Jesus" applies to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost collectively -- in other words, that they are "one God whose name is Jesus."

WHat one eath are you talking about, you'd better re-read what i said and then retract that falsehood, I said the opposite and said that in agreeing with the apostolic preacher that is what you were saying. I mean it Katzpur, that is a gross misrepresentation.

Jesus is the name of the Son of God.

 

[*Paul*]

I feel physically sick, i'm not joking here, here is what I said:

Quote:Originally Posted by KatzpurActually, I suspect that a lot of trinitarians would agree with me that Jesus is the name of the Son, and not of the Father or the Holy Ghost, but I could be wrong about that.

I think they all would as do i.
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45078&page=3
Posted yesterday at 11;39pm
Here must be the confusion:

Quote:If you believe that God the Father and the Holy Spirit are named "Jesus," then it would appear that we disagree, as I believe that the name "Jesus" refers only to the Son of God.

Thats what I believe to absolutley, but if thats what you believe then what you are saying is we believe in 3 Gods and one of them is called Jesus who is one in purpose and unity with the other two ( and are one in that sense). Not that there is one God and His name is Jesus. Wouldn't that be correct? I'm only trying to understand what you believe here not discredit it, as I said I have taken time to read quite a bit of your church documents so I could understand what you believe rather than have a Christian tell me what you believe and thought I had reached an understanding but clearly I haven't , it must be more complicated than what I previously thought which is why I asked for a someone to clear this up for me.
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45078&page=2 posted yesterday 10:57 pm
I meant that I believe that the name Jesus refers to the name of the Son of God. Not the name of the trinity collectively.

Please please please understand that I believe in the trinity, Father Son and Holy Spirit, i am very orthodox on that point. The other conclusion would be absurd.

 

[lunamoth]

Hey Paul, I figured there must have been some kind of misunderstanding going on. Although that conversation is hard to follow, I can see that it was just some confusion in the wording and that your view of the Trinity the traditional one.

 

[Bishka]

You guys, I think Katz might be talking about Paul from the New Testament, not quite sure.....

 

[*Paul*]

Hey Paul, I figured there must have been some kind of misunderstanding going on. Although that conversation is hard to follow, I can see that it was just some confusion in the wording and that your view of the Trinity the traditional one.

Thanks Lunamoth, that's kind of you to say and I appreciate it. I now realise that Katzpur must have misunderstood me and was not being malicious, she obviously didn't read my last post on the topic yesterday. It was upsetting to read the post number 7, but I accept that my wording could have been better and I publicly aoplogise to Katzpur if she feels I have spoken inappropriatly to her in my response, it just, as I said upset me and made me feel sick literally.

 

[*Paul*]

You guys, I think Katz might be talking about Paul from the New Testament, not quite sure.....

No Becky she uses my name with the * * either side of it. But as I said she can't have read the full thread or started this one before I made my last comment maybe.

 

[Bishka]

No Becky she uses my name with the * * either side of it. But as I said she can't have read the full thread or started this one before I made my last comment maybe.

My mistake.

 

[Katzpur]

Thanks Lunamoth, that's kind of you to say and I appreciate it. I now realise that Katzpur must have misunderstood me and was not being malicious, she obviously didn't read my last post on the topic yesterday. It was upsetting to read the post number 7, but I accept that my wording could have been better and I publicly aoplogise to Katzpur if she feels I have spoken inappropriatly to her in my response, it just, as I said upset me and made me feel sick literally.

Oh, my gosh!! You have no need to apologize. It's me who needs to apologize. I totally misunderstood you. When you said, "That's what I believe too, absolutely," I thought you meant you were agreeing with Apostolic Preacher, not with me!!!! I am so, so sorry, Paul.

 

[*Paul*]

Oh, my gosh!! You have no need to apologize. It's me who needs to apologize. I totally misunderstood you. When you said, "That's what I believe too, absolutely," I thought you meant you were agreeing with Apostolic Preacher, not with me!!!! I am so, so sorry, Paul.

No hard feelings and I accept my the part i played in the misunderstanding. Thanks for the sincere apology.