The True God

[Jainarayan]

Who is the True God mentioned in 1 John 5:20?

• “We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know Him who is true. And we are in Him who is true by being in His Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.” (Emphasis mine)

Many people, people of expert knowledge in scriptures, people of professed reverence for the almighty God, theologians of renown, eminent men of power and in leadership, have claimed that the verse refers to …… Jesus the Christ!

What do you say, and how are you see it as so.

I mean, to me, the ‘true God’ is the ‘Him’ whom the Lord Jesus Christ has given us an understanding of?

Afterall, Jesus Christ prayed to ‘Him’, the Father, saying:

• “Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.” (John 17:3)

The ‘you’ referred to his Heavenly Father: God!

Your thoughts are welcomed!

Given that I do not believe the Bible to be authoritative I cannot say that particular God is the true God. He may be A god, but not THE God. That distinction belongs to Vishnu, whom I call Sarvaśaktivat Jagannātha (Almighty Lord of the Universe). Devotees of Śiva would use that description for Him, God with a different name and form.

 

[Revoltingest]

And another, R rated version.

Oh, yeah...him too.

 

[`mud]

...and that damned donkey !!!

 

[Lain]

Who is the True God mentioned in 1 John 5:20?

• “We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know Him who is true. And we are in Him who is true by being in His Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.” (Emphasis mine)

Many people, people of expert knowledge in scriptures, people of professed reverence for the almighty God, theologians of renown, eminent men of power and in leadership, have claimed that the verse refers to …… Jesus the Christ!

What do you say, and how are you see it as so.

I mean, to me, the ‘true God’ is the ‘Him’ whom the Lord Jesus Christ has given us an understanding of?

Afterall, Jesus Christ prayed to ‘Him’, the Father, saying:

• “Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.” (John 17:3)

The ‘you’ referred to his Heavenly Father: God!

Your thoughts are welcomed!

I think it is the Father, the One True God, due to consistency reasons primarily. The Scriptures well establish in the majority of circumstances to call the Father "God" or "True God." The Son reveals the Father, so therefore it is the Father said to be "True" there.

 

[Soapy]

...and that damned donkey !!!

‘Jesus, Joseph, Mary, and the wee donkey!!’

A saying about something unbelievable… :

• ‘Jesus, Joesph, Mary, and the wee donkey!! - I told you before we started out that you were short on petrol. And now we are stuck out here…!’

 

[Jainarayan]

My Hindu answer to “Jesus, Mary and Joseph!”... “Krishna, Yashoda, Nanda cha!” (Sanskrit, being completely free form often puts cha, “and” at the end for poetic meter).

 

[pearl]

The Son reveals the God of truth; Christians dwell in the true God, in his Son (Jn 17:3)
That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and revelation resulting in knowledge of him. (Eph 1:17)

The ‘you’ referred to his Heavenly Father: God!

I agree.

 

[Soapy]

My Hindu answer to “Jesus, Mary and Joseph!”... “Krishna, Yashoda, Nanda cha!” (Sanskrit, being completely free form often puts cha, “and” at the end for poetic meter).

It’s the Irish (Ireland including Northern Ireland) who add:

• ‘and the wee (meaning: small/not significant) Donkey!’.

(Sorry, I forgot ‘Joseph’ out of my original list… edited in now!)

 

[TiggerII]

1 Jn 5:20 -
“We are in him that is true [alethinos], even in his Son, Jesus Christ. This [outos] is the true [alethinos] God, and eternal life.” - KJV.

Some trinitarians actually insist that the word “this” (outos) here refers to Jesus. In other words, “[Jesus Christ] is the true God and eternal life.”

Even though all other uses of 'the true God' in Scripture are clearly referring to YHWH, the Father, it is obvious that grammatically the word “this” (outos) could be referring to either the Father or Jesus in this particular scripture (see the footnote for 1 John 5:20 in the NIV Study Bible). But the fact that the true God (or “the true One”) has just been identified as the Father of Jesus (1 Jn 5:20, TEV; GNB; and the footnote in the NIV Study Bible) makes it highly probable that “this is the true God” refers to the Father, not Jesus.

The respected trinitarian NT scholar Murray J. Harris sums up his 13-page analysis of this scripture as follows:
“Although it is certainly possible that outos [‘this’] refers back to Jesus Christ, several converging lines of evidence point to ‘the true one,’ God the Father, as the probable antecedent. This position, outos = God [Father], is held by many commentators, authors of general studies, and significantly, by those grammarians who express an opinion on the matter.” - p. 253, Jesus as God, Baker Book House, 1992.

Notice how this trinitarian scholar actually admits that the probability is that the Father (not Jesus) is being called the true God here also. He even tells us (and cites examples in his footnotes) that New Testament grammarians and commentators (most of them trinitarian, of course) agree!

So this single “proof” that the “true God” is a title for anyone other than the Father alone is not proof at all. The grammar alone merely makes it a possibility. The immediate context makes it highly improbable since (as in all other uses of the term) the true God (or the true one) was just identified as the Father.

“We are in the one who is true as we are in his Son, Jesus Christ. He is the true God and this is eternal life.” - NJB.

“We know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we know the true God. We live in union with the true God - in union with his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and this is eternal life.” - TEV.

“And we know that the Son of God has come, and he has given us understanding so that we can know the true God. And now we live in fellowship with the true God because we live in fellowship with his Son, Jesus Christ. He is the only true God, and he is eternal life.” - New Living Translation.

So the immediate context alone makes it probable that the true God is the Father in this scripture also. If we include the context of all the other uses of the "true God," it is certain that He is the Father alone (whose personal name is YHWH - Ps. 83:18, Ex. 3:15).

 

[Soapy]

The Son reveals the God of truth; Christians dwell in the true God, in his Son (Jn 17:3)
That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and revelation resulting in knowledge of him. (Eph 1:17)



I agree.

So what are your thoughts on why certain factions of Christians insist that ‘the Great God’ is the Son, when it is clear that the Son was revealing the Father… as even the Son says himself:

• ‘Father, I have given them the word YOU GAVE ME TO GIVE TO THEM and they have received it’

 

[Soapy]

1 Jn 5:20 -
“We are in him that is true [alethinos], even in his Son, Jesus Christ. This [outos] is the true [alethinos] God, and eternal life.” - KJV.

Some trinitarians actually insist that the word “this” (outos) here refers to Jesus. In other words, “[Jesus Christ] is the true God and eternal life.”

Even though all other uses of 'the true God' in Scripture are clearly referring to YHWH, the Father, it is obvious that grammatically the word “this” (outos) could be referring to either the Father or Jesus in this particular scripture (see the footnote for 1 John 5:20 in the NIV Study Bible). But the fact that the true God (or “the true One”) has just been identified as the Father of Jesus (1 Jn 5:20, TEV; GNB; and the footnote in the NIV Study Bible) makes it highly probable that “this is the true God” refers to the Father, not Jesus.

The respected trinitarian NT scholar Murray J. Harris sums up his 13-page analysis of this scripture as follows:
“Although it is certainly possible that outos [‘this’] refers back to Jesus Christ, several converging lines of evidence point to ‘the true one,’ God the Father, as the probable antecedent. This position, outos = God [Father], is held by many commentators, authors of general studies, and significantly, by those grammarians who express an opinion on the matter.” - p. 253, Jesus as God, Baker Book House, 1992.

Notice how this trinitarian scholar actually admits that the probability is that the Father (not Jesus) is being called the true God here also. He even tells us (and cites examples in his footnotes) that New Testament grammarians and commentators (most of them trinitarian, of course) agree!

So this single “proof” that the “true God” is a title for anyone other than the Father alone is not proof at all. The grammar alone merely makes it a possibility. The immediate context makes it highly improbable since (as in all other uses of the term) the true God (or the true one) was just identified as the Father.

“We are in the one who is true as we are in his Son, Jesus Christ. He is the true God and this is eternal life.” - NJB.

“We know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we know the true God. We live in union with the true God - in union with his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and this is eternal life.” - TEV.

“And we know that the Son of God has come, and he has given us understanding so that we can know the true God. And now we live in fellowship with the true God because we live in fellowship with his Son, Jesus Christ. He is the only true God, and he is eternal life.” - New Living Translation.

So the immediate context alone makes it probable that the true God is the Father in this scripture also. If we include the context of all the other uses of the "true God," it is certain that He is the Father alone (whose personal name is YHWH - Ps. 83:18, Ex. 3:15).

So you mean that despite all the evidence and the commons sense involved, there are still people of expert opinion, eminent theologians, and supposed ‘Godly persons’ who still mistranslate and believe that it is Jesus that is the True God… ?

I mean, take it as they claim:

• “Jesus is the true God”!!

How does this equate to the trinitarian belief that there are three who are the one God IF JESUS [alone] IS THE TRUE GOD…

That would then mean that JESUS is ‘Father, Son, and Holy Spirit’!!!

I know there are those who believe this but read carefully…. ‘Jesus is the true God and the true God is Father, Son (Jesus), and Holy Spirit’!

Do you see it? It would mean that Jesus is God AND the Son who is a third part of HIMSELF!!!???

Come on, please!!! Seriously…. These are people who claim to be ‘filled with the Holy Spirit of the true God’?

Now that is truly GRIEVING THE HOLY SPIRIT!!!

 

[`mud]

creating possibilities, a very Catholic, Christian choice to make !

 

[pearl]

So what are your thoughts on why certain factions of Christians insist that ‘the Great God’ is the Son, when it is clear that the Son was revealing the Father… as even the Son says himself:

They erroneously believe there is a 'Christian God' that has replaced the God of Israel.

 

[Soapy]

They erroneously believe there is a 'Christian God' that has replaced the God of Israel.

That sounds very much like what has occurred.

The God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David, Solomon..,.. Jesus, said he was to be their ONLY GOD! Their ONE GOD!

That ‘oneness’ has nothing to do with a unity of three persons. It is to state that only one God is to be worshipped… unlike the pagans and the Heathens who worship multiple Gods!!

That is what trinity despises… the words of the very God they claim to worship!

When a trinitarian tries to define ‘God’ they come up with nonsense and then claim that God is too mighty to define.

Yet Jesus said that he had revealed the Father to ‘Them’. That ‘Them’ surely therefore cannot mean ‘Trinitarians’ as they claim that God has not been fully defined to them.

The reality is that they screw up their definition and can fined no cohesion in their definition - so they claim he is undefinable!

One of their definition says that ‘God is Essence… of which the three persons share!’

Now think about that… think of an analogy:
Fish… Three Fish in a fish bowl… the water is the ‘Essence’ of which the three fish share in.

But notice that the Essence is OUTSIDE of the fish, inside and around them…

Notice that the Essence is the same… but yet trinity says The three are Heirachially different!

How can they be different if they share in the same almighty essence?

WHO established the heirachy?

Why and how is the Father GREATER than the Son, and the Son greater than the ‘so-called’ person that is the Holy Spirit?

Scriptures says that the Holy Spirit, SENT BY GOD (???!!! Sent by the essence????) will take of what is Jesus’…! How??? If they share the same essence .. How can one have what the other does not?

Trinity says the three persons are absolutely equal… they are all almighty…

First, if one is almighty, why the need for three!!????

next, if they are all almighty, how can they be UNEQUAL IN RANK? Why is there a RANK!

Who is the leader among equals?

Is there a human example of three equal powers as one unit but ranked by descending order?

Absolutely none!!!

There is only ever ONE LEADER, one Head, one Father…. ONE GOD!

Ever!

 

[Brian2]

So what are your thoughts on why certain factions of Christians insist that ‘the Great God’ is the Son, when it is clear that the Son was revealing the Father… as even the Son says himself:

• ‘Father, I have given them the word YOU GAVE ME TO GIVE TO THEM and they have received it’

The Son reveals the Father because it is only the Son who knows the Father. He knows Him because they have lived together from eternity. The Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father.
The Father revealed the Son and the Son, who is exactly like His Father, reveals His Father, as He did with Philip. (John 14:9)

 

[muhammad_isa]

The Son reveals the Father because it is only the Son who knows the Father. He knows Him because they have lived together from eternity. The Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father.
The Father revealed the Son and the Son, who is exactly like His Father, reveals His Father, as He did with Philip. (John 14:9)

Did Abraham believe this?
Did Moses believe this?

No .. they didn't.
From the perspective of belief in the Abrahamic G-d, orthodox Christianity is a "sectarian interpretation" of monotheism.
It is unique in this respect.

There were many other interpretations in Early Christianity, but it was destined that Catholicism would be uppermost in the west, due mainly to political reasons.

 

[Brian2]

Did Abraham believe this?
Did Moses believe this?

No .. they didn't.
From the perspective of belief in the Abrahamic G-d, orthodox Christianity is a "sectarian interpretation" of monotheism.
It is unique in this respect.

There were many other interpretations in Early Christianity, but it was destined that Catholicism would be uppermost in the west, due mainly to political reasons.

The Catholic Church did not write the New Testament or Old Testament.
The Bible is ongoing revelation all the way through and I am just saying what is in the Bible.
Jesus said that He would be with the Church till the end of the age even though there would be weeds in the Church.

 

[pearl]

When a trinitarian tries to define ‘God’ they come up with nonsense and then claim that God is too mighty to define.

I'll go with Augustine's answer in his quest for God, 'Can God be understood and known by reason alone?, 'if you understood him, it would not be God'.

Yet Jesus said that he had revealed the Father to ‘Them’. That ‘Them’ surely therefore cannot mean ‘Trinitarians’ as they claim that God has not been fully defined to them.

There is a difference between 'defined' and revealed. Jesus himself, we believe, through his life, death, resurrection, is the revelation of God for Christians. I think it is pure arrogance for anyone to state that God may be defined. God is a Mystery.

One of their definition says that ‘God is Essence… of which the three persons share!’

. The concept of person in the doctrine of God

What we today understand as person, in common everyday language, is not the language understood in the origin of the trinitarian formula.
It was Tertullian who gave to the West its formula for expressing the Christian idea of God. God is "una substantia-tres personae," one being in three persons. It was here that the word "person" entered intellectual history for the first time with its full weight.

Joseph Ratzinger. Concerning the Notion of Person in Theology. Communio 17 (Fall 1990) (communio-icr.com)

Scriptures says that the Holy Spirit, SENT BY GOD (???!!! Sent by the essence????) will take of what is Jesus’…! How??? If they share the same essence .. How can one have what the other does not?

The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God who In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. ' And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.'

. ONE GOD!
Ever!

Yes, One God

 

[muhammad_isa]

God is a Mystery.

Well, that means that we can believe more or less anything .. interpret scripture according to a given creed or what have you.
It makes no sense that the first commandment is "I am YHWH your God, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before me." .. but as G-d is mysterious, He can be three different "persons" in One

Yes, One God

Yes, exactly .. and Jesus bowed and prostrated to that One G-d. [the Father]

 

[pearl]

Yes, exactly .. and Jesus bowed and prostrated to that One G-d. [the Father]

As did Moses;
Then, as before, I lay prostrate before the LORD for forty days and forty nights; I ate no food, I drank no water, because of all the sin you had committed in the sight of the LORD, doing wrong and provoking him.
David lay prostrate before the Angel of the Lord for his sin (1 Chronicles 21:16-17) As do the priests on Good Friday, it is an act of humility.