Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe God is always God whether in the Son or as the Father.Jesus cannot be the Son of God and also God since the Son is not the Father.
I believe that God created all things and Jesus did not create anything.
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I believe God is always God whether in the Son or as the Father.Jesus cannot be the Son of God and also God since the Son is not the Father.
I believe that God created all things and Jesus did not create anything.
I believe that is false. The Son has a body and the Father does not, so they are not the same thing. What is the same is God in both cases.The Son OF God is the Father, the almighty, the one Jesus Christ called, ‘The one true God’?
- ‘This means life that they should come to believe that YOU (Father) are the one true God’!
- “You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they were created and have their being.”
May I ask what translation you are using for that, please?John 1:1-3, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was fully God. The Word was with God in the beginning. All things were created by him, and apart from him not one thing was created that has been created."
What other kind of Son would God the Father have? If Jesus is the one and only begotten Son of God, how could He not be God? I believe that since Jesus is the unique Son of God, He therefore must be God by nature with all the same God- qualities, characteristics, and attributes of His Father.Jesus cannot be the Son of God and also God since the Son is not the Father.
I believe that God created all things and Jesus did not create anything.
If Jesus is the one and only begotten Son of God, how could He be God the Father? The Son is not the Father.What other kind of Son would God the Father have? If Jesus is the one and only begotten Son of God, how could He not be God? I believe that since Jesus is the unique Son of God, He therefore must be God by nature with all the same God- qualities, characteristics, and attributes of His Father.
The New English Translation, a.k.a. the NET Bible.May I ask what translation you are using for that, please?
I didn’t say the Son is the Father, nor do I believe the Bible says that. I am saying that the Son of God would have the same qualities, attributes, and eternal nature as His Father, therefore the Son would be God as His Father.If Jesus is the one and only begotten Son of God, how could He be God the Father? The Son is not the Father.
I believe that since Jesus is the Son of God, He shares the qualities, characteristics, and attributes of His Father such as Good, Loving, Gracious, Merciful, Just, Righteous, Forgiving, and Patient, but God has some attributes that are unique to God such as All-powerful, All-knowing, Unchanging, Impassable, Infinite, Omnipresent, Self-Existent, Self-Sufficient, and Immaterial.
I am confused. If the Son is not the Father, how could the Son be God as His Father?I didn’t say the Son is the Father, nor do I believe the Bible says that. I am saying that the Son of God would have the same qualities, attributes, and eternal nature as His Father, therefore the Son would be God as His Father.
I believe in the eternal triune Godhead ; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. One God, composed of three Persons each possessing the same omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent God-Nature.I am confused. If the Son is not the Father, how could the Son be God as His Father?
The New Testament clearly says that Jesus is God. I believe what it says, not your flawed interpretation.Jesus is not God nor claims to be God, even tells us that he is not God. Jesus is only the Son of God, Jehovah is God, and Jesus is the Son of God. Jehovah sent Jesus is the form of man to be a man offering because God could not take the fall of being a man that would be a sin and God is all righteous without sin. Romans 8 1:3 God sent his Son in likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. when Jesus went back to heaven he now sits at the right hand of God.. Numbers 23:19 God is not a Man, that he should lie, neither the son of a man that he should repent. Jesus is also the son of a man. The Bible has a lot of words and verses to read. you have to read the whole bible to understand the whole truth. If you miss words you will miss the whole truth of the word.
No, the New Testament does not say that Jesus is God. You believe that Jesus is God because of your flawed interpretation.The New Testament clearly says that Jesus is God. I believe what it says, not your flawed interpretation.
“I and my Father are one” (John 10:30) means that whatever pertains to Jesus, all His acts and doings, are identical with the Will of the Father. Jesus and God also share the same Holy Spirit, so in that sense they are one. Jesus also shares some (but not all) the Attributes of God so in that sense they are one.John 10:30, "I and the Father are one"
If you really know me, you will know my Father as well means that Jesus and the Father were separate entities.John 14:6-10a, "Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really know me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”
John 14Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.”
Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me?"
John 14:11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.John 17:20-21a, "My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you."
I believe it is because God does not change whether in or out of the body. He is one. I believe what makes them distinct is the flesh. The Father has no body but the Son does.I am confused. If the Son is not the Father, how could the Son be God as His Father?
I believe that is false. Jesus does say He is God in many ways and best in John 10:30.Jesus is not God nor claims to be God, even tells us that he is not God. Jesus is only the Son of God, Jehovah is God, and Jesus is the Son of God. Jehovah sent Jesus is the form of man to be a man offering because God could not take the fall of being a man that would be a sin and God is all righteous without sin. Romans 8 1:3 God sent his Son in likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. when Jesus went back to heaven he now sits at the right hand of God.. Numbers 23:19 God is not a Man, that he should lie, neither the son of a man that he should repent. Jesus is also the son of a man. The Bible has a lot of words and verses to read. you have to read the whole bible to understand the whole truth. If you miss words you will miss the whole truth of the word.
Jesus never said that He was God. That is a church doctrine that came about by misinterpreting Bible verses.I believe that is false. Jesus does say He is God in many ways and best in John 10:30.
Hi, @jimb. Sorry I just got back to this. Thanks for the translations but I notice one thing. That is that there is no mention of the Holy Spirit, said to be one of the persons of the Trinity. It speaks of God and the Word.The New English Translation, a.k.a. the NET Bible.
Here is there "footnote" regarding "fully God" (with my added emphasis)...
Or “and what God was the Word was.” Colwell’s Rule is often invoked to support the translation of θεός (theos) as definite (“God”) rather than indefinite (“a god”) here. However, Colwell’s Rule merely permits, but does not demand, that a predicate nominative ahead of an equative verb be translated as definite rather than indefinite. Furthermore, Colwell’s Rule did not deal with a third possibility, that the anarthrous predicate noun may have more of a qualitative nuance when placed ahead of the verb. A definite meaning for the term is reflected in the traditional rendering “the word was God.” From a technical standpoint, though, it is preferable to see a qualitative aspect to anarthrous θεός in John 1:1c (ExSyn 266-69). Translations like the NEB, REB, and Moffatt are helpful in capturing the sense in John 1:1c, that the Word was fully deity in essence (just as much God as God the Father). However, in contemporary English “the Word was divine” (Moffatt) does not quite catch the meaning since “divine” as a descriptive term is not used in contemporary English exclusively of God. The translation “what God was the Word was” is perhaps the most nuanced rendering, conveying that everything God was in essence, the Word was too. This points to unity of essence between the Father and the Son without equating the persons. However, in surveying a number of native speakers of English, some of whom had formal theological training and some of whom did not, the editors concluded that the fine distinctions indicated by “what God was the Word was” would not be understood by many contemporary readers. Thus the translation “the Word was fully God” was chosen because it is more likely to convey the meaning to the average English reader that the Logos (which “became flesh and took up residence among us” in John 1:14 and is thereafter identified in the Fourth Gospel as Jesus) is one in essence with God the Father. The previous phrase, “the Word was with God,” shows that the Logos is distinct in person from God the Father.sn And the Word was fully God. John’s theology consistently drives toward the conclusion that Jesus, the incarnate Word, is just as much God as God the Father. This can be seen, for example, in texts like John 10:30 (“The Father and I are one”), 17:11 (“so that they may be one just as we are one”), and 8:58 (“before Abraham came into existence, I am”). The construction in John 1:1c does not equate the Word with the person of God (this is ruled out by 1:1b, “the Word was with God”); rather it affirms that the Word and God are one in essence.
Here are some other translations of John 1:1-3 that I use...
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made." NIV
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being in him was life, and the life was the light of all people." NRSVue
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made." ESV