Who IS "The Only TRUE God"- as Jesus put it?

[VEW]

If Jesus Is God.... ​

1. Why is he called the "firstborn of all creation"? Col. 1:15; Rev. 3:14
2. Why did he say he did not come of his "own initiative" but was "sent forth"? John 8:42
3. Why did Jesus not know the "day and hour" of the Great Tribulation, but God did? Matt. 24:36
4. Who did Jesus speak to in prayer?
5. How did he "appear before the person of God for us"? Heb. 9:24
6. Why did Jesus say "the Father is greater than I am"? John 14:28
7. Who spoke to Jesus at the time of his baptism saying "this is my son"? Matt. 3:17
8. How could he be exalted to a superior position? Php. 2:9, 10
9. How can he be the "mediator between God and man"? ! Tim. 2:5
10. Why did Paul say that "the head of Christ is God"? 1 Cor. 11:3
11. Why did Jesus "hand over the Kingdom to his God" and subject himself to God"? ! Cor. 15:24, 28
12. How does he refer to as "my God and your God"? John 20:17
13. How does he sit at God's right hand? Ps. 110:1; Heb. 10: 12, 13
14. Why does John say "no man has seen God at any time"? John 1:18
15. Why did people not die when they saw Jesus? Ex. 30:20..........VEW

 

[Danilo T. Aungon]

The word GOD has its original owner. Remember it is English word is known in Hebrew's Time. How they call or addressed their supreme being is something buried to oblivion by early conquest of whosoever dominant was there until the reached Ancient England where its natives speak English. They called their supreme being GOD. Now, English is a powerful language, so to gain more benefits at the this time they call their deit true god while the real owner is false GOD.

 

[ayani]

GOD never came off as Holy, Sacred or Divine in our conversations. He never belittled me. He never expected worship or required special attention from me.

than i'd have say in faith, emphatically, that it was not God that spoke to you... not the God who made the heavens and the earth, nor the God who has given us life. i empathize with you- i have, a number of times, been drawn into dialogue with a voice or presence i beieved to be Godly, or divine. there are many, many voices in the air masqurading as God's Holy Spirit, and t would seem that what many of these voices declare (mine did) in their 'revelation' a message of universalism, pantheism, or an understanding of God originating and ending with self.

the God i serve, who sent His Son into the world, is described as holy, and worthy of respect, awe, and honour. He is Somone who desires communion with us, who desiresfor us to come to know Him, and walk with Him. He is worthy of worship, gatitude, praise, love, and respectful obedience.

He has a personality. unlike many advaitic descriptions of the divine, He is not Biblically synonymous in an abstract way with reality, the world around us, or consciousness. He can be described, however, as the creator, the giver of life, the Lord, the Master of the Universe, and Father.

From my understanding there are many people who can live and die without acknowledging GOD’s existence.

yes, they do. as the Bible says, He is never far from any of us. because of Him, in Him, we move around, live, breathe, and are provided for. yet a human being can go through life without really knowing Him personally, regardless of a general belief in a Creator, regarless of one's religious affiliation.

 

[Spiritone]

God the Father=The Creator of all, instilled part of God into Creation.
God the Son=The Christ, Jesus at that time and others at other times and places.
God the Holy Ghost=Spirit of God in everything spiritual in our existence.

Just a logical probability imo.

 

[Berachiah Ben Yisrael]

God the Father=The Creator of all, instilled part of God into Creation.
God the Son=The Christ, Jesus at that time and others at other times and places.
God the Holy Ghost=Spirit of God in everything spiritual in our existence.

Just a logical probability imo.

So where did Yahshua say all this?

 

[ayani]

here is another understanding :

God = the Father; the Master of the Universe; the Creator; the Giver of Life (Genesis 1:1, Deuteronomy 4:39, Jonah 1:9, Isaiah 42:5, Matthew 23:9)

Jesus = the Son of God; the Messiah; sent by God; the One through Whom we come to know God personally, and are saved (Matthew 16:15-17, John 4:25-26, John 8:36, John 10:30, John 14:6-7)

Holy Spirit = God's Spirit (of Truth and holiness) given to the Son and through Him, to believers in the Son; the Spirit of God which sanctifies, teaches, and guides our hearts in Christlikeness (Matthew 12:22-28, John 14:16-17)

i would not disagree with the Aposlte's creed. certainly there is a Holy Spirit, which "proceeds from the Father and the Son". i would quietly disagree with the idea that the Spirit is a "person" of a triune Godhead, or a "somebody" distinct from the Father and the Son.

but i would not disagree that "the three are one" in truth and purpose, seeming as Jesus and the Father are One, and the Spirit of God is the same Spirit by which Jesus worked His miracles, taught, and prophesied, and the Spirit indwelling in born-again believers. on those lines, i would identify the "Spirit of Jesus" in Acts 16:7 with the Holy Spirit.

 

[Elessar]

If Jesus Is God.... ​

1. Why is he called the "firstborn of all creation"? Col. 1:15; Rev. 3:14
2. Why did he say he did not come of his "own initiative" but was "sent forth"? John 8:42
3. Why did Jesus not know the "day and hour" of the Great Tribulation, but God did? Matt. 24:36
4. Who did Jesus speak to in prayer?
5. How did he "appear before the person of God for us"? Heb. 9:24
6. Why did Jesus say "the Father is greater than I am"? John 14:28
7. Who spoke to Jesus at the time of his baptism saying "this is my son"? Matt. 3:17
8. How could he be exalted to a superior position? Php. 2:9, 10
9. How can he be the "mediator between God and man"? ! Tim. 2:5
10. Why did Paul say that "the head of Christ is God"? 1 Cor. 11:3
11. Why did Jesus "hand over the Kingdom to his God" and subject himself to God"? ! Cor. 15:24, 28
12. How does he refer to as "my God and your God"? John 20:17
13. How does he sit at God's right hand? Ps. 110:1; Heb. 10: 12, 13
14. Why does John say "no man has seen God at any time"? John 1:18
15. Why did people not die when they saw Jesus? Ex. 30:20..........VEW

I don't expect you to accept my answers, but I'm going to do it anyway.

1. First, I don't accept Rav Sha'ul's writings as binding, and even if I did, it says - "He is the visible image of the invisible G-d. He is supreme over all creation," - Colosim 1:15. Nothing about firstborn. Hitgalut 3:14 has a similar formulation, ""[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]To the angel of the Messianic Community in Laodicea, write: 'Here is the message from the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the Ruler of G-d's creation." Neither one uses "firstborn" and thus this is a translation issue, not a theological one.

2. The formulation in Yochanan 8:42 is being pretty clear; he is referring to himself as being "sent by G-d" as he speaks to the P'rushim, drawing a clear distinction that he is not in the earth by human will, but by G-d, and that he is making it clear that his words are not from human thought, but from G-d. He did not come according to human will, but according to G-d's will.

3. I, personally, hold that when Yeshua says "the Son", he means himself as he stands, in human form on the earth, constricted by time according to his own intent. He has put limits on himself in human form to see, in order to allow his human form to be fully human, to be temptable, and so on, to be a proper sacrifice for humanity.

4. Yeshua spoke to G-d, as G-d was still omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient, while he existed in human form. He continued to pray so as to show an example to humans on how to pray.

5. The author of Yehudim M'shichim, in this passage, is offering a metaphor, comparing the Messiah to the cohen hagadol, or High Priest, not speaking truth or doctrine. The verse is, then, taken out of context.

6. It means that himself, in human form, has restrictions put on him (which he put on himself to make him a truly human form) that the omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent G-d does not.

7. All humankind are the sons of G-d, and himself in human form is no exception.

8. As I said before, I don't believe Rav Sha'ul's writings to be binding.

9. See above.

10. See above.

11. See above.

12. As a human, his G-d is G-d. The G-d of all humanity is G-d. Even G-d in human form has himself as his G-d, because G-d is the G-d of all humankind.

13. Psalms are literary poetry, and is not meant for literal reading. Yehudim M'shichim's author is referencing the psalm previously mentioned.

14. Yochanan is not infallible. He is incorrect, as G-d has clearly shown his face to Moshe Rabbeinu in the Torah. And, even thus how I disagree with it, the very verse you cite contradicts you: [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]"[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]No one has ever seen G-d; but the only and unique Son, who is identical with G-d and is at the Father's side -- he has made him known." (Yochanan 1:18)

15. Sh'mot 30:20 states that "[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]when they enter the tent of meeting - they are to wash with water, so that they won't die. Also when they approach the altar to minister by burning an offering for Hashem," Clearly, however, G-d in human form has been seen previously - by Avraham (B'resheet 18) and Ya'akov (B'resheet 32), without any special ritual, so why now?
[/FONT]

 

[BLang]

The concept of Trinity was hashed out some 1600-1700 years ago by very biblically learned men. They came up with the word Trinity to explain the the truth of God. These were people who were fairly close {within a century or two} to those taught by the apostles. Gen. talks about how man was created in "our" image. The Pharisee's were angered because Jesus makes himself equal to God. Jesus says that, "before Moses was, I Am".
Jesus prayed to the Father.
Jesus did not deny being good when called good. He was trying to get the man to understand why he was good! Because he is God!

 

[Berachiah Ben Yisrael]

The Pharisee's were angered because Jesus makes himself equal to God. Jesus says that, "before Moses was, I Am".

How about that this statement wasn't spoken from the flesh and blood Yahshua but rather by the malach (Ruach Ha Chodesh) within him? What if this malach was the one speaking that was from the beginning with Yah and was the "word" that Yah spoke first that created it into being that created all things because Yah's word cannot return to him unfulfilled? What if this spirit/malach/angel/ruach was the one spirit that Yahshua gave up on the death stake? What if this was the same spirit in which all things that Yahshua did was done from the time of his purification? what if this spirit is one in the same that lighted as a dove and possesed Yahshua?

I like what if's. Ecspecially when they really cannot be disproved.

Oh guess what? Even after Moshe' was, "I AM". After everyone was "I AM". Before everyone was "I AM". All of course but Yah.

Just my opinion.

 

[ayani]

How about that this statement wasn't spoken from the flesh and blood Yahshua but rather by the malach (Ruach Ha Chodesh) within him?

well, it would seem that the people listening to Yeshua at the time were alarmed enough by His statement to attempt to kill Him in flesh and blood.

when i read Jesus saying "i and the Father are One" i don't read Him as being spoken through, but as speaking in a meaningful way about Himself, and His Father.

i've met a number of peple who become very, very interested in the specifics of reconstructing the supposedly Hebraic origins of Christianity. it should be noted that while Jesus spoke a Semitic language, and while His disciples spoke that same language, that the Gospels were first written in Greek- not Hebrew or Aramaic.

the world of Jesus was undeniably bi-lingual and bi-cultural. the One prophesied as being a "light to the Gentiles", through whom this Irish-Jewish woman has come to know the God who gave her life personally, is truly a Man for all peoples. the miracle of Petacost showed that no language group would be excluded from hearing the Gospel, and Jesus' final commandmnt to His disciples in Matthew's Gospel was to "go and make disciples of all nations, baptize them, and teach them all i have taught you".

 

[Elessar]

i've met a number of peple who become very, very interested in the specifics of reconstructing the supposedly Hebraic origins of Christianity. it should be noted that while Jesus spoke a Semitic language, and while His disciples spoke that same language, that the Gospels were first written in Greek- not Hebrew or Aramaic.

Actually, there is significant evidence that Mattityahu (Matthew), Markos (Mark), and/or Yochanan (John) were originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic or a similar Semitic language, then translated to Greek and the original manuscripts lost. I know of many people who consider the similarities between Mattiyahu, Markos and Lukah to be due to Lukah acting primarily as a translator of Markos and/or Mattityahu, and drawing in other knowledge and traditions.

 

[ayani]

Actually, there is significant evidence evidence that Mattityahu (Matthew), Markos (Mark), and/or Yochanan (John) were originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic or a similar Semitic language, then translated to Greek and the original manuscripts lost.

that is my point exactly. the emphasis on Hebraic / Semitic language / culture / religious practices becomes so great, that one is left with a religious culture that excludes the "other" within its own (hypothetical) body.

one may be left with members of a religious group more comfortable in a mosque or a synagogue than a church, more comfortable shredding the trinity to bits with intellectual Muslims than standing by the unique person of Christ with fellow believers in Him. i've met such people, and i've been such people, on both sides of the fence. i can tell you that it was a place of great pride, but not of grace, or of final rest.

 

[Berachiah Ben Yisrael]

well, it would seem that the people listening to Yeshua at the time were alarmed enough by His statement to attempt to kill Him in flesh and blood.

Well duh. I mean just think about it. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that. Yahshua, a flesh and blood man with a malach of Yah working inside of him doing most if not all of the talking and all of the miracles, speaks to a crowd of Hebrew Yisraelites that are so influenced by the Sadducees and the Pharisees and their own take of the Torah through their traditions hearing a mere mortal man just like themselves say that he and the father are one must have flipped out to say the least.

when i read Jesus saying "i and the Father are One" i don't read Him as being spoken through, but as speaking in a meaningful way about Himself, and His Father.

Hey, and you know, you wouldn’t be alone. But I tend to look deeper into what things mean and how they truly are before just simply believing what is just on the surface of what I read first hand. But again, there are plenty out there that don’t and have that same understanding.

i've met a number of peple who become very, very interested in the specifics of reconstructing the supposedly Hebraic origins of Christianity. it should be noted that while Jesus spoke a Semitic language, and while His disciples spoke that same language, that the Gospels were first written in Greek- not Hebrew or Aramaic.

And that statement hasn’t been proven as fact. There is still a very heated debate among scholars as to whether they were first written in Hebrew. But hey, you could do worse and believe everything you hear and read on the internet as well. I have something of interest pertaining to this toward the end of this reply.

the world of Jesus was undeniably bi-lingual and bi-cultural. the One prophesied as being a "light to the Gentiles", through whom this Irish-Jewish woman has come to know the God who gave her life personally, is truly a Man for all peoples. the miracle of Petacost showed that no language group would be excluded from hearing the Gospel, and Jesus' final commandmnt to His disciples in Matthew's Gospel was to "go and make disciples of all nations, baptize them, and teach them all i have taught you".

And I agree. Yahshua did say this and by no doubt it would have been done in those different languages but I seriously doubt that even then they would translate the names of persons or places. Just like if your real name was “ayani” if in English it meant “Beth” just for the sake of argument and I saw you and called you Beth you wouldn’t even know if I was speaking to you or not. I bet that in your entire life no one, including your own mother, has ever called you Beth. I know without a doubt that Yahshua’s mother Miriam never ever called her son jesus and I think it a safe bet that no one did to his face. In any case there are proofs out there that Hebrews wasn’t to good in reading and writing Greek. Case in point is that of Yosef Ben Matityah, or as most know him today, Titus Flavius Josephus. He wrote in one of his great works called “Antiquities of the Jews”………….

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Bold][FONT=TimesNewRoman,Bold]“[/FONT][/FONT]I have also taken a great deal of pains to obtain the learning of the Greeks, and understand the elements of the Greek language; although I have so accustomed myself to speak our own tongue, that I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient exactness. For our nation does not encourage those that learn the
language of many nations. On this account, as there have been many who have done their endeavors, with great patience, to obtain this Greek learning, there have yet hardly been two or three that have succeeded herein, who were immediately rewarded for their pains.[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Bold][FONT=TimesNewRoman,Bold]” [/FONT][/FONT]– Antiquities XX, XI 2.

There are others that have wrote to this and some have even made mention that the so called gospels were first penned in Hebrew. Some have even admitted that the Greek losses the same meaning than that of the original Hebrew being that the two languages were so far removed. Also there was the little old command that stated that we were not to even mention the names of pagan gods and it is almost impossible to speak Greek without doing so. In any case, though I am quite sure that you will, as others have, continue in your understanding of things the way you see them.

I’m happy that you have something that you, and others like you, have to believe and hold on to.

You continue in peace.

 

[Berachiah Ben Yisrael]

Actually, there is significant evidence that Mattityahu (Matthew), Markos (Mark), and/or Yochanan (John) were originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic or a similar Semitic language, then translated to Greek and the original manuscripts lost. I know of many people who consider the similarities between Mattiyahu, Markos and Lukah to be due to Lukah acting primarily as a translator of Markos and/or Mattityahu, and drawing in other knowledge and traditions.

One just has to wonder how many of these text may have possibly survived the Romans only to fall to the hands of the crusades to be torn and burned to cover up truth.

 

[Riverwolf]

Jesus did not deny being good when called good. He was trying to get the man to understand why he was good! Because he is God!

Not how I read it at all...

 

[Berachiah Ben Yisrael]

a,

Here is another source that might interest you. Its a PDF download of a very good read on the subject of the NT being written in Greek.

http://www.aramaicpe****ta.com/Was%20the%20New%20Testament%20Really%20Written%20in%20Greek%20-%20Edition%201b.pdf

 

[VEW]

Thanks (Berachial Ben Yisreal) for your input on Consantine and the role he played in establishing the trinity doctrine. From what I have read, you are right on...VEW

 

[VEW]

[Elessar;1396214]I don't expect you to accept my answers, but I'm going to do it anyway.

1.-Why is he called the "firstborn of all creation"? Col. 1:15; Rev. 3:14 By VEW.

1. First, I don't accept Rav Sha'ul's writings as binding, and even if I did, it says - "He is the visible image of the invisible G-d. He is supreme over all creation," - Colosim 1:15. Nothing about firstborn. Hitgalut 3:14 has a similar formulation, ""[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]To the angel of the Messianic Community in Laodicea, write: 'Here is the message from the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the Ruler of G-d's creation." Neither one uses "firstborn" and thus this is a translation issue, not a theological one.[/FONT]

Elessor, I looked up Col. 1:15 in several different translations of the Bible.

King James...Col.1:15 :Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature."

Today’s Engilish Version.. Col. 1:15. "Christ is the visible likeness of the invisible God. He is the firstborn Son, superior to all created things.

The International Version. Col. 1:15. "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

Phillips Modern English. Col. 1:15. Christ is the visible expression of the invisible God. He was born before creation began., for it was through him that everything was made, whetherheavenly or earthly, seen or unseen."
Revised Standard Version. Col. 1:15 "Hi si the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation."

Jerusalem Bible (Catholic) Col. 1:15 "Hi is the image of the unseen God and the first-born of all creation."

Interlinear Translation from Greek to English (word for word) "who is image of the God the invisible, firstborn of all creation."

The Greek word for first-born is . ( prot’otokos) This same Greek word is used regarding Jesus as Mary’s first-born. Luke 2: 41-52. So what did the apostle mean by calling Jesus the first-born of all creation?

Here we find that the Greek words for both "first-born" (protótokos) and "beginning" (arkhé) describe Jesus as the first one of a group of class, "the body, the church," and therefore he has preeminence in this respect. He also has preeminence in being the first one resurrected to endless life from among all the human dead.—1 Cor. 15:22, 23.

The same Greek words occur in the Greek Septuagint translation at Genesis 49:3: "Ruben, thou art my first-born [protótokos], thou my strength, and the first [arkhé, "beginning"] of my children." (Compare Deuteronomy 21:17, Septuagint.) From such Biblical statements it is reasonable to conclude that the Son of God is the firstborn of all creation in the sense of being the first of God’s creatures. In fact, Jesus refers to himself as "the beginning [arkhé] of God’s creation." (Rev. 3:14, CB)

Also, the "birthright" that naturally belonged to the father’s firstborn son, in both Hebrew and Greek terms for (bekhoqrah́; proqtoqtókiqa) come from roots having the basic idea of "firstborn."

Therefore, there is not good reason to conclude that Col. 1:15 was not referring to Jesus as God’s first creation....

I will have to look at the other points that you made and reply to them seperately, at another time.....VEW

 

[Elessar]

[Elessar;1396214]I don't expect you to accept my answers, but I'm going to do it anyway.

1.-Why is he called the "firstborn of all creation"? Col. 1:15; Rev. 3:14 By VEW.

1. First, I don't accept Rav Sha'ul's writings as binding, and even if I did, it says - "He is the visible image of the invisible G-d. He is supreme over all creation," - Colosim 1:15. Nothing about firstborn. Hitgalut 3:14 has a similar formulation, ""[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]To the angel of the Messianic Community in Laodicea, write: 'Here is the message from the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the Ruler of G-d's creation." Neither one uses "firstborn" and thus this is a translation issue, not a theological one.[/FONT]

Elessor, I looked up Col. 1:15 in several different translations of the Bible.

King James...Col.1:15 :Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature."

Today’s Engilish Version.. Col. 1:15. "Christ is the visible likeness of the invisible God. He is the firstborn Son, superior to all created things.

The International Version. Col. 1:15. "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

Phillips Modern English. Col. 1:15. Christ is the visible expression of the invisible God. He was born before creation began., for it was through him that everything was made, whetherheavenly or earthly, seen or unseen."
Revised Standard Version. Col. 1:15 "Hi si the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation."

Jerusalem Bible (Catholic) Col. 1:15 "Hi is the image of the unseen God and the first-born of all creation."

Interlinear Translation from Greek to English (word for word) "who is image of the God the invisible, firstborn of all creation."

The Greek word for first-born is . ( prot’otokos) This same Greek word is used regarding Jesus as Mary’s first-born. Luke 2: 41-52. So what did the apostle mean by calling Jesus the first-born of all creation?

Here we find that the Greek words for both "first-born" (protótokos) and "beginning" (arkhé) describe Jesus as the first one of a group of class, "the body, the church," and therefore he has preeminence in this respect. He also has preeminence in being the first one resurrected to endless life from among all the human dead.—1 Cor. 15:22, 23.

The same Greek words occur in the Greek Septuagint translation at Genesis 49:3: "Ruben, thou art my first-born [protótokos], thou my strength, and the first [arkhé, "beginning"] of my children." (Compare Deuteronomy 21:17, Septuagint.) From such Biblical statements it is reasonable to conclude that the Son of God is the firstborn of all creation in the sense of being the first of God’s creatures. In fact, Jesus refers to himself as "the beginning [arkhé] of God’s creation." (Rev. 3:14, CB)

Also, the "birthright" that naturally belonged to the father’s firstborn son, in both Hebrew and Greek terms for (bekhoqrah́; proqtoqtókiqa) come from roots having the basic idea of "firstborn."

Therefore, there is not good reason to conclude that Col. 1:15 was not referring to Jesus as God’s first creation....

I will have to look at the other points that you made and reply to them seperately, at another time.....VEW

The fact that there is a question means that you cannot use it to establish anything absolutely.

 

[Berachiah Ben Yisrael]

Thanks (Berachial Ben Yisreal) for your input on Consantine and the role he played in establishing the trinity doctrine. From what I have read, you are right on...VEW

Thank you but please may all praise and glory go to the one who has earned it. Yah my Elohim. For without him I am nothing.