All Claims of The Son's Deity

Peterlag said:
Psalm 110:1 makes a distinction between the LORD God and the Lord Jesus Christ. The LORD said unto my Lord.

The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Ephesians 1:17 says the Father of glory is the God of our Lord Jesus Christ.

That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:
Click to expand...
Pete as said, you need to KNOW the difference between LORD and Lord. as you posted in Psalms 110:1. LISTEN and LEARN, Psalms 110:1 "A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool."

the "LORD" here all chaptalization is the Hebrew term:
H3068 יְהוָה Yhvah (yeh-vaw') n/p.
יְהוָֹה Yhovah (yeh-ho-vaw')
יְהוֹ Yhow (yeh-ho') [as a prefix]
1. (meaning) the self-Existent or Eternal, the I AM.
2. (person) Yahweh (Yehvah), Jewish national name of God.
3. (anglicized) Jehovah.
4. (as a name prefix) Yeho-.
5. (As expressed in Hebraic Koine Greek) ἐγώ εἰμί, I AM (literally: I myself, I am).
[from H1961]
KJV: Jehovah, the Lord.
Root(s): H1961

Lord: H113 אָדוֹן 'adown (aw-done') n-m.
אָדֹן 'adon (aw-done') [shortened]
1. sovereign (i.e. controller, human or divine).
2. lord.
{also used as a prefix for names}
[from an unused root (meaning to rule)]
KJV: lord, master, owner.

NOTE the Hebrew term strong # H113

now the same "Lord" in verse 1 is the same "Lord" in verse 5, because it is the same "Lord" .... Sit thou at my right hand. let's see it, Psalms 110:5 "The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath." and the same "Lord" in verse #1 is here in verses 5 at the LORD'S Right. now the "Lord" here in definition at verse #5.
Lord, H136 אֲדֹנָי 'Adonay (ad-o-noy') n-m.
1. (meaning) Lord (used as a proper name of God only).
2. (person) Adonai, The Lord God of Israel (which is actually “Yahweh God of Israel” - see Exodus 5:1 and 120 other occurrences).
[am emphatic form of H113]
KJV: (my) Lord.
Root(s): H113

see it now? the emphatic form of H113 yes, the same person in verse 1. but why not say this in verse 1? because now with ALL POWER in his new BODY.... Flesh and Bone, is the "LORD" in flesh, hence ........... "My", "My", because now..... the LORD is seen in flesh. Oh this is too easy.

101G.
 
Aeliana said:
Are they really that difficult? Well yes and no. Largely it depends on the question it's self as it maybe a trick question designed to set a trap.

Hope this helps:giggle:
Click to expand...
Matthew 5:37 "But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil."

an answer of YES or NO can be discussed father for the understanding of a yes or no, and as for a trap, it only if the recipient of the demand is unsure of their answer. if one knows that the answer is true or false, a yes or no will affirm it or not.

for if the giver of the question that requires a yes or no is sure of the answer, a yes affirms the TRUTH, or else reprove the ERROR.

hence the reason for the discussion .... if a yes or no neither resolve or affirm the truth.

101G.
 
Peterlag said:
I told him a gazillion times there's no per-existence and he keeps saying I'm not addressing it.
Click to expand...
Saying no does not address the passage or answer the question asked

Your no is simply bald denial.

Philippians 2:5–8 (KJV 1900) — 5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

When was this mind in Christ?

When did he exist in the form of God?

What is the time relationship between the highlighted blue and red sentences?
 

It seems difficult for people to understand that John 1:1...​

is introducing the Gospel of John, and not the Book of Genesis. The topic of John is God (the Father, the only God) at work in the ministry of the man Jesus of Nazareth, not the creation of rocks, trees and stars.

“Everything came to be through it.” The logos is an “it” not a “him.” (John 1:3)

Translators have deliberately chosen to use “him” because they wanted to emphasize that the Word was the male person we know as Jesus. This was a theological choice, not a linguistic one.

Translators, on the other hand, retained the natural feminine gender of the Hebrew word chokmah (חָכְמָה) “wisdom” in the book of Proverbs.

“Do not forsake wisdom, and she will protect you; love her, and she will watch over you.” (Proverbs 4:6)
Was the Wisdom a distinct divine person?
So, for the same reason that Wisdom is not literally a person, Word is not literally a person.

Both the description in Proverbs and in John 1:1-3 are metaphorical.
Jesus is the personification of the Word because He speaks the words of God. To listen to Jesus equals listening to the Word of God.
 
Peterlag said:

It seems difficult for people to understand that John 1:1...​

is introducing the Gospel of John, and not the Book of Genesis. The topic of John is God (the Father, the only God) at work in the ministry of the man Jesus of Nazareth, not the creation of rocks, trees and stars.

“Everything came to be through it.” The logos is an “it” not a “him.” (John 1:3)

Translators have deliberately chosen to use “him” because they wanted to emphasize that the Word was the male person we know as Jesus. This was a theological choice, not a linguistic one.

Translators, on the other hand, retained the natural feminine gender of the Hebrew word chokmah (חָכְמָה) “wisdom” in the book of Proverbs.

“Do not forsake wisdom, and she will protect you; love her, and she will watch over you.” (Proverbs 4:6)
Was the Wisdom a distinct divine person?
So, for the same reason that Wisdom is not literally a person, Word is not literally a person.

Both the description in Proverbs and in John 1:1-3 are metaphorical.
Jesus is the personification of the Word because He speaks the words of God. To listen to Jesus equals listening to the Word of God.
Click to expand...
translators do a great job even where they do not understand a passage. Too bad that you do not explain John 1 in a fashion that is coherent but you give it some obscure alternative meaning. Yes it is metaphorical but that does not mean you can detach it from a metaphor for what Jesus did incarnate as he was. In becoming incarnate, he was both of human form and of divine nature. He then becomes part of creation -- a divine partaker within creation. At the same time, he makes humans into a new creation of the earthly combined with God's Spirit in them, thus partaking of divine nature but only by God sharing divinity of himself. Hopefully this is not an improper explanation of what Christ has done for Christians. But if you deny Christ as God incarnate, you deny all that follows that in benefits for Christians.
 
"Greater love has no one, that one lay down his life for his friends." John 15:13

Wouldn't it be great if God could lay down His life for us?

Oh, wait a minute. He DID!

"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength." Mark 12:30


"He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me." Mark 10:37
"If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple." Luke 14:26

So it appears that we are to love Jesus to the same degree that we love God!

Either that is idolatry or Jesus IS God? Which is it?
 
Last edited:
Peterlag said:
I'm not running and there is no pre-existence in the Bible. It's only in your mind.
Click to expand...
John 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

John 3:13 No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.
 
"No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other ..."
Matthew 6: 24

Ephesians 6:9 "... knowing that both their Master and yours is in heaven, ... "

Colossians 4:1 " ... knowing that you too have a Master in heaven."

Jude 4 " ... ungodly persons who ... deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ."

So if we can ONLY serve ONE Master, and yet God is called our Master and Jesus is called our ONLY Master, how is this possible?
This is similar to God is called our Lord, and Jesus is also called our Lord, and yet Eph. 4:5 says there is only ONE LORD.

So either Jesus IS BOTH our MASTER and our LORD - AND God is also BOTH our MASTER and our LORD - or we again have idolatry or Jesus IS God. Which is it?
 
Peterlag said: " ... there is no pre-existence in the Bible. It's only in your mind."

No, actually it's in the minds of both Jesus and John the Baptist. "for He existed before me." John 1:30

What's in Peterlag's mind is a denial of the words of scripture
 
Peterlag said:
My habit is to respond to what is real. You ask questions concerning what is not real.
Click to expand...
Copout

You are running from the evidence the passage impart concerning his existence in the form of God before becoming man that is taking on flesh

Philippians 2:5–8 (NASB95) — 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
 
ChatGPT believes in one God. Asked if Jesus is that God:

Drumroll please…..


Here it is


Yes.

Based on all available historical evidence, philosophical reasoning, and the unique claims and resurrection of Jesus—Jesus is the one true Creator God.
Click to expand...

How about that!


I did not expect that from ChatGPT, but as these things are getting smarter every single minute, day after day, it seems as though these answers are getting more and more clear too.


Pretty incredible, huh?


Even ChatGPT knows how to read the evidence, but Peterlag and others can't seem to get it.
 
TomL said:
Copout

You are running from the evidence the passage impart concerning his existence in the form of God before becoming man that is taking on flesh

Philippians 2:5–8 (NASB95) — 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
Click to expand...
Still not running no matter how many times you say I am. Here's my response one again...

Philippians 2:6 is not a teaching on the trinity or that we should confess or believe that Jesus is God. After saying that Christ was in the form of God, Philippians 2:6 goes on to say that Christ “considered being equal with God not something to be grasped at.” If Jesus were God, then it would make no sense at all to say that he did not “grasp” at equality with God because no one grasps at equality with himself. Some Trinitarians say, “Well, he was not grasping for equality with the Father.” That is not what the verse says. It says Christ did not grasp at equality with God, which makes the verse nonsense if he were God.

The Greek word morphē does not refer to the essential nature of Christ in that context. If the point of the verse is to say that Jesus is God, then why not just say that? If Jesus is God, say that, don’t say he has the “essential nature of God.” Of course God has the “essential nature” of God, so why would anyone make that point? This verse does not say “Jesus being God” but rather “being in the form of God.” Paul is reminding the Philippians that Jesus represented the Father in every possible way.

From the Septuagint and their other writings, the Jews were familiar with morphē referring to the outward appearance, including the form of men and idols. To the Greeks, it also referred to the outward appearance, including the changing outward appearance of their gods and the form of statues. The only other New Testament use of morphē outside Philippians is in Mark, and there it refers to the outward appearance. Also, the words related to morphē clearly refer to an outward manifestation or appearance. The word morphē refers to an outward appearance or manifestation. Jesus Christ was in the outward appearance of God, so much so that he said, “He who has seen me has seen the Father.” Christ always did the Father’s will, and perfectly represented his Father in every way.
 
ProDeo said:
John 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

John 3:13 No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.
Click to expand...
John 17:5 has been used to prove that Jesus is God because of the phrase, “that I had with you before the world was.” There is no question that Jesus “existed” before the world began. But did he exist literally as a person or in God’s foreknowledge, “in the mind of God”? Both Christ and those called to be in the Body of Christ, the Church, existed in God’s foreknowledge before being alive. Christ was part of the intention of God from the beginning, and he became flesh only when he was conceived. It is Trinitarian bias that causes people to read an actual physical existence into this verse rather than a figurative existence in the mind of God. When 2 Timothy says that each Christian was given grace “before the ages began” (2 Timothy 1:9), no one tries to prove that we were actually alive with God back then. Everyone acknowledges that we were “in the mind of God,” i.e., in God’s foreknowledge. The same is true of Jesus Christ. His glory was “with the Father” before the world began, and in John 17:5 he prayed that it will come into manifestation.
 
Peterlag said:
John 17:5 has been used to prove that Jesus is God because of the phrase, “that I had with you before the world was.” There is no question that Jesus “existed” before the world began. But did he exist literally as a person or in God’s foreknowledge, “in the mind of God”? Both Christ and those called to be in the Body of Christ, the Church, existed in God’s foreknowledge before being alive. Christ was part of the intention of God from the beginning, and he became flesh only when he was conceived. It is Trinitarian bias that causes people to read an actual physical existence into this verse rather than a figurative existence in the mind of God. When 2 Timothy says that each Christian was given grace “before the ages began” (2 Timothy 1:9), no one tries to prove that we were actually alive with God back then. Everyone acknowledges that we were “in the mind of God,” i.e., in God’s foreknowledge. The same is true of Jesus Christ. His glory was “with the Father” before the world began, and in John 17:5 he prayed that it will come into manifestation.
Click to expand...
The same is NOT true of Jesus Christ.

2 Timothy 1:9 - who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began,

Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.
Col 1:16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.

God the Son together with the Father created.

There is no conflict with 1 Tim 1:9

-------------

Isa 41:4 Who has performed and done this, calling the generations from the beginning? I, the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he.
Isa 44:6 Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: “I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.
Isa 48:12 “Listen to me, O Jacob, and Israel, whom I called! I am he; I am the first, and I am the last.

Compare with Jesus in Revelation -

Rev 1:17 When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand on me, saying, “Fear not, I am the first and the last,
Rev 2:8 “And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write: ‘The words of the first and the last, who died and came to life.
Rev 22:13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.”

Jesus claiming equality with Yahweh, or else you have to throw out Revelation from your Bible.

You have a lot to deny.

Jesus existed only in the mind of God ??????????

Blasphemy.
 
Peterlag said:
Still not running no matter how many times you say I am. Here's my response one again...

Philippians 2:6 is not a teaching on the trinity or that we should confess or believe that Jesus is God. After saying that Christ was in the form of God, Philippians 2:6 goes on to say that Christ “considered being equal with God not something to be grasped at.” If Jesus were God, then it would make no sense at all to say that he did not “grasp” at equality with God because no one grasps at equality with himself. Some Trinitarians say, “Well, he was not grasping for equality with the Father.” That is not what the verse says. It says Christ did not grasp at equality with God, which makes the verse nonsense if he were God.

The Greek word morphē does not refer to the essential nature of Christ in that context. If the point of the verse is to say that Jesus is God, then why not just say that? If Jesus is God, say that, don’t say he has the “essential nature of God.” Of course God has the “essential nature” of God, so why would anyone make that point? This verse does not say “Jesus being God” but rather “being in the form of God.” Paul is reminding the Philippians that Jesus represented the Father in every possible way.

From the Septuagint and their other writings, the Jews were familiar with morphē referring to the outward appearance, including the form of men and idols. To the Greeks, it also referred to the outward appearance, including the changing outward appearance of their gods and the form of statues. The only other New Testament use of morphē outside Philippians is in Mark, and there it refers to the outward appearance. Also, the words related to morphē clearly refer to an outward manifestation or appearance. The word morphē refers to an outward appearance or manifestation. Jesus Christ was in the outward appearance of God, so much so that he said, “He who has seen me has seen the Father.” Christ always did the Father’s will, and perfectly represented his Father in every way.
Click to expand...
Again the only issue raised here is personal pre-existence and you are not dealing with it

Philippians 2:5–8 (NASB95) — 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.


Christ existed in the form of God before becoming flesh and he had an attitude and could think

of which you say not a thing

I call that running
 
Peterlag said:
John 17:5 has been used to prove that Jesus is God because of the phrase, “that I had with you before the world was.” There is no question that Jesus “existed” before the world began. But did he exist literally as a person or in God’s foreknowledge, “in the mind of God”? Both Christ and those called to be in the Body of Christ, the Church, existed in God’s foreknowledge before being alive. Christ was part of the intention of God from the beginning, and he became flesh only when he was conceived. It is Trinitarian bias that causes people to read an actual physical existence into this verse rather than a figurative existence in the mind of God. When 2 Timothy says that each Christian was given grace “before the ages began” (2 Timothy 1:9), no one tries to prove that we were actually alive with God back then. Everyone acknowledges that we were “in the mind of God,” i.e., in God’s foreknowledge. The same is true of Jesus Christ. His glory was “with the Father” before the world began, and in John 17:5 he prayed that it will come into manifestation.
Click to expand...
Well lets see

Philippians 2:5–7 (LEB) — 5 Think this in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, existing in the form of God, did not consider being equal with God something to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself by taking the form of a slave, by becoming in the likeness of people. And being found in appearance like a man,

You confess he pre-existed

The scripture tells us it was in the form of God and that he was able to think and consider

that is not about God's foreknowledge
 
TomL said:
Well lets see

Philippians 2:5–7 (LEB) — 5 Think this in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, existing in the form of God, did not consider being equal with God something to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself by taking the form of a slave, by becoming in the likeness of people. And being found in appearance like a man,

You confess he pre-existed

The scripture tells us it was in the form of God and that he was able to think and consider

that is not about God's foreknowledge
Click to expand...
How is it you write that I confessed he pre-existed when everything I ever wrote says he did not?
 

Similar threads

Johann
Christ The God-Man
Replies
7
Views
159
101G
101G
Neil Spargo
Exposing the secretive world of the Jehovah’s Witnesses
Replies
3
Views
26
101G
101G
Complete
'Sons of God' - because created by God.
2
Replies
22
Views
86
101G
101G
Johann
Jesus: YHWH God Incarnate
Replies
16
Views
250
101G
101G
Peterlag
Thomas... My Lord and my God
81 82 83
Replies
2K
Views
8K
mikesw
M
Back
Top Bottom