All Claims of The Son's Deity

Adam is called a “type” of Jesus Christ...

(Romans 5:14) The word translated as “type” in many English versions is the translation of the Greek word tupos (τύπος) which can be defined as “a type, pattern, model, or example of something else.” Although the KJV translates tuposas “figure” most of the more modern versions say “pattern” (NIV), “prototype” (HCSB), or “type” (ESV, NAB, NASB). Adam was a type, prototype, or pattern of Christ because he was fully human and began without a sin nature—and Jesus was the same: fully human and made without a sin nature. The reason no other human male after Adam could be a “type” of Christ is that we are all born with a sin nature. Adam could not be a “type” of Christ if Jesus was 100% man and 100% God because Adam did not have a “God-nature.”
 
Last edited:
I don't see how I'm off running again since I do not believe Jesus was around until he was born. I think I said that a thousand times a hundred different ways.
Read Phil 2:5-8 and respond to what was asked

You were asked

Did Christ not exist in the form of God and was he not capable of thinking or considering having had a mind before becoming a man?

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.

You have not stated one word regarding this.

As long as you do not address this you are running.
 
The issue you have raised a number of times is centered around Philippines 2:6 and that's what I'm commenting on.
Except you are supposedly responding to what I posted.

And the issue I raised is Phil 2:5-8 shows a pre-existence of Christ/the word before becoming flesh.

You have not dealt with it.
 
Adam is called a “type” of Jesus Christ...

(Romans 5:14) The word translated as “type” in many English versions is the translation of the Greek word tupos (τύπος) which can be defined as “a type, pattern, model, or example of something else.” Although the KJV translates tuposas “figure” most of the more modern versions say “pattern” (NIV), “prototype” (HCSB), or “type” (ESV, NAB, NASB). Adam was a type, prototype, or pattern of Christ because he was fully human and began without a sin nature—and Jesus was the same: fully human and made without a sin nature. The reason no other human male after Adam could be a “type” of Christ is that we are all born with a sin nature. Adam could not be a “type” of Christ if Jesus was 100% man and 100% God because Adam did not have a “God-nature.”
Type does not require alikeness in all ways but can refer to alikeness in a particular way

Figuratively of a person as bearing the form and figure of another, as having a certain resemblance in relations and circumstances (Rom. 5:14)

Spiros Zodhiates, The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament (Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 2000).

γ. in a doctrinal sense, a type i. e. a person or thing prefiguring a future (Messianic) person or thing: in this sense Adam is called τύπος τοῦ μέλλοντος sc. Ἀδάμ, i. e. of Jesus Christ, each of the two having exercised a pre-eminent influence upon the human race (the former destructive, the latter saving), Ro. 5:14.*

Joseph Henry Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Being Grimm’s Wilke's Clavis Novi Testamenti (New York: Harper & Brothers., 1889), 632.
 
sorry you are just expressing your opinion
GINOLJC, to all.
my opinion? lol, lol, lol, it's you who cannot accept what the bible say. you didn't even KNOW who the Lord God was in Isaiah 48:16 nor in Revelation.... lol. LOOK ....... when you can accept God written then we can discuss.
another, not the same.
see what 101G is speaking of ..... you're Ignorant of God word. let 101G show you. the ANOTHER.... the SAME ONE PERSON. listen and Learn, using the Vine dictionary which makes it so simple.
Another, [ 1,,G243 G2087 ,allos heteros ] have a difference in meaning, which despite a tendency to be lost, is to be observed in numerous passages. Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort;" heteros expresses a qualitative difference and denotes "another of a different sort." Christ promised to send "another Comforter" (allos, "another like Himself," not heteros), John 14:16.

see the difference now. a numerical difference example is, First & Last, the Same person in dispensation of time. or Father & Son in dispensation of time, or Root & Offspring in dispensation of time. this is all accomplish in H259 the ECHAD of God.

now ANOTHER that is the SAME.... Listen, Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:" here the LORD is "ONE"
ONE: H259 אֶחָד 'echad (ech-awd') adj.
1. (properly) united, i.e. one.
2. (as an ordinal) first.
[a numeral from H258]
KJV: a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any(-thing), apiece, a certain, (dai-)ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together.
Root(s): H258

see definition #2. (as an ordinal) first. now let's see that FIRST in dispensation of time. Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." see that term BEGINNING in verse 1 here. it is the Hebrew term
H7225 רֵאשִׁית re'shiyth (ray-sheeth') n-f.
1. the first, in place, time, order or rank.
2. (specifically) a firstfruit.
[from the same as H7218]
KJV: beginning, chief(-est), first(-fruits, part, time), principal thing.
Root(s): H7218
Notice definition #1, the first, in place, time, order or rank.

FIRST in TIME, yes the time IN, IN, IN, the beginning, meaning our TIME, for God has no TIME. here God is the First/Father/Root/the CREATOR & MAKER of all things. in TIME to Come, scripture, Galatians 4:4 "But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law," in what? THE FULLNESS OF ..... "TIME", what did the definition of beginning states, FIRST in TIME. Oh this is so easy. in TIME as the ECHAD of himself, THE "FIRST" now in the end times, or the Last days, he God in the ECHAD come as the Son. why? to SAVE & REDEEMED that which he made in the BEGINNING. meaning he is the Last/Son/Offspring. this is just too easy.

see TomL, this is why 101G knows that it was only ONE PERSON who... "MADE ALL THINGS" per Isaiah 44:24 and John 1:3. this is why and How 101G knows that it was ONLY "ONE" PERSON who made MAN in the beginning, per Matthews 19:4, and Mark 10:6.

see KNOWING the ECHAD of God, or the Equal Share of HIMSELF to come in flesh, and NOW resurrected with all power ... all and any bible question for me are answered. so 101G never need a personal opinion, because 101G believe what God have said in his word. this come from being taught by God himself, the Holy Spirit. 1 Corinthians 2:12 "Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God." 1 Corinthians 2:13 "Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual."

if you have the Spirit in you, then let him teach you, until then there is no need for us to discuss anything. no put down, but you and 101G have not the same teacher. again no put down, ok.

101G.
 
Adam is called a “type” of Jesus Christ...

(Romans 5:14) The word translated as “type” in many English versions is the translation of the Greek word tupos (τύπος) which can be defined as “a type, pattern, model, or example of something else.” Although the KJV translates tuposas “figure” most of the more modern versions say “pattern” (NIV), “prototype” (HCSB), or “type” (ESV, NAB, NASB). Adam was a type, prototype, or pattern of Christ because he was fully human and began without a sin nature—and Jesus was the same: fully human and made without a sin nature. The reason no other human male after Adam could be a “type” of Christ is that we are all born with a sin nature. Adam could not be a “type” of Christ if Jesus was 100% man and 100% God because Adam did not have a “God-nature.”
Figure, when used as a NOUN, in respect to "A bodily shape, usually of a person or animal". another word or the synonym for FIGURE, is
shape, form, build, frame, physique, body, proportions, torso, fashion. NOTE, "Body" and "Fashion". this is proven out in Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" Philippians 2:7 "But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:" Philippians 2:8 "And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."

so, this FIGURE, (Romans 5:14), and this Fashion, ( Philippians 2:8) is God outward Manifestation in flesh bone and blood.

101G.
 
It was well-known that for prophets and kings to be successful they had to be empowered by God’s spirit, His gift of holy spirit. That was why God put his spirit upon the elders that were to rule Israel (Numbers 11:17-29), why after David sinned he prayed that God would not take His holy spirit away (Psalms 51:11), and why Elisha asked for a double portion of God’s spirit to be upon him (2 Kings 2:9), and indeed, the Bible records that Elisha did almost twice as many miracles as Elijah. Cyrus, in typical fashion of one who does not take credit not due him, acknowledges here in Isaiah 48:16 that God sent him, but will not take full credit for his success but says that God also gave His spirit to Cyrus, which was the source of much of his success.
so is NOT "God" a, a, a, a Spirit? per John 4:24a...... now in the NT is not God Spirit in .... "ALL" of us? again, 101G question, is the Spirit in Isaiah 48:16 three persons or ONE PERSON. your answer please.

101G.
 
so is NOT "God" a, a, a, a Spirit? per John 4:24a...... now in the NT is not God Spirit in .... "ALL" of us? again, 101G question, is the Spirit in Isaiah 48:16 three persons or ONE PERSON. your answer please.

101G.
It seems you do not know the difference between God who is Spirit and His gift of the spirit that He put on people in the Old Testament which is very similar to the spirit He has born within the Christian.
 
The word Trinity means “tri-unity. Behind the concept of unity is the biblical affirmation of monotheism.
why behind, just say monotheism up front. but 101G understand your position.
The hard part for some is that He is one in three, the Trinitarian character of God.
if he is one IN, IN, IN, three then he is not monotheistic. for Monotheism: is the Belief in a single, all-powerful deity. not three IN One.

please understand 101G is not against you. but your doctrine that you believe in. so...... may 101G ask you trinity question. Genesis 1:26 "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." is the US and the OUR here a single PERSON? but before you answer, listen to the very next verse, Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

question, how did God go from a US and a OUR to a "HE" and a "HIS" in one verse? but again before you answer, listen to what the Lord Jesus said about Genesis 1:26 and 27. Matthew 19:3 "The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?" Matthew 19:4 "And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,"

notice the Lord Jesus said God is a HE, "Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,"

so, can you tell 101G why God .... the Lord Jesus said, "GOD" is a HE? remember 101G is not against you ok.

101G.
 
Figure, when used as a NOUN, in respect to "A bodily shape, usually of a person or animal". another word or the synonym for FIGURE, is
shape, form, build, frame, physique, body, proportions, torso, fashion. NOTE, "Body" and "Fashion". this is proven out in Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" Philippians 2:7 "But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:" Philippians 2:8 "And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."

so, this FIGURE, (Romans 5:14), and this Fashion, ( Philippians 2:8) is God outward Manifestation in flesh bone and blood.

101G.
Adam too?
 

Data On The Trinity


"The doctrine of the Trinity is not a biblical doctrine... it's the product of theological reflection."
- The Christian Doctrine of God Trinitarian. E. Brunner, 1949, p. 236.

“Trinity is not a biblical doctrine"
- New Bible Dictionary, J. Douglas, F. Bruce, 1982, p. 1298.

“Scholars generally agree that there is no doctrine of the Trinity as such in either the Old or the New Testament”
- The Harper Collins Encyclopedia of Catholicism, 1995, p. 564.

“The Bible has no statements or speculations concerning a trinitary deity."
- Encyclopedia Britannica, volume 12, p. 383, 1979.

“Three coequal partners in the Godhead cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the Bible. It's important to avoid reading the Trinity into places where it does not appear."
-Oxford Companion To the Bible, Bruce Metzger, M. Coogan, p. 782-3.

“The doctrine of the Trinity is not present in biblical thought... it goes beyond, and even distorts, what the Bible says about God.”
- A Contemporary Interpretation of the Trinity - God in Three Persons: Prof. M. Erickson, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary,p. 12, 20.

“The belief (in a Trinity-God) was reached only in the 4th and 5th centuries AD and hence is not explicitly and formally a biblical belief."
-Dictionary of The Bible, 1995, (trinitarian) J. Mckenzie, p. 899.

“The doctrine of the Trinity was formulated in the post-biblical period."
- Harper’s Bible Dictionary, 1985.

“In the New Testament there is no direct suggestion of a doctrine of the Trinity."
- An Encyclopedia of Religion, V. Ferm (ed.), 1945, p. 344.

“No passage of Scripture discusses the threeness of God."
- The New International Version. Disciples Study Bible, p. 173, note for Mt. 3:16.

“The Bible does not state that there is one God who exists in three persons”
- Basic Theology, Prof. C. Ryrie, p. 89.

“The Bible does not teach the doctrine of the Trinity”
-Christian Doctrine, Prof. S. Guthrie, Columbia Theol. Seminary, 1994,p. 92.

“The doctrine of the Trinity cannot be justified on the basis of Scripture. Indeed it's hard to imagine Jesus speaking in such terms"
- An Outline of Biblical Theology, Prof. M. Burrows, Yale Divinity School, p. 81.

“The doctrine of God as existing in three persons and one substance is not demonstrable by scriptural proofs."
- Hastings Dictionary Of TheBible, 1898.

“There is in the Old Testament no indication of interior distinctions in the God-head. And there is no doctrine of the Trinity in the New Testament”
- The Known Bible and its Defense, Rev. M. Hembre, 1933, p. 25.

The above is from volume one of a two volume paper called...

Sleight Of Mind
by: Steven Blake
 

Data On The Trinity


"The doctrine of the Trinity is not a biblical doctrine... it's the product of theological reflection." - The Christian Doctrine of God Trinitarian. E. Brunner, 1949, p. 236.

“Trinity is not a biblical doctrine" - New Bible Dictionary, J. Douglas, F. Bruce, 1982, p. 1298.

“Scholars generally agree that there is no doctrine of the Trinity as such in either the Old or the New Testament” - The Harper Collins Encyclopedia of Catholicism, 1995, p. 564.

“The Bible has no statements or speculations concerning a trinitary deity." - Encyclopedia Britannica, volume 12, p. 383, 1979.
neither is there any unitarian concept in the bible. so. why try to prove something that is not true?

101G
 
is not Adam in God IMAGE .... that was to come, Roman 5:14...... (smile),

101G
Adam is not God. And neither is Jesus. If he was Adam could not be the same type of Jesus. My friend Richard says you guys play the "Get out of Jail card" whenever you need to make Jesus a man again. You switch back and forth whenever you need to.
 
Back
Top Bottom