There you go again. Jesus cannot convey the idea of pre-existing when he says "before Abraham was, I am." Instead, Jesus has to use the word "incarnation" instead of the words he chose. Also, Jesus would have been obstructed from living until the cross if he had stated his pre-existence more clearly."
All Claims of The Son's Deity
- Thread starter Johann
- Start date
You fabricate ideas here. It is not likely that Jesus was saying "I baptize you in the name of Jesus." Schoenheit advocates are becoming more desperate.
Runningman
Active Member
Jesus isn't the I AM according to Exodus 3:14,15 and Acts 3:13. Jesus isn't the God of Abraham according to the Bible. Someone who isn't the God of Abraham being the I AM and pre-existing Abraham is not supported by Scripture. That's one of the great many lies your leaders have taught you. I am sure they would be proud you're perpetuating their half baked theology.
Runningman
Active Member
There is no evidence they were baptizing in the name of the "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." The Bible doesn't support your organization's version of baptism. And I like Schoenheit because he's a great Biblical theologian. Unfortunately, your church was founded by a raging anti-Semite named Martin Luther. Maybe people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
101G
Active Member
Victoria
Active Member
Agreed, only God Himself can be tempted, & NOT sin. Only God can live a sinless, holy, perfect life. Only God can give, keep, the Ten Commandments, & the Mosaic law, perfectly. Worshiping anyone other than God alone is idolatry. Jewish monotheism strictly reserved worship for God alone, which explains the anger at Jesus' claim.
"Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;" Exodus 20:3-5
If Jesus isn't God, why didn't He rebuke Thomas? John 20:28
If Jesus isn't God, then how could He possibly forgive sins? Mark 2:1-12
If Jesus isn't God, why did people bow down before Him in worship? Matthew 2:11; Mark 5:6; John 9:38
Only God alone can be the saviour of humanity (i.e. Isaiah 43:3; Isaiah 45:21). That's why 1 John 4:3 is extremely important b/c Satan wants you to believe otherwise to keep you lost. Remember, "Yea, hath God said"...
I AM THAT I AM
(Exodus 3:13-14)
I am the bread of life (John 6:35)
I am the light of the world (John 8:12)
I am the door of the sheep (John 10:7)
I am the good shepherd (John 10:11)
I am the resurrection, and the life (John 11:25)
I am the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6)
I am the true vine (John 15:1)
Before Abraham was, I am (John 8:58)
"I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins." John 8:24
So again, the word repent doesn't mean to "stop/turn" from sin. Repent means a change of mind/heart.
Victoria
Active Member
The ESV has way too many errors in it to be trusted.
The biggest red flag of all is the omittion of only begotten.
Examples:
John 1:14; 18; 3:16; 18; Hebrews 11:17; 1 John 4:9
Next, the ESV makes Joseph the father of Jesus:
Luke 2:33; 43 (one says father, the other says parents)
This is an attack on Jesus' incarnate birth. Jesus was not born from Joseph's seed.
There's only one first, & last. God alone. Jesus was God in human form so that He could redeem those who believe.
To say God is also called the first, & the last, but never died... you've got two gods here. That's polytheism.
I don't use any Y names, I just call Him Father God, or Abba.
The book of John describes Jesus Christ as God in human form. John 1:1; 14
We do know for a fact that king David killed Goliath. According to the ESV, it was Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim. If something that noticable of an error exists in the ESV, then how could we therefore trust the interpretation of who Jesus Christ is in the ESV?
Victoria
Active Member
God can defend Himself, Mike. If you're not using scripture to help someone see their error(s), then perhaps engaging in spiritual warfare isn't something you're qualified to do. 2 Timothy 3:16; Hebrews 4:12
Victoria
Active Member
Those two verses are something I definitely needed hearing.
Something I'm still working on. Thanks for the rebuke
From here, I need to just leave it in God's hands.
Last edited:
Correct, worshiping anyone other than God AS God is idolatry.
God cannot be tempted . . . Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. [James 1:14]
For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. [Hebrews 4:15] It seems that Jesus was able to live a sinless, holy, perfect life by always choosing to submit his will to the will of his Father's.
Amen.
Thomas clearly saw both the Lord Jesus, and the God who raised Jesus from the dead and he stated that fact.
And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me." [Matt. 28:18]
. . . "But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” [Mark 2:10]
proskyneo - translated worship - to bow down, prostrate oneself, or show deep reverence and submission to someone, often through actions like kneeling or kissing the hand of a superior; signifying both a physical act of bowing and an internal attitude of homage. They bowed before him giving homage, respect due a superior.
that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. [John 5:23]
There are plenty of men that God appointed as saviors throughout the OT yet there is only one savior that gives eternal life and that life is in His Son.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [John 3:16]
For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. [John 5:26]
but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. [John 20:31]
And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. [1 John 5:11]
Post #2092:
Last edited:
Victoria
Active Member
Victoria was just using a little banter, 101G.
Even Paul used banter at times
the problem is that they know various passages but put a unitarian spin on them. I point out the flaws in that until they can make an argument sufficient to deny the divinity of Christ. They are devoted Schoenheits.
My favorite was the KJV but I find the ESV easier to read. I know that Jesus was the only begotten Son - most people do.
Luke 2:33,43 And his father and his mother marveled at what was said about him. . . . And when the feast was ended, as they were returning, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem. His parents did not know it
I really don't see how it is an attack on Jesus' birth - Jesus was the offspring (seed) of the woman. [Gen. 3:15]
God is an immortal being. An immortal being cannot die. Jesus Christ was a mortal being therefore capable of dying. Therefore, Rev. 2:8 is about Jesus “And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write: ‘The words of the first and the last, who died and came to life." That's ironic - I have 'two gods'?
John is the only gospel that has a purpose statement and that is but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. [John 20:31]
If one studies the scripture they would read about David killing Goliath: And there came out from the camp of the Philistines a champion named Goliath of Gath, whose height was six cubits and a span. . . . And David put his hand in his bag and took out a stone and slung it and struck the Philistine on his forehead. The stone sank into his forehead, and he fell on his face to the ground. So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and struck the Philistine and killed him. [1 Sam. 17:4,49,50] And from 2 Samuel 21:19: And there was again war with the Philistines at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim, the Bethlehemite, struck down Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver's beam. . . . It does look like this is now saying that Elhanan struck down Goliath . . . .but then we find in 1 Chronicles 20:5 the solution to the so-called problem:
And there was again war with the Philistines, and Elhanan the son of Jair struck down Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.
I guess there is a first time for everything - it's the first time I have had my choice of the ESV attacked!
Victoria
Active Member
It's not so much about a particular version, it's about God's Word in general. There are two sets of manuscripts that has created a lot of confusion, unfortunately.
Some of us may know that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God, which confirms His deity, but what about those who hold modern translations that omitt this truth? We can see this evidenced in this thread. They say 1 John 5:7 is an error, as one example.
Israel, 'nor the early Christians of Antioch had a translation preference. Paul even warned of those forging his epistles. Scripture was under attack back then, so why would it not continue to be since? Hidden motives, Satan is crafty.
The Gnostics, Philosophists, & Spiritists from Alexandria, Egypt interpretted the scriptures differently than Christians in Antioch. Paul warns us of philosophy, & vain deceit in Colossians 2:8-9. The Godhead was under attack. Witchcraft was corrupting Peter's ministry in Acts 8:18-20, Simon wanting to purchase the power of the Holy Ghost from Peter. Again, in 2 Peter 1:20-21, there were Gnostics figuratively interpretating prophecy. Then there was Hymenaeus in 2 Timothy 2:17-18, stating the resurrection had past already.
Last edited:
Victoria
Active Member
I'm not saying for certain, but could it be perhaps b/c Westcott & Hort had a Unitarian on that committee that I posted about not long ago? Men of God forbade it, but they didn't take heed.
You did not addressed the statement below;
Do you believe what Jesus said in John 5:37? That neither have heard the voice of the Father anytime?
Then whose voice was that on Exodus 3:14?
I believe, Jesus Himself as what He said in John 8:58.
Joh 5:37 “And the Father who sent Me, He has testified about Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.
Yes, as Jesus emptied Himself the form of God and take the form of a servant in the likeness of men and obedient to the Father even death on the cross, a demonstration of Jesus's voluntary submission to the Father's will and a reflection of His human limitations during His earthly ministry. While Jesus is fully God, He was in the human form, and this human aspect did not include the omniscience of the Father regarding the timing of His return. And as Jesus said in Acts 1:7 that there are certain things that it is not for the followers to know times and season that the Father had fixed by His own authority.
Act 1:7 But He said to them, “It is not for you to know periods of time or appointed times which the Father has set by His own authority;
Are you suggesting that unitarian would have controlled access to the Greek manuscripts to as to hide vital information that has never been corrected since Westcott and Hort started this project? I'm not sure how it could be that even hidden motives could have obscured the testimony of the manuscripts found across various centuries.
What seems evident in KJV-only writings is the false testimony or representation about the views and actions of Westcott and Hort. That makes it appear the concern should be about those KJV-only writings.
Victoria
Active Member
Let them be. Just agree to disagree respectfully.
