Runningman
Active Member
I understand, but you're only begging the question because what you are attempting to describe is an incarnation, but this word is non-existent in Scripture.
So a man is our atoning sacrifice for sins. Correct?
Jesus denied being God
- Thread starter Runningman
- Start date
So a man is our atoning sacrifice for sins. Correct?
The principle is clearly there
John 1:1–14 (NASB 2020) — 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of mankind. 5 And the Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not grasp it. 6 A man came, one sent from God, and his name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. 9 This was the true Light that, coming into the world, enlightens every person. 10 He was in the world, and the world came into being through Him, and yet the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and His own people did not accept Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name, 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of a man, but of God. 14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us; and we saw His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
Where do you see any mention of a mere man?
synergy
Active Member
I have no idea where you got the phrase "Divine Council" from? As I said before, in instances when both God and Jesus (Son) are mentioned as two separate entities (Persons) in the same sentence, as is done in Acts 3:13 (my example) and John 3:16 (your example), then it's perfectly logical to assume the other entity (or Person) is the Father. There is no resort to strawmen on your part.
synergy
Active Member
It's now an established fact that you've realized that it was false for you to say the following, since you continue to not offer any counterargument:
Ex 3:6 set you straight.
Ex 3:6 Moreover He said, “I am the God of your father—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God.
This proves that we are talking about God in Ex 3 whose name is "I Am", the very same name that Jesus used to name himself in John 8:58.
Thus, Jesus is God.
Peterlag
Active Member
Jesus is not God. He is the Messiah. The son of God.
Peterlag
Active Member
They learned it from the Catholics. Much of the Roman Catholic doctrine was assimilated into Protestantism and is still being passed along as Christian groups continue to split off from one another. In a nutshell that is why even the independent church in your neighborhood today most probably believes that there is a trinity.
Peterlag
Active Member
I deal with all of your half verses scattered all over the Bible a thousand times over I have been doing this. And I will do it again for you. What's your verse?
synergy
Active Member
You are so ignorant of history that it totally defies the imagination. You go to the head of the class for the class called Ignorance of History for Cultists and Heretics.
The Orthodox are not protestants and represent the eastern portion of the church of the early century,
Scripture opposes your claim
John 1:1 (NASB 2020) — 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 20:28 (NASB 2020) — 28 Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”
Titus 2:13 (NASB 2020) — 13 looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus,
2 Peter 1:1 (NASB 2020) — 1 Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ:
Peterlag
Active Member
I have had others accuse me of only responding to their verses and then when I do that others accuse me of not posting my own data. I can't win. No matter what I do someone says I'm not responding in the right way. You list John 1:1 and in that verse you think Jesus is the logos and I don't know why.
Jesus Christ is not a lexical definition of logos. The verse does not say "In the beginning was Jesus." The "Word" is not synonymous with Jesus, or even the "Messiah." The word logos in John 1:1 refers to God's creative self-expression... His reason, purpose and plans, especially as they are brought into action. It refers to God's self-expression or communication of Himself. This has come to pass through His creation and especially the heavens. It has come through the spoken word of the prophets and through Scripture. Most notably it has come into being through His Son. The logos is the expression of God and is His communication of Himself just as a "word" is an outward expression of a person's thoughts. This outward expression of God has now occurred through His Son and thus it's perfectly understandable why Jesus is called the "Word." Jesus is an outward expression of God's reason, wisdom, purpose and plan. For the same reason we call revelation "a word from God" and the Bible "the Word of God."
If we understand that the logos is God's expression... His plan, purpose, reason and wisdom. Then it is clear they were with Him "in the beginning." Scripture says God's wisdom was "from the beginning" and it was common in Hebrew writing to personify a concept such as wisdom. The fact that the logos "became" flesh shows it did not exist that way before. There is no pre-existence for Jesus in this verse other than his figurative "existence" as the plan, purpose or wisdom of God for the salvation of man. The same is true with the "word" in writing. It had no literal pre-existence as a "spirit-book" somehow in eternity past, but came into being as God gave the revelation to people and they wrote it down.
Peterlag
Active Member
A study of the history of the Christian Church shows a definite development in the doctrine of the Trinity over the centuries. For example, the early form of the Apostles Creed (believed to date back to shortly after the time of the apostles themselves) does not mention the Trinity or the dual nature of Christ. The Nicene Creed that was written in 325 AD and modified later added the material about Jesus Christ being “eternally begotten” and the "true God” and about the Holy Spirit being “Lord.” But it was the Athanasian Creed that was most likely composed in the latter part of the 4th century or possibly even as early as the 5th century that was the first creed to explicitly state the doctrine of the Trinity.
It seems it would have been clearly stated in the Bible and in the earliest Christian creeds if the doctrine of the Trinity was genuine and central to Christian belief and especially if belief in it was necessary for salvation as many Trinitarians teach. God gave the Scriptures to the Jewish people, and the Jewish religion and worship that comes from that revelation does not contain any reference to or teachings about a triune God. Surely the Jewish people were qualified to read and understand it, but they never saw the doctrine of the Trinity, but rather just the opposite as all throughout their history they fiercely defended the fact that there was only one God.
This is the Apostles creed
I believe in God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth; And in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord: who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried;* the third day he rose from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
Nicene Creed
| We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. |
| And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God,] Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; |
| By whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth]; |
| Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man; |
| He suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven; |
From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.You cannot read this passage and not see John 1:1–32 (NASB 2020) — 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of mankind. 5 And the Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not grasp it. 6 A man came, one sent from God, and his name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. 9 This was the true Light that, coming into the world, enlightens every person. 10 He was in the world, and the world came into being through Him, and yet the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and His own people did not accept Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name, 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of a man, but of God. 14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us; and we saw His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 John testified about Him and called out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who is coming after me has proved to be my superior, because He existed before me.’ ” 16 For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace. 17 For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has seen God at any time; God the only Son, who is in the arms of the Father, He has explained Him. 19 This is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites to him from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?” 20 And he confessed and did not deny; and this is what he confessed: “I am not the Christ.” 21 And so they asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah?” And he said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” And he answered, “No.” 22 Then they said to him, “Who are you? Tell us, so that we may give an answer to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?” 23 He said, “I am THE VOICE OF ONE CALLING OUT IN THE WILDERNESS, ‘MAKE THE WAY OF THE LORD STRAIGHT,’ as Isaiah the prophet said.” 24 And the messengers had been sent from the Pharisees. 25 They asked him, and said to him, “Why then are you baptizing, if you are not the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?” 26 John answered them, saying, “I baptize in water, but among you stands One whom you do not know. 27 It is He who comes after me, of whom I am not worthy even to untie the strap of His sandal.” 28 These things took place in Bethany beyond the Jordan, where John was baptizing people. 29 The next day he saw Jesus coming to him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! 30 This is He in behalf of whom I said, ‘After me is coming a Man who has proved to be my superior, because He existed before me.’ 31 And I did not recognize Him, but so that He would be revealed to Israel, I came baptizing in water.” 32 And John testified, saying, “I have seen the Spirit descending as a dove out of heaven, and He remained upon Him. John is speaking of Jesus and Jesus multiple times claims he had come down from heaven |
MTMattie
Active Member
What baffles me is how it can be that people do not understand In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God... nor, And the Word became flesh (For they refuse to even try to understand in their limited mortal brains.... that In the beginning YHWH had a plan)
BUT these very same people will debate to the death to support an equally ( if you will) unexplainable occurrence of how a little Jewish girl, by the name of Mary... actually became pregnant while still being a virgin.... And continue to believe that this baby, who grew to be a man was strictly a
mortal... no different then you or I.
Another biblical fallacy???? "The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; for that reason also the holy Child will be called the Son of God.
The only other possibility would be that somehow Joseph or even another somehow... well, I best not say it.
If how this baby boy came into existence is true. I happen to believe it to be so...... then both parts are so.
And I have no reason to want it to be otherwise.....
Why would anyone?
MTMattie
Active Member
You had said...
TomL said:
It is a matter of translation and the fact Jesus was not literally begotten by God
Here the term is used in relation to the resurrection
Acts 13:33 (KJV 1900) — 33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.
I merely suggested
"Find a proper explanation for the word begotten and quit assuming you know what is meant when there is nothing written to support what you believe.
Every translation is faulty at best for not everything can be translated between languages."
Ray
Active Member
They don't call Satan than deceiver for nothing. He also has A plan. The thing is he knows how much God loves us And since Satan hates God, hIs main goal Is to deceive us and keep us from Turning to Jesus for our salvation. He wants to get as many of us as he can to spend eternity with him In hell.
Peterlag
Active Member
Concerning John 1:14 which I will respond to because I think you wanted me to respond to what you post...
The "Word" is the wisdom, plan or purpose of God and the Word became flesh as Jesus Christ. Thus, Jesus Christ was the Word in the flesh, which is shortened to the Word for ease of speaking. Scripture is also the Word in writing. Everyone agrees that the Word in writing had a beginning. So did the Word in the flesh. In fact, the Greek text of Matthew 1:18 says that very clearly: "Now the beginning of Jesus Christ was in this manner..." The modern Greek texts all read "beginning" in Matthew 1:18. Birth is considered an acceptable translation since the beginning of some things is birth, and so most translations read birth. Nevertheless, the proper understanding of Matthew 1:18 is the beginning of Jesus Christ. In the beginning God had a plan, a purpose, which became flesh when Jesus was conceived.
Peterlag has conflated the writings with the person of Christ. Christ is the Word but scripture is only a writing about the Word. We can see this example of someone going on his own to redefine scripture and its meaning.
