The Bible does not teach to pray to Jesus

[synergy]

Conclusion is Exodus 3:14-15 isn't Jesus speaking. John 14:9 is about knowing the Father, not Jesus being the Father if that is what you're suggesting, which is not an orthodox Trinitarian belief.

It's about knowing and seeing the Father. You need a new pair of glasses.

John 14:9 Jesus said to him, Have I been with you such a long time and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father. And how do you say, Show us the Father?

This is evident from the context where Jesus stated, "From now on" meaning, from that point going forward, they "know Him and have seen Him" in John 14:7. Therefore, when Jesus said "I have been with you all this time, and still you do not know Me? Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father." It wasn't referring to actually seeing the Father in the visual sense, but in the figurative knowing and understanding. That's the common denominator here.

That takes us back to John 6:46 that precludes the possibility that it's the Father appearing to anyone except Christ. @civic astutely mentioned that already.

John 6:46 is the same idea as above. Jesus understands the Father.

None of this suggests Jesus pre-existed in the way you suggest.

Conclusion: Jesus is the "I Am" OT God mentioned in Ex 3.

 

[civic]

It's about knowing and seeing the Father. You need a new pair of glasses.

John 14:9 Jesus said to him, Have I been with you such a long time and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father. And how do you say, Show us the Father?

That takes us back to John 6:46 that precludes the possibility that it's the Father appearing to anyone except Christ. @civic astutely mentioned that already.

Conclusion: Jesus is the "I Am" OT God mentioned in Ex 3.

talk about conflating the Father with the Son- its unbelievable to see what both the modalists and uni's do with scripture to deny the Son,

 

[Runningman]

nope Jesus meant to see Him is to see God because He is God, but not the Father.

now you went from being a uni to a modalist.

next fallacious argument.

The original question, based on John 14:7, where Jesus stated they had seen the Father was:

"Jesus said they had seen the Father in John 14:7 so the way the disciples have seen the Father is the same way Jesus has seen the Father, by understanding the Father. Yes or no?"

You responded with a no.

Here are your options based on the bad logic your provided.

Option 1: Only Jesus has seen the Father and Jesus was wrong about the disciples seeing the Father.

Option 2: Jesus and the disciples have both seen the Father.

Option 3: Jesus is the image of the invisible God, but since Romans 8:29 says Christians will be conformed to the image of the Son, you must accept Christians are conformed to the image of the invisible God.

The irony is you are the one in the pickle.

 

[synergy]

@synergy I've been at it so long now with the calvies I forgot how much fun it is to debate the uni's. I miss it.

for over 2 decades online I spent 80 % of my time defending the trinity and deity of Christ and the last few its been 80% of the time with calvinists. its time to go back the way it use to be since there are bigger fish to fry.

They are a much bigger fish to fry. The Deity of Christ is the biggest issue of the 21st century. Who knows, we might build an alliance with Calvinists on that theme. Strange how life can takes twists and turns.

 

[civic]

The original question, based on John 14:7, where Jesus stated they had seen the Father was:

"Jesus said they had seen the Father in John 14:7 so the way the disciples have seen the Father is the same way Jesus has seen the Father, by understanding the Father. Yes or no?"

You responded with a no.

Here are your options based on the bad logic your provided.

Option 1: Only Jesus has seen the Father and Jesus was wrong about the disciples seeing the Father.

Option 2: Jesus and the disciples have both seen the Father.

Option 3: Jesus is the image of the invisible God, but since Romans 8:29 says Christians will be conformed to the image of the Son, you must accept Christians are conformed to the image of the invisible God.

The irony is you are the one in the pickle.

no Jesus said no one on several occasions has seen the Father and Paul says the same in many placed. Jesus meant physically seeing the Father with their own eyes and hearing with their physical ears.

Jesus then makes it spiritual to see His is the same as seeing the Father- They are One- ie the same God.

you have conflated the spiritual with the physical with eyes, ears .

hope this helps !!!

 

[Runningman]

It's about knowing and seeing the Father. You need a new pair of glasses.

John 14:9 Jesus said to him, Have I been with you such a long time and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father. And how do you say, Show us the Father?

That takes us back to John 6:46 that precludes the possibility that it's the Father appearing to anyone except Christ. @civic astutely mentioned that already.

Conclusion: Jesus is the "I Am" OT God mentioned in Ex 3.

This is called a non sequitur. Means your conclusion doesn't match the premise. Read @civic 's comment above where he provided the scriptural support for God being invisible. If God is invisible, then He can't be seen. Therefore seeing Jesus, with your eyes, is not the same as actually looking at God. God is knowable, yes, but not visible. Jesus however, is visible. This means Jesus isn't God and is not the I AM.

 

[civic]

They are a much bigger fish to fry. The Deity of Christ is the biggest issue of the 21st century. Who knows, we might build an alliance with Calvinists on that theme. Strange how life can takes twists and turns.

its the biggest issue in Scripture and was defended by Jesus Himself and the Apostles in their writings against the gnostics, uni's, modalists of their day.

 

[Runningman]

no Jesus said no one on several occasions has seen the Father and Paul says the same in many placed. Jesus meant physically seeing the Father with their own eyes and hearing with their physical ears.

Jesus then makes it spiritual to see His is the same as seeing the Father- They are One- ie the same God.

you have conflated the spiritual with the physical with eyes, ears .

hope this helps !!!

You are tripping over your own shoelaces at this point. You just posted a bunch a verses about God being invisible and yet Jesus is not invisible. Now you're saying that Jesus was referring to physically seeing the Father. This is a theological trainwreck my friend. "Seeing" God must, therefore, be about knowing and understanding God.

 

[civic]

This is called a non sequitur. Means your conclusion doesn't match the premise. Read @civic 's comment above where he provided the scriptural support for God being invisible. If God is invisible, then He can't be seen. Therefore seeing Jesus, with your eyes, is not the same as actually looking at God. God is knowable, yes, but not visible. Jesus however, is visible. This means Jesus isn't God and is not the I AM.

nope Jesus saw the Father physically and hears Him physically which no man except Himself has done.

spiritually Jesus said to see Him was to see the Father since no man has physically seen the Father who is invisible.

next......

 

[synergy]

You are tripping over your own shoelaces at this point. You just posted a bunch a verses about God being invisible and yet Jesus is not invisible. Now you're saying that Jesus was referring to physically seeing the Father. This is a theological trainwreck my friend. "Seeing" God must, therefore, be about knowing and understanding God.

So, answer me who appeared and spoke the words in Ex 3?

1. John 6:46 precludes the possibility that it's the Father appearing to anyone except Christ but
2. John 14:9 allows the Father to be seen when one sees Jesus, the Preincarnate Jesus in the case of Ex 3.

Conclusion: Jesus is the "I Am" OT God mentioned in Ex 3.

 

[civic]

You are tripping over your own shoelaces at this point. You just posted a bunch a verses about God being invisible and yet Jesus is not invisible. Now you're saying that Jesus was referring to physically seeing the Father. This is a theological trainwreck my friend. "Seeing" God must, therefore, be about knowing and understanding God.

The Son who was God ( John 1:1) became flesh ( John 1:14).

No contradictions as it was the Pre Incarnate Son ( YHWH ) who walked in the garden with Adam and appeared to the OT prophets- not the Father whom no man has seen and is invisible.

next......

 

[civic]

So, answer me who appeared and spoke the words in Ex 3?

1. John 6:46 precludes the possibility that it's the Father appearing to anyone except Christ but
2. John 14:9 allows the Father to be seen when one sees Jesus, the Preincarnate Jesus in the case of Ex 3.

Conclusion: Jesus is the "I Am" OT God mentioned in Ex 3.

Yes indeed !!!

 

[Runningman]

nope Jesus saw the Father physically and hears Him physically which no man except Himself has done.

spiritually Jesus said to see Him was to see the Father since no man has physically seen the Father who is invisible.

next......

Contradicted by the fact that God is invisible. No one has seen God in the visual sense. You are proved this using Scripture. So how did the disciples see Jesus if God is invisible?

 

[Runningman]

The Son who was God ( John 1:1) became flesh ( John 1:14).

No contradictions as it was the Pre Incarnate Son ( YHWH ) who walked in the garden with Adam and appeared to the OT prophets- not the Father whom no man has seen and is invisible.

next......

So despite Scripture saying otherwise, Jesus is invisible?

 

[Runningman]

So, answer me who appeared and spoke the words in Ex 3?

1. John 6:46 precludes the possibility that it's the Father appearing to anyone except Christ but
2. John 14:9 allows the Father to be seen when one sees Jesus, the Preincarnate Jesus in the case of Ex 3.

Conclusion: Jesus is the "I Am" OT God mentioned in Ex 3.

Already answered this directly in comment 951.

Conclusion is Exodus 3:14-15 isn't Jesus speaking. John 14:9 is about knowing the Father, not Jesus being the Father if that is what you're suggesting, which is not an orthodox Trinitarian belief. This is evident from the context where Jesus stated, "From now on" meaning, from that point going forward, they "know Him and have seen Him" in John 14:7. Therefore, when Jesus said "I have been with you all this time, and still you do not know Me? Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father." It wasn't referring to actually seeing the Father in the visual sense, but in the figurative knowing and understanding. That's the common denominator here.

John 6:46 is the same idea as above. Jesus understands the Father.

None of this suggests Jesus pre-existed in the way you suggest.

 

[civic]

Contradicted by the fact that God is invisible. No one has seen God in the visual sense. You are proved this using Scripture. So how did the disciples see Jesus if God is invisible?

No one has seen the Father try reading with comprehension.

 

[civic]

So despite Scripture saying otherwise, Jesus is invisible?

nope you are conflating the Father with the Son

next fallacy

 

[synergy]

Already answered this directly in comment 951.

Conclusion is Exodus 3:14-15 isn't Jesus speaking. John 14:9 is about knowing the Father, not Jesus being the Father if that is what you're suggesting, which is not an orthodox Trinitarian belief. This is evident from the context where Jesus stated, "From now on" meaning, from that point going forward, they "know Him and have seen Him" in John 14:7. Therefore, when Jesus said "I have been with you all this time, and still you do not know Me? Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father." It wasn't referring to actually seeing the Father in the visual sense, but in the figurative knowing and understanding. That's the common denominator here.

John 6:46 is the same idea as above. Jesus understands the Father.

None of this suggests Jesus pre-existed in the way you suggest.

You are flat out contradicting John 6:46 that precludes the possibility that it's the Father appearing to anyone except Christ.

John 6:46 Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God, He has seen the Father.

You are in fact saying that Moses is the "Not that anyone" that has seen the Father.

 

[Runningman]

No one has seen the Father try reading with comprehension.

Then "Seeing" is knowing. Not looking at an invisible God. Jesus is not the invisible God according to Scripture.

Colossians 1
15The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

1 Timothy 1
17Now to the King eternal, immortal, and invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.

 

[Runningman]

nope you are conflating the Father with the Son

next fallacy

Then you admit Jesus is not the invisible God.

Remember that pickle you talked about earlier? You're in it.