The Bible does not teach to pray to Jesus

A blind man can see that it is the word who became flesh and was known as Jesus Christ
Following up on your metaphor, Tom, fortunately not everyone is blind.:cool:
Some people can see far enough as to understand that the Bible is full of metaphors.
The Word of God cannot become flesh, or tree, or stone.
John 1 also says that the Light came to the world. Did the Light become flesh?


Jesus is not the Word made flesh, literally.
Jesus conveys the words of God, and it is in that sense that He is "the Word".
That's why the words of Jesus give us eternal life (John 6:63,68) ... when followed, of course!

God cannot become a volcano, or a deer, or a man, or a woman.
Let's leave this idea for the demigods of ancient cultures.
 
Very, very typically.
So typically, that whenever the terms "Father" and "Jesus Christ" are mentioned in the same sentence, and the author wants to give the title "God" to one of them, in 100% of the verses (not 95.5% this time, but 100%) the title goes to The Father.

Beyond the fact that this happens 100% of the times, the question I encourage you to reflect on is... why?
Why did the authors of the New Testament prefer "Theos" for The Father if they wanted to teach the deity of Jesus?

Why didn't they give the title "Theos" to both the Father and the Son every time they had a chance to put these two personal beings together? Or, if not every time, at least 50%? At least 33%? At least 10%?

In fact, in the verse in which Paul explicitly teaches who Christians worship as God, and who they follow as Master (Lord)... the verse that would end any debate about the use of "God" and "Lord"... why does Paul insist in separating the status of God and Lord, assigning the status of God only to the Father?

"yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him." (1 Cor 8:6)
So accordingly the Father is not lord? (1cor 8:6)

As previously noted Theos along with the article is used as a proper name while theos without the article can refer to a class of being -deity

Yet we have verses which call Christ God

John 1:1 (ESV) — 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 20:28–29 (ESV) — 28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

Titus 2:13 (ESV) — 13 waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,

2 Peter 1:1 (ESV) — 1 Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:
 
It doesn't alight with physically seeing the Father unless you and @civic are wanting to be funny and say that seeing Jesus means they were physically looking at the Father. Don't forget, God is invisible.
Nobody said we see the Father physically. Another pathetic strawman counterargument on your part. Thus the following truth prevails, in spite of your heresies.
  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.
 
Following up on your metaphor, Tom, fortunately not everyone is blind.:cool:
Some people can see far enough as to understand that the Bible is full of metaphors.
The Word of God cannot become flesh, or tree, or stone.
John 1 also says that the Light came to the world. Did the Light become flesh?


Jesus is not the Word made flesh, literally.
Jesus conveys the words of God, and it is in that sense that He is "the Word".
That's why the words of Jesus give us eternal life (John 6:63,68) ... when followed, of course!

God cannot become a volcano, or a deer, or a man, or a woman.
Let's leave this idea for the demigods of ancient cultures.
Except flesh is not just a metaphor

Jesus the word was flesh - man

Your claim God cannot become a man is not supported by scripture and is simply your opinion

In any case the passage is clear

John 1:1–34 (ESV) — 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 were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. 6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light. 9 The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. 11 He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. 12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 (John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’ ”) 16 For from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known. 19 And this is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?” 20 He confessed, and did not deny, but confessed, “I am not the Christ.” 21 And they asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah?” He said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” And he answered, “No.” 22 So they said to him, “Who are you? We need to give an answer to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?” 23 He said, “I am the voice of one crying out in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way of the Lord,’ as the prophet Isaiah said.” 24 (Now they had been sent from the Pharisees.) 25 They asked him, “Then why are you baptizing, if you are neither the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?” 26 John answered them, “I baptize with water, but among you stands one you do not know, 27 even he who comes after me, the strap of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie.” 28 These things took place in Bethany across the Jordan, where John was baptizing. 29 The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! 30 This is he of whom I said, ‘After me comes a man who ranks before me, because he was before me.’ 31 I myself did not know him, but for this purpose I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel.” 32 And John bore witness: “I saw the Spirit descend from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him. 33 I myself did not know him, but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’ 34 And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God.

The word was God became flesh and the son of God. He was identified by john as Jesus
 
Thanks for your answer, Runningman
You love my approach. Then you find it unreasonable.:)

I see your point.
Being a Baha’i means acting under the conviction that we are all members of the same family. I can’t help it.
It's just a matter of wishful thinking meets reality. I cannot deny that the rose tinted glasses got knocked off my face long ago, but I still love your idea because it's the ideal, but reality won't allow me to agree with it unfortunately.

Now, you brought a very important point here, which is what our Trinitarian brothers think about the importance of believing in such doctrine for the destiny of our souls after death. That would be the topic of another thread.
Yes indeed. I love that topic. Is there already a thread open?
 
Very, very typically.
So typically, that whenever the terms "Father" and "Jesus Christ" are mentioned in the same sentence, and the author wants to give the title "God" to one of them, in 100% of the verses (not 95.5% this time, but 100%) the title goes to The Father.

Beyond the fact that this happens 100% of the times, the question I encourage you to reflect on is... why?
Why did the authors of the New Testament prefer "Theos" for The Father if they wanted to teach the deity of Jesus?

Why didn't they give the title "Theos" to both the Father and the Son every time they had a chance to put these two personal beings together? Or, if not every time, at least 50%? At least 33%? At least 10%?

In fact, in the verse in which Paul explicitly teaches who Christians worship as God, and who they follow as Master (Lord)... the verse that would end any debate about the use of "God" and "Lord"... why does Paul insist in separating the status of God and Lord, assigning the status of God only to the Father?

"yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him." (1 Cor 8:6)
Your quote of 1 Cor 8:6 would eliminate every single use of Lord from the Father as Lord and only the Son is the Lord in scripture. That’s the only way you can be consistent with the text since your position is only the Father is God from the same text.

Hope this helps !!!
 
Your quote of 1 Cor 8:6 would eliminate every single use of Lord from the Father as Lord and only the Son is the Lord in scripture. That’s the only way you can be consistent with the text since your position is only the Father is God from the same text.

Hope this helps !!!
The collateral damage your theology receives for pressing that is that Jesus can't be the true God because the Father is the only true God.

That's a wrap for Trinitarianism. :whistle:🎶

John 17
3Now this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent.
 
The collateral damage your theology receives for pressing that is that Jesus can't be the true God because the Father is the only true God.

That's a wrap for Trinitarianism. :whistle:🎶

John 17
3Now this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent.
Nope that’s your dilemma not mine since the Son is both the one Lord, only Lord, only Sovereign and called the True God and Eternal Life.

I’m the consistent one , not you :)

That’s the wrap for uni’s .

Just sayin :)
 
Nobody said we see the Father physically. Another pathetic strawman counterargument on your part. Thus the following truth prevails, in spite of your heresies.
  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.
No one said Jesus saw the Father physically. The only precedent in seeing the Father is knowing Him or revealing Him.

Acts 3:13 debunks that idea that Jesus could be the I AM.
 
Nope that’s your dilemma not mine since the Son is both the one Lord, only Lord, only Sovereign and called the True God and Eternal Life.

I’m the consistent one , not you :)

That’s the wrap for uni’s .

Just sayin :)
Then Jesus isn't the only Sovereign One and King of kings and Lord of lords.

1 Timothy 6
14Keep this commandment without stain or reproach until the appearance of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15which the blessed and only Sovereign One—the King of kings and Lord of lords—will bring about in His own time. 16He alone is immortal and dwells in unapproachable light. No one has ever seen Him, nor can anyone see Him. To Him be honor and eternal dominion! Amen.
 
Nobody said we see the Father physically. Another pathetic strawman counterargument on your part. Thus the following truth prevails, in spite of your heresies.
  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.
Almost forgot about a verse. 1 Timothy 6:16 is pretty clear no one has ever seen God. Not even Jesus. It refers to visually looking at God in this case, not knowing.
 
Acts 3:13 debunks that idea that Jesus could be the I AM.
False. Ex 3 describes a Divine Appearance. Do you understand that fact?

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.
 
Then Jesus isn't the only Sovereign One and King of kings and Lord of lords.

1 Timothy 6
14Keep this commandment without stain or reproach until the appearance of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15which the blessed and only Sovereign One—the King of kings and Lord of lords—will bring about in His own time. 16He alone is immortal and dwells in unapproachable light. No one has ever seen Him, nor can anyone see Him. To Him be honor and eternal dominion! Amen.
Nope that’s your fallacy not mine since both the Father and Son are the true God, Lord, Sovereign, YHWH, Creator, King of Kings, Lord of Lords. Alpha/ Omega, First/ Last, God almighty, Savior, I Am, etc …..
 
You ran from the text

A blind man can see that it is the word who became flesh and was known as Jesus Christ

John 1:1–34 (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. 33 And I did not recognize Him, but He who sent me to baptize in water said to me, ‘He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, this is the One who baptizes in the Holy Spirit.’ 34 And I myself have seen, and have testified that this is the Son of God.”

The word became flesh and was the son of the Father

John identified Jesus as this son


Thus your doctrine is refuted





More denying of scripture

John 20:28–29 (NASB 2020) — 28 Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Because you have seen Me, have you now believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.”



Sorry but when two nouns are separated by and (kai0 and the article appears on before the first noun then one person is spoken of


Granville sharps rule


Agreed because that is modalist and not trinitarian doctrine

You continually conflate them

Again you fail to distinguish the noun Theos being used as a proper name and Theos used to denote deity
A common trait with uni’s
 
Back
Top Bottom