The Bible does not teach to pray to Jesus

[Pancho Frijoles]

The point there is

Exodus 23:20–21 (KJV 1900) — 20 Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. 21 Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.

the angel has the name of YHWH in him

That's correct.
That's exactly what a messenger from God is supposed to do.
The messenger is supposed to act in the name of God, and speak in the name of God. That's why the name of God is in him.
That's why we have to obey that messenger.

When you see the word angel you think created being but it can just refer to a messenger

A messenger of whom?
That's the point. If it is a messenger of God, then it is not God.

A messenger speaks on behalf of God, not in behalf of Himself. Did Jesus spoke on behalf of God, or on behalf of Himself?
If Jesus spoke on his own authority, then He was God.
But if Jesus spoke what God asked Him to speak, then He was a Messenger

Let's hear from Jesus:

• For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the Spirit without limit. (John 3:34)
• Anyone who chooses to do the will of God will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own. (John 7:17)
• So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me. (John 8:28)
• Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority... (John 14:10)

The Bible even calls Jesus a Prophet, a Prophet like Moses.
“This is the Moses who told the Israelites, ‘God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your own people. (Acts 7:37)

CONCLUSION: Jesus self-identified as Messenger from God. God gave Jesus authority to speak on God's behalf.

 

[TomL]

The Angel of the lord as God

Judges 13:2–22 (KJV 1900) — 2 And there was a certain man of Zorah, of the family of the Danites, whose name was Manoah; and his wife was barren, and bare not. 3 And the angel of the LORD appeared unto the woman, and said unto her, Behold now, thou art barren, and bearest not: but thou shalt conceive, and bear a son. 4 Now therefore beware, I pray thee, and drink not wine nor strong drink, and eat not any unclean thing: 5 For, lo, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and no rasor shall come on his head: for the child shall be a Nazarite unto God from the womb: and he shall begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines. 6 Then the woman came and told her husband, saying, A man of God came unto me, and his countenance was like the countenance of an angel of God, very terrible: but I asked him not whence he was, neither told he me his name: 7 But he said unto me, Behold, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and now drink no wine nor strong drink, neither eat any unclean thing: for the child shall be a Nazarite to God from the womb to the day of his death. 8 Then Manoah intreated the LORD, and said, O my Lord, let the man of God which thou didst send come again unto us, and teach us what we shall do unto the child that shall be born. 9 And God hearkened to the voice of Manoah; and the angel of God came again unto the woman as she sat in the field: but Manoah her husband was not with her. 10 And the woman made haste, and ran, and shewed her husband, and said unto him, Behold, the man hath appeared unto me, that came unto me the other day. 11 And Manoah arose, and went after his wife, and came to the man, and said unto him, Art thou the man that spakest unto the woman? And he said, I am. 12 And Manoah said, Now let thy words come to pass. How shall we order the child, and how shall we do unto him? 13 And the angel of the LORD said unto Manoah, Of all that I said unto the woman let her beware. 14 She may not eat of any thing that cometh of the vine, neither let her drink wine or strong drink, nor eat any unclean thing: all that I commanded her let her observe. 15 And Manoah said unto the angel of the LORD, I pray thee, let us detain thee, until we shall have made ready a kid for thee. 16 And the angel of the LORD said unto Manoah, Though thou detain me, I will not eat of thy bread: and if thou wilt offer a burnt offering, thou must offer it unto the LORD. For Manoah knew not that he was an angel of the LORD. 17 And Manoah said unto the angel of the LORD, What is thy name, that when thy sayings come to pass we may do thee honour? 18 And the angel of the LORD said unto him, Why askest thou thus after my name, seeing it is secret? 19 So Manoah took a kid with a meat offering, and offered it upon a rock unto the LORD: and the angel did wondrously; and Manoah and his wife looked on. 20 For it came to pass, when the flame went up toward heaven from off the altar, that the angel of the LORD ascended in the flame of the altar. And Manoah and his wife looked on it, and fell on their faces to the ground. 21 But the angel of the LORD did no more appear to Manoah and to his wife. Then Manoah knew that he was an angel of the LORD. 22 And Manoah said unto his wife, We shall surely die, because we have seen God.

That's correct.
That's exactly what a messenger from God is supposed to do.
The messenger is supposed to act in the name of God, and speak in the name of God. That's why the name of God is in him.
That's why we have to obey that messenger.



A messenger of whom?
That's the point. If it is a messenger of God, then it is not God.

A messenger speaks on behalf of God, not in behalf of Himself. Did Jesus spoke on behalf of God, or on behalf of Himself?
If Jesus spoke on his own authority, then He was God.
But if Jesus spoke what God asked Him to speak, then He was a Messenger

Let's hear from Jesus:

• For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the Spirit without limit. (John 3:34)
• Anyone who chooses to do the will of God will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own. (John 7:17)
• So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me. (John 8:28)
• Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority... (John 14:10)

The Bible even calls Jesus a Prophet, a Prophet like Moses.
“This is the Moses who told the Israelites, ‘God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your own people. (Acts 7:37)

CONCLUSION: Jesus self-identified as Messenger from God. God gave Jesus authority to speak on God's behalf.

Sorry the angel is identified as Yahweh and God

He is seen in heaven and forgiving sin


What need is there for an angel to act on behalf of God in heaven and what ordinary angel can forgive sin

As Jesus stated

John 1:18 (LEB) — 18 No one has seen God at any time; the one and only, God, the one who is in the bosom of the Father—that one has made him known.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

The angel of Yahweh as Yahweh continued

Judges 6:11–14 (LEB) — 11 The angel of Yahweh came and sat under the oak that was at Ophrah that belonged to Jehoash the Abiezrite; and Gideon his son was threshing wheat in the winepress to hide it from the Midianites. 12 The angel of Yahweh appeared to him and said to him, “Yahweh is with you, you mighty warrior.” 13 Gideon said to him, “Excuse me, my lord. If Yahweh is with us, why then has all this happened to us? Where are all his wonderful deeds that our ancestors recounted to us, saying, ‘Did not Yahweh bring us up from Egypt?’ But now Yahweh has forsaken us; he has given us into the palm of Midian.” 14 And Yahweh turned to him and said, “Go in this your strength, and you will deliver Israel from the palm of Midian. Did I not send you?”

Do you think that Gideon saw God?
The Bible says "No one has seen God at any time" (John 1:18)

In these ancient narratives, we read things as if God was interacting directly with humans. That's why you read "And Yahweh turned to him and said...". If God would interact directly with humans, then He would not need an Angel.

However, in the passage you are quoting, Gideon himself, speaks of Yahweh in third person: "Excuse me, my lord. If Yahweh is with us, why then has all this happened to us?" and also: "But now Yahweh has forsaken us". Why didn't Gideon talk to Yahweh in second person ("If you, my Lord, are with us..." or "But now You have forsaken us"). Gideon knew he was not speaking with YHWH, because nobody could see Him and live.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

This is an awesome piece of Scripture.

So it was, that while they were there, the days were completed for her to be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn. Now there were in the same country shepherds living out in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night. And behold, an angel of the Lord stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were greatly afraid. Then the angel said to them, "Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which will be to all people. "For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. "And this will be the sign to you: You will find a Babe wrapped in swaddling cloths, lying in a manger." And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying: "Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace, goodwill toward men!"

- Luke 2:6-14 (NKJV)

Strong's Concordance defines "glory of the Lord" #7935 as "Shekanyah, shek-an-yah; meaning yah has dwelt." It indicates that God dwelt there.

Selah

Hi Selah

Jesus was already born when this angel of the Lord appeared. Do we agree?
So this angel cannot be Jesus. And still, the glory of the Lord can shine in his presence.

 

[mikesw]

Do you think that Gideon saw God?
The Bible says "No one has seen God at any time" (John 1:18)

In these ancient narratives, we read things as if God was interacting directly with humans. That's why you read "And Yahweh turned to him and said...". If God would interact directly with humans, then He would not need an Angel.

However, in the passage you are quoting, Gideon himself, speaks of Yahweh in third person: "Excuse me, my lord. If Yahweh is with us, why then has all this happened to us?" and also: "But now Yahweh has forsaken us". Why didn't Gideon talk to Yahweh in second person ("If you, my Lord, are with us..." or "But now You have forsaken us"). Gideon knew he was not speaking with YHWH, because nobody could see Him and live.

Maybe I missed something of the broader discussion, but it is nice to see that only Jesus has truly seen God since he was sent from heaven. As to Judges 13:2–22, you may note that Monoah's perspective was stated when he said "We shall surely die, because we have seen God!” To the best of his perception he had seen God. However, this does not mean he has seen God in all God's glory. Not even had Moses seen God in this fashion.
Regarding Luke 2:9, this is saying "an angel of the Lord" not "the angel of the Lord." You are grasping for straws. Selah's sharing of this verse still is exciting but the meaning might be a bit different. We especially note that the Lord is shown to be Jesus and thus the angel of the Lord and the glory of the Lord can be recognized as aspects of Jesus.
I suppose we are training you so you can try to improve your arguments around others. Is that true?

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

And Manoah said unto his wife, We shall surely die, because we have seen God.

Sorry the angel is identified as Yahweh and God

Dear Tom

The Bible says "No one has seen God at any time" (John 1:18)
Do you think that Manoah and his wife saw God?

In ancient times Israelites kept idols, thought YHWH had a wife, represented YHWH as a calf, and thought that angels or divine beings could come to earth, take human form and have sex with women.
They believed that priests could know the will of God through stones, diagnose leprosy in the walls of a house, and detect which woman was lying by giving her something to drink and observing the reaction.

The Old Testament narratives are a mix of messages from God that make sense for our lives today, and things that made sense for people of other cultures and times. Now we call these things superstitions. For them they were not superstitions, of course.

I'm saying this because Manoah and his wife were afraid to die because they thought they had seen God. They were wrong. They followed the superstitions of their time. No blame on them.

Why the woman referred to the visitor first as "a man of God" (a name given to prophets)?
How is the looks of an angel of God? The woman said this man looked like a fearsome angel of God.
Why did this Angel speak of God in third person?
Why did Manoah pray to God (not the angel), God listened (not the angel), and that God sent the Angel to them in response to that prayer?

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Maybe I missed something of the broader discussion, but it is nice to see that only Jesus has truly seen God since he was sent from heaven.

Well, the Bible does not state that Jesus has seen God.
What is important, though, is that Jesus has revealed God to us. Why would anyone of us want to see God literally?

As to Judges 13:2–22, you may note that Monoah's perspective was stated when he said "We shall surely die, because we have seen God!” To the best of his perception he had seen God. However, this does not mean he has seen God in all God's glory. Not even had Moses seen God in this fashion.

I agree with you.
Manoah and his wife thought they had seen God, which is different. Israelites had all kind of irrational beliefs, as any other people of their time.
We also have irrational beliefs nowadays.

I suppose we are training you so you can try to improve your arguments around others. Is that true?

Yes, all these debates help us to train ourselves in the techniques of debates. The most important thing for me, though, is that we recognize that people who think differently from us are also children of God, our brothers, and that we will share with them the Love of God forever. Not because our merits, but because of His Everlasting Mercy.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Genesis 31:11–13 (LEB) — 11 Then the angel of God said to me in the dream, ‘Jacob,’ and I said, ‘Here I am.’ 12 And he said, ‘Lift up your eyes and see—all the rams mounting the flock are streaked, speckled, and dappled, for I have seen all that Laban is doing to you. 13 I am the God of Bethel where you anointed a stone pillar, where you made a vow to me. Now get up, go out from this land and return to the land of your birth.’ ”

Again

• Jacob did not saw God because nobody has seen God.
• A messenger (angel) of God cannot be God, by definition. God cannot be an instrument, servant or herald of someone else... and if God is speaking directly, why the need of a messenger?
• When the angel says "I am the God of Bethel", the angel is speaking in God's behalf.

You have not answered the question "What is an angel or messenger?" Please take a time to reflect and answer. Not necessarily here, in the Forum. Your answer yourself.

 

[mikesw]

Dear Tom

The Bible says "No one has seen God at any time" (John 1:18)
Do you think that Manoah and his wife saw God?

In ancient times Israelites kept idols, thought YHWH had a wife, represented YHWH as a calf, and thought that angels or divine beings could come to earth, take human form and have sex with women.
They believed that priests could know the will of God through stones, diagnose leprosy in the walls of a house, and detect which woman was lying by giving her something to drink and observing the reaction.

The Old Testament narratives are a mix of messages from God that make sense for our lives today, and things that made sense for people of other cultures and times. Now we call these things superstitions. For them they were not superstitions, of course.

I'm saying this because Manoah and his wife were afraid to die because they thought they had seen God. They were wrong. They followed the superstitions of their time. No blame on them.

Why the woman referred to the visitor first as "a man of God" (a name given to prophets)?
How is the looks of an angel of God? The woman said this man looked like a fearsome angel of God.
Why did this Angel speak of God in third person?
Why did Manoah pray to God (not the angel), God listened (not the angel), and that God sent the Angel to them in response to that prayer?

Well, the Bible does not state that Jesus has seen God.
What is important, though, is that Jesus has revealed God to us. Why would anyone of us want to see God literally?


I agree with you.
Manoah and his wife thought they had seen God, which is different. Israelites had all kind of irrational beliefs, as any other people of their time.
We also have irrational beliefs nowadays.

Yes, all these debates help us to train ourselves in the techniques of debates. The most important thing for me, though, is that we recognize that people who think differently from us are also children of God, our brothers, and that we will share with them the Love of God forever. Not because our merits, but because of His Everlasting Mercy.

Your alternative conception of Manoah and her husband does not stand scrutiny. First, we see that the whole text is based on God promising a prophet to be born to them. The words of Manoah and his wife confirm the action of God here. The inclusion and vantage point of the Book of Judges confirms their recognition of the Angel of the Lord as God. The scriptures also testify to the acts of Samson. Scripture also has revealed when people followed idolatry instead of true worship of God. Consequently the testimony against your speculation is quite solid. This is quite an amazing passage talking about the multiple persons of God.

As to contriving that your discussion can bring unity of beliefs, that is quite unlikely when you are having to deny the testimony of scripture to obtain some sort of unity.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

The angel of the LORD is Jehovah

Judges 2:1–5 (KJV 1900) — 1 And an angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you. 2 And ye shall make no league with the inhabitants of this land; ye shall throw down their altars: but ye have not obeyed my voice: why have ye done this? 3 Wherefore I also said, I will not drive them out from before you; but they shall be as thorns in your sides, and their gods shall be a snare unto you. 4 And it came to pass, when the angel of the LORD spake these words unto all the children of Israel, that the people lifted up their voice, and wept. 5 And they called the name of that place Bochim: and they sacrificed there unto the LORD.

The angel of the LORD stated I will never break my covenant with you.

Again

• Bochim did not see God because nobody has seen God, according to the Bible.
• A messenger of God cannot be God by definition. God does not speak on behalf of someone else... and if God wanted to speak directly, then He wouldn't need a messenger
• When the angel says "I will never break my convenant with you" he is speaking on behalf of God.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Hi Mike

Thanks for your comment. Let me reflect on it

Your alternative conception of Manoah and her husband does not stand scrutiny. First, we see that the whole text is based on God promising a prophet to be born to them.

Correct. The promises of God can be made through a Messenger, as in the case of Gabriel.

The words of Manoah and his wife confirm the action of God here.

The action of God was to send an Angel or "man of God" to convey the message.

The inclusion and vantage point of the Book of Judges confirms their recognition of the Angel of the Lord as God.

No. It just confirms that they thought they had seen God. And they did it at the end, not at the beginning,.
The Book of Judges is full of references to the culture of Israel and surrounding peoples, who looks primitive and/or superstitious to us.
Look at the narrative of Samson. Did Samson believe that cutting his hair would deprive him from his strength? And then, when he was shaved, why did he lose effectively his strength?

The scriptures also testify to the acts of Samson.

Mainly epic acts that most likely never occurred as told.

Scripture also has revealed when people followed idolatry instead of true worship of God. Consequently the testimony against your speculation is quite solid.

What has idolatry to do with my speculation? I don't get it. Please read again my post.

This is quite an amazing passage talking about the multiple persons of God.

The passage does not mention any other person of God.
The passage mentions a Messenger of God.
Do not put in the text things that are not there.

As to contriving that your discussion can bring unity of beliefs, that is quite unlikely when you are having to deny the testimony of scripture to obtain some sort of unity.

The testimony from Scripture is that God loves you, that He gave his Son for you, out of love.
The testimony from Scripture is that we can repent and be reconciled to God.
This bring us unity.

In regard to the topic in debate, the testimony of the Scripture is that nobody has seen God. Neither Jacob, nor Gideon, nor Bochim, nor Manoah saw God.

 

[mikesw]

Hi Mike

Thanks for your comment. Let me reflect on it

Correct. The promises of God can be made through a Messenger, as in the case of Gabriel.

The action of God was to send an Angel or "man of God" to convey the message.

No. It just confirms that they thought they had seen God. And they did it at the end, not at the beginning,.
The Book of Judges is full of references to the culture of Israel and surrounding peoples, who looks primitive and/or superstitious to us.
Look at the narrative of Samson. Did Samson believe that cutting his hair would deprive him from his strength? And then, when he was shaved, why did he lose effectively his strength?


Mainly epic acts that most likely never occurred as told.

What has idolatry to do with my speculation? I don't get it. Please read again my post.

The passage does not mention any other person of God.
The passage mentions a Messenger of God.
Do not put in the text things that are not there.

The testimony from Scripture is that God loves you, that He gave his Son for you, out of love.
The testimony from Scripture is that we can repent and be reconciled to God.
This bring us unity.

In regard to the topic in debate, the testimony of the Scripture is that nobody has seen God. Neither Jacob, nor Gideon, nor Bochim, nor Manoah saw God.

IT is confirmed that you have to reject scripture in order to create your doctrine. This is doubly bad since you are also Jewish. We accept the testimony of scripture since it points out when people are speaking superstition or following false gods or making an idol to be a proxy for God. The scriptures also were maintained by the Israel people while also testifying to all the times that the Israel tribes fell away from God. The scriptures also testified to the arrival of the Messiah and the timing that would happen (per the 70weeks in Daniel). Plus the Temple was destroyed both at the time and the degree prophesied by Jesus.
Thus, your assessment of Judges is fallacious and ill-advised and certainly not inclusive of Christian views. So I'm not even sure how you can ascribe any equal relevance of other religions to the testimony of scripture and Christ. You either declare God a liar through scriptures or you say God is unable to protect the message through scripture. If you do not have faith toward God's word, why would he do you any favors?

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

IT is confirmed that you have to reject scripture in order to create your doctrine. This is doubly bad since you are also Jewish. We accept the testimony of scripture since it points out when people are speaking superstition or following false gods or making an idol to be a proxy for God. The scriptures also were maintained by the Israel people while also testifying to all the times that the Israel tribes fell away from God. The scriptures also testified to the arrival of the Messiah and the timing that would happen (per the 70weeks in Daniel). Plus the Temple was destroyed both at the time and the degree prophesied by Jesus.
Thus, your assessment of Judges is fallacious and ill-advised and certainly not inclusive of Christian views. So I'm not even sure how you can ascribe any equal relevance of other religions to the testimony of scripture and Christ. You either declare God a liar through scriptures or you say God is unable to protect the message through scripture. If you do not have faith toward God's word, why would he do you any favors?

My dear brother Mike

The fact that a person does not interpret Scripture the way you do, does not mean that such person is not loved by God and guided by his spirit. Millions of people out there are right now producing the fruits of the Spirit, even if they do not agree in all theology.

I believe you are wrong in some of the ideas you defend. However, I do think that you may be much closer to God than I, and enjoying the beauty and joy of his grace more than I.
The puroose of a debate like this is to put ourselves un the shoes of the other to become less arrogant and more loving.

So I encourage you to embrace your Unitarian brothers as children of God, just like you.

 

[mikesw]

My dear brother Mike

The fact that a person does not interpret Scripture the way you do, does not mean that such person is not loved by God and guided by his spirit. Millions of people out there are right now producing ghe fruits of the Spirit, even if they do not agree in all theology.

I believe you are wrong in some of the ideas you defend. However, I do think that you may be much closer to God than I, and enjoying the beauty and joy of his grace more than I.
The puroose of a debate like this is to put ourselves un the shoes of the other to become less arrogant and more loving.

Ok. I'm in the shoes of the one who does not know Christ. Therefore I have no hope of glory. All I have is the harsh, rotten life. No one is giving me assurance that God is greater than all this and no one is telling me how Christ is a way of relief. So I just live a miserable life or have false hopes in vapors and illusions. And Pancho is telling me that even the scriptures lie, so I cannot trust them either. Oh well. Give me another rum and Tequila

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Ok. I'm in the shoes of the one who does not know Christ. Therefore I have no hope of glory. All I have is the harsh, rotten life. No one is giving me assurance that God is greater than all this and no one is telling me how Christ is a way of relief. So I just live a miserable life or have false hopes in vapors and illusions. And Pancho is telling me that even the scriptures lie, so I cannot trust them either. Oh well. Give me another rum and Tequila

Unitarians share with you the same need of salvation.
They have the same hope of glory, just like you.
They have beautiful, fruitful lives, just like you.
They trust in God’s mercy and value Christ’s sacrifice, just like you.
Their faith in God is as strong as yours.
They consider the Scriptures precious, just like you.
They will enjoy the unspeakable joy of the presence of God, just like you.

Please reflect on this.

 

[mikesw]

Unitarians share with you the same need of salvation.
They have the same hope of glory, just like you.
They have beautiful, fruitful lives, just like you.
They trust in God’s mercy and value Christ’s sacrifice, just like you.
Their faith in God is as strong as yours.
They consider the Scriptures precious, just like you.
They will enjoy the unspeakable joy of the presence of God, just like you.

Please reflect on this.

But they seem to deny the essence of God and the scriptures that testify to the deity of Christ. If they do not trust or know God, their fate is not much different from anyone else who denies who God is. I say this is an soft sense due to the fact the gospel may take root in their heart but they have been led astray in doctrine. Every argument they make against the passages about the deity of Christ have been so flawed here, that it seems intentional disregard for scripture. The possible real response to the gospel gives some hope from the outsider looking at them with their beliefs. Even a Muslim who hears and responds quietly to the gospel message can be saved despite lacking full access to the scriptures.
For now just let me finish this bottle of Tequila while I identify with the "other" who has no hope.

 

[synergy]

No. Trinitarian theology is nonsense. Jesus being the son/servant of the God of Abraham means he isn't the God of Abraham. None of God's sons/servants are the God of Abraham. There isn't a special nonsense clause for Jesus where one gets to change the rules to defy conventional reason. Scripture says no one has ever seen God then turns right around and says the disciples have seen God. Seeing and being blind are used in scripture in a figurative sense.

The subject in John 6:46 and John 14:9 is the Father. Do you understand English? This proves that you either have a dirt poor understanding of English (typical for all Judaizing Unitarians) or a savage contempt for what's written in the Bible. Which is it?

John 6:46 (Not that anyone has seen the Father except the one who is from God—this one has seen the Father.)

John 14: 9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

Conclusion: Jesus is God.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

But they seem to deny the essence of God and the scriptures that testify to the deity of Christ. If they do not trust or know God, their fate is not much different from anyone else who denies who God is.

How can you be sure they don’t know God?
Those who live loving each other, are born again and know God.
Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God, and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. (1 John 4:7)

I say this is an soft sense due to the fact the gospel may take root in their heart but they have been led astray in doctrine. Every argument they make against the passages about the deity of Christ have been so flawed here, that it seems intentional disregard for scripture.

Well, people from the other side of the debate may think exactly the same about you.
They think you have been led astray in doctrine.
They think your arguments are flawed.
They feel the same frustration towards you that you feel towards them.

So, what are we gonna do now?
Accurse each other? Threaten each other with the flames of an eternal hell?

Jesus prayed to the Only and True God that we may become one. This is his desire, and such desire will be fulfilled.

 

[mikesw]

How can you be sure they don’t know God?
Those who live loving each other, are born again and know God.
Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God, and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. (1 John 4:7)



Well, people from the other side of the debate may think exactly the same about you.
They think you have been led astray in doctrine.
They think your arguments are flawed.
They feel the same frustration towards you that you feel towards them.

So, what are we gonna do now?
Accurse each other? Threaten each other with the flames of an eternal hell?

Jesus prayed to the Only and True God that we may become one. This is his desire, and such desire will be fulfilled.

What else can I follow except the testimony of scripture. No one has ever shared anything here sufficient to deny the deity of Christ. Other people can think that their unsupportable doctrine is valid or that the Trinitarian doctrine is false. But why follow something they cannot prove.
How can they deny the nature of God and still claim to know God? If there is some human fallibility on their part, God does seem to cover that, as noted before. I shared the idea that if you brought a dozen roses to your wife and she has a severe allergic reaction to them. She then reminds you it was your girlfriend (before marriage) who liked roses. You hardly show knowledge of your wife. A mistake could happen where someone handed you roses when you asked for tulips. That would show that you knew the right thing for your wife but made a mistake in execution. That could be acceptable, despite the hefty hospital bill.

 

[Studyman]

Those verses do not teach that the Word of God was a Person.

I so much enjoy your perspective. And I hope we can fellowship and have discussions like I have with members of a small flock that I am blessed to be part of. And I have argued against men who have promoted the philosophy that the "Word of God" is a thing, not a Spiritual life form, or as I believed, a "Him". And I came to this conclusion based on Scripture which at times refers to the "Word of the Lord" as a "him" in my view.

Gen. 15: 1 After these things the word of the LORD came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.

1 Sam. 15: 23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, "he" hath also rejected thee from being king.

2 Sam. 22: 31 As for God, his way is perfect; the word of the LORD is tried: "he" is a buckler to all them that trust in him.

1 Kings 2: 27 So Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being priest unto the LORD; that he might fulfil the word of the LORD, which "he" spake concerning the house of Eli in Shiloh.

1 Kings 16: 12 Thus did Zimri destroy all the house of Baasha, according to the word of the LORD, which "he" spake against Baasha by Jehu the prophet,

There are many more, and of course John 1.

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

I thought, and believed actually, that sometimes in Scriptures, the "Word of the Lord" was referring to a "Him", a living being. A messenger of the Lord.

Just like in hundreds of other instances, this is a just a figurative way of speaking.
Jews, Muslisms, Christians, Baha'i, we all use this language, and we never think we are talking about a person. Ask any Catholic theologian if those verses refer to a Person coming to visit Shemaia or to Nathan.

Consider these two verses:

For the word of God is alive, and active, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intents of the heart. (Hebrews 4:12)

He had in His right hand seven stars, and out of His mouth went a sharp two-edged sword. His appearance was like the sun shining brightly. (Revelation 1:16)

Why in the vision of the Book of Revelation the two-edged sword comes from the mouth of Christ?
Is Christ Himself the Word of God? Is Christ a Sword?
Christ speaks the words of God. The Word of God comes from his mouth. That's why Christ is referred, metaphorically, as the Word of God.
So, The Word of God is not a person. The Spirit of God is not a person. The Wisdom of God (Proverbs 6) is not a Person.
The Love of God is not a Person!
The Bible says "God is Love". Love is coeternal with God. So, John could also have started his gospel saying: "In the beginning there was Love. And Love was with God. And Love was God". That would not make the Love of God a distinct person within the Godhead.

But now, after your thoughtful Biblical reasoning, I am reconsidering my understanding of the verses posted above, and so many more.

I would ask a question though, if I may.

If God is a Spirit, as the Lord's Christ says HE is in my KJV Translation, And the Spirit of Christ, which is said to be in the minds of the Prophets when Jesus was up where He was before HE became flesh, are they not living beings? Can the "Word of the Lord" or the "Spirit of the Lord" be living beings? I mean, if God is a Spirit, and God is a living being, then wouldn't the Spirit of God be a living being?

I truly love such discussions and have been corrected through them many times. Please give me your thoughts.

Thank you.