Thomas... My Lord and my God

[civic]

Jesus does not sit on the throne. He sits to the right of it as second in command since he's the head of the body of Christ.

nope in Revelation He is sitting on the throne and its Christ who is identified as the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End- not the Father.

next fallacy

Rev 22:13, “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.”

We can see here that Whoever is the Alpha/Omega also claims to be the first/last AND the beginning/end. It’s the same Person.

If we look back in Rev 1:17-18 we see the following:

“…Fear not; I am the first and the last: I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.”

So, the One Who is first/last (and then is also Alpha/Omega and beginning/end) is the same Person who was dead and is alive forever more. It doesn’t take a scholar to figure out Who is the One speaking here. It does take a lot of mental gymnastics to explain away something so obvious.

The term "first/last" is used 4 times in Rev. Twice it is used along with "Alpha/Omega" with the Person claiming to be "first/last" AND the "Alpha/Omega."

"Alpha/Omega" is used 4 times in Rev. Twice with "first/last" and twice with "beginning/end."

"Beginning/end" occurs 3 times: twice with "Alpha/Omega" and once with "Alpha/Omega" AND "first/last."

In all of these texts, the speaker always refers to Himself with both or all of the titles. To say, "Well, this time it's Jehovah who is the first/last, this next time it's Jesus, then later it's Jehovah again..." is the mental gymnastics to which I referred.

Is God the first/last or is Jesus the first/last? Is God the Alpha/Omega or is Jesus the Alpha/Omega? Is God the beginning/end or is Jesus the beginning/end. An obvious way to reconcile the verses is to understand that Jesus is God.

According to unitarians, it seems God claimed to be the first/last in one sense while Jesus claimed to be first/last in another sense. You seem to gloss over the blatant connection of first/last with beginning/end and Alpha/Omega. In each verse, the Speaker who claims one title also claims one or both of the others. It's all the same person.

I usually wait patiently for unitarians to reply but this point has been nagging at me so I have to comment preemptively. I really am baffled by their suggestion from other discussion in the past that “first/last” has some meaning here other than the obvious one (a title synonymous with Alpha/Omega). You even say that Alpha/Omega is never used of the Son? Incredible!! We both have said that context is king so I would like to remind other readers of the context of Rev 1:17-18 (beginning in v.10, Young’s Literal):

I was in the Spirit on the Lord's-day, and I heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, saying, I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last;' and, `What thou dost see, write in a scroll, and send to the seven assemblies that [are] in Asia; to Ephesus, and to Smyrna, and to Pergamos, and to Thyatira, and to Sardis, and to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.'

And I did turn to see the voice that did speak with me, and having turned, I saw seven golden lamp-stands, and in the midst of the seven lamp-stands, [one] like to a son of man, clothed to the foot, and girt round at the breast with a golden girdle, and his head and hairs white, as if white wool -- as snow, and his eyes as a flame of fire; and his feet like to fine brass, as in a furnace having been fired, and his voice as a sound of many waters, and having in his right hand seven stars, and out of his mouth a sharp two-edged sword is proceeding, and his countenance [is] as the sun shining in its might.

And when I saw him, I did fall at his feet as dead, and he placed his right hand upon me, saying to me, `Be not afraid; I am the First and the Last, and he who is living, and I did become dead, and, lo, I am living to the ages of the ages. Amen! and I have the keys of the hades and of the death.

Do you realize this is one scene? The Speaker identifies Himself in v. 11 as “the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last.” John turns to see who is speaking and sees “one like to a son of man” (other translations have “the Son of man”). Perhaps John is saying, "I saw someone who looked like Jesus." Then finally, in v. 17-18, the Speaker indeed identifies Himself as the One who is living and became dead and is now alive again forever.

Unitarians: I guess you identify the Alpha and Omega in v. 8 as Jehovah and v. 11 as Jesus? I guess you don’t see the term “the First and the Last” as a title equivalent to “the Alpha and Omega”? If so, you are definitely seeing something in the text that an ordinary reading doesn’t see beacuse of your bias.

It’s a title ascribed to the Almighty. I didn’t think it needed a more precise definition to be understood. What about, “the one who is and who was and who to come”? Does that need to be defined? I guess we could talk about a precise definition but I don’t think that will change my point. The Alpha/Omega is self-described as “the Almighty (1:8) AND the First/Last (22:13). The First/Last is self-described as the one who was dead and is alive forever more (1:18). Again, there are either 2 people who are the first and last OR Jesus is the Almighty.

Conclusion: Scripture declares YHWH is the First and the Last and besides Me there is no God/YHWH. Christ is YHWH.

hope this helps !!!

 

[TOTHALORDBEALLGLORY]

nope in Revelation He is sitting on the throne and its Christ who is identified as the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End- not the Father.

next fallacy

Rev 22:13, “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.”

We can see here that Whoever is the Alpha/Omega also claims to be the first/last AND the beginning/end. It’s the same Person.

If we look back in Rev 1:17-18 we see the following:

“…Fear not; I am the first and the last: I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.”

So, the One Who is first/last (and then is also Alpha/Omega and beginning/end) is the same Person who was dead and is alive forever more. It doesn’t take a scholar to figure out Who is the One speaking here. It does take a lot of mental gymnastics to explain away something so obvious.

The term "first/last" is used 4 times in Rev. Twice it is used along with "Alpha/Omega" with the Person claiming to be "first/last" AND the "Alpha/Omega."

"Alpha/Omega" is used 4 times in Rev. Twice with "first/last" and twice with "beginning/end."

"Beginning/end" occurs 3 times: twice with "Alpha/Omega" and once with "Alpha/Omega" AND "first/last."

In all of these texts, the speaker always refers to Himself with both or all of the titles. To say, "Well, this time it's Jehovah who is the first/last, this next time it's Jesus, then later it's Jehovah again..." is the mental gymnastics to which I referred.

Is God the first/last or is Jesus the first/last? Is God the Alpha/Omega or is Jesus the Alpha/Omega? Is God the beginning/end or is Jesus the beginning/end. An obvious way to reconcile the verses is to understand that Jesus is God.

According to unitarians, it seems God claimed to be the first/last in one sense while Jesus claimed to be first/last in another sense. You seem to gloss over the blatant connection of first/last with beginning/end and Alpha/Omega. In each verse, the Speaker who claims one title also claims one or both of the others. It's all the same person.

I usually wait patiently for unitarians to reply but this point has been nagging at me so I have to comment preemptively. I really am baffled by their suggestion from other discussion in the past that “first/last” has some meaning here other than the obvious one (a title synonymous with Alpha/Omega). You even say that Alpha/Omega is never used of the Son? Incredible!! We both have said that context is king so I would like to remind other readers of the context of Rev 1:17-18 (beginning in v.10, Young’s Literal):

I was in the Spirit on the Lord's-day, and I heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, saying, I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last;' and, `What thou dost see, write in a scroll, and send to the seven assemblies that [are] in Asia; to Ephesus, and to Smyrna, and to Pergamos, and to Thyatira, and to Sardis, and to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.'

And I did turn to see the voice that did speak with me, and having turned, I saw seven golden lamp-stands, and in the midst of the seven lamp-stands, [one] like to a son of man, clothed to the foot, and girt round at the breast with a golden girdle, and his head and hairs white, as if white wool -- as snow, and his eyes as a flame of fire; and his feet like to fine brass, as in a furnace having been fired, and his voice as a sound of many waters, and having in his right hand seven stars, and out of his mouth a sharp two-edged sword is proceeding, and his countenance [is] as the sun shining in its might.

And when I saw him, I did fall at his feet as dead, and he placed his right hand upon me, saying to me, `Be not afraid; I am the First and the Last, and he who is living, and I did become dead, and, lo, I am living to the ages of the ages. Amen! and I have the keys of the hades and of the death.

Do you realize this is one scene? The Speaker identifies Himself in v. 11 as “the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last.” John turns to see who is speaking and sees “one like to a son of man” (other translations have “the Son of man”). Perhaps John is saying, "I saw someone who looked like Jesus." Then finally, in v. 17-18, the Speaker indeed identifies Himself as the One who is living and became dead and is now alive again forever.

Unitarians: I guess you identify the Alpha and Omega in v. 8 as Jehovah and v. 11 as Jesus? I guess you don’t see the term “the First and the Last” as a title equivalent to “the Alpha and Omega”? If so, you are definitely seeing something in the text that an ordinary reading doesn’t see beacuse of your bias.

It’s a title ascribed to the Almighty. I didn’t think it needed a more precise definition to be understood. What about, “the one who is and who was and who to come”? Does that need to be defined? I guess we could talk about a precise definition but I don’t think that will change my point. The Alpha/Omega is self-described as “the Almighty (1:8) AND the First/Last (22:13). The First/Last is self-described as the one who was dead and is alive forever more (1:18). Again, there are either 2 people who are the first and last OR Jesus is the Almighty.

Conclusion: Scripture declares YHWH is the First and the Last and besides Me there is no God/YHWH. Christ is YHWH.

hope this helps !!!

Correctamundo my friend . I AM THE FIRST . lets even examine that .
I AM THE FIRST . GOD IS THE FIRST . I am the first and the last . the beginning and the ending .
Now what you need to also remind these folks about , WHICH i think you did , is
Go too and behold the entire bible . WHO was the ONLY ONE that ever used that line .
No angel did . no prophet did , no man did . GOD DID .
And yet somehow when JESUS says it they try and then say HE is another first and last . just like they try and say
A WORD , THE WORD Stuff . they twist things my friend . THEY Do it all the time .

 

[TOTHALORDBEALLGLORY]

nope in Revelation He is sitting on the throne and its Christ who is identified as the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End- not the Father.

next fallacy

Rev 22:13, “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.”

We can see here that Whoever is the Alpha/Omega also claims to be the first/last AND the beginning/end. It’s the same Person.

If we look back in Rev 1:17-18 we see the following:

“…Fear not; I am the first and the last: I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.”

So, the One Who is first/last (and then is also Alpha/Omega and beginning/end) is the same Person who was dead and is alive forever more. It doesn’t take a scholar to figure out Who is the One speaking here. It does take a lot of mental gymnastics to explain away something so obvious.

The term "first/last" is used 4 times in Rev. Twice it is used along with "Alpha/Omega" with the Person claiming to be "first/last" AND the "Alpha/Omega."

"Alpha/Omega" is used 4 times in Rev. Twice with "first/last" and twice with "beginning/end."

"Beginning/end" occurs 3 times: twice with "Alpha/Omega" and once with "Alpha/Omega" AND "first/last."

In all of these texts, the speaker always refers to Himself with both or all of the titles. To say, "Well, this time it's Jehovah who is the first/last, this next time it's Jesus, then later it's Jehovah again..." is the mental gymnastics to which I referred.

Is God the first/last or is Jesus the first/last? Is God the Alpha/Omega or is Jesus the Alpha/Omega? Is God the beginning/end or is Jesus the beginning/end. An obvious way to reconcile the verses is to understand that Jesus is God.

According to unitarians, it seems God claimed to be the first/last in one sense while Jesus claimed to be first/last in another sense. You seem to gloss over the blatant connection of first/last with beginning/end and Alpha/Omega. In each verse, the Speaker who claims one title also claims one or both of the others. It's all the same person.

I usually wait patiently for unitarians to reply but this point has been nagging at me so I have to comment preemptively. I really am baffled by their suggestion from other discussion in the past that “first/last” has some meaning here other than the obvious one (a title synonymous with Alpha/Omega). You even say that Alpha/Omega is never used of the Son? Incredible!! We both have said that context is king so I would like to remind other readers of the context of Rev 1:17-18 (beginning in v.10, Young’s Literal):

I was in the Spirit on the Lord's-day, and I heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, saying, I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last;' and, `What thou dost see, write in a scroll, and send to the seven assemblies that [are] in Asia; to Ephesus, and to Smyrna, and to Pergamos, and to Thyatira, and to Sardis, and to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.'

And I did turn to see the voice that did speak with me, and having turned, I saw seven golden lamp-stands, and in the midst of the seven lamp-stands, [one] like to a son of man, clothed to the foot, and girt round at the breast with a golden girdle, and his head and hairs white, as if white wool -- as snow, and his eyes as a flame of fire; and his feet like to fine brass, as in a furnace having been fired, and his voice as a sound of many waters, and having in his right hand seven stars, and out of his mouth a sharp two-edged sword is proceeding, and his countenance [is] as the sun shining in its might.

And when I saw him, I did fall at his feet as dead, and he placed his right hand upon me, saying to me, `Be not afraid; I am the First and the Last, and he who is living, and I did become dead, and, lo, I am living to the ages of the ages. Amen! and I have the keys of the hades and of the death.

Do you realize this is one scene? The Speaker identifies Himself in v. 11 as “the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last.” John turns to see who is speaking and sees “one like to a son of man” (other translations have “the Son of man”). Perhaps John is saying, "I saw someone who looked like Jesus." Then finally, in v. 17-18, the Speaker indeed identifies Himself as the One who is living and became dead and is now alive again forever.

Unitarians: I guess you identify the Alpha and Omega in v. 8 as Jehovah and v. 11 as Jesus? I guess you don’t see the term “the First and the Last” as a title equivalent to “the Alpha and Omega”? If so, you are definitely seeing something in the text that an ordinary reading doesn’t see beacuse of your bias.

It’s a title ascribed to the Almighty. I didn’t think it needed a more precise definition to be understood. What about, “the one who is and who was and who to come”? Does that need to be defined? I guess we could talk about a precise definition but I don’t think that will change my point. The Alpha/Omega is self-described as “the Almighty (1:8) AND the First/Last (22:13). The First/Last is self-described as the one who was dead and is alive forever more (1:18). Again, there are either 2 people who are the first and last OR Jesus is the Almighty.

Conclusion: Scripture declares YHWH is the First and the Last and besides Me there is no God/YHWH. Christ is YHWH.

hope this helps !!!

let all that draws breath praise and thank the glorious LORD . stay in the Bible my friend . feast everyday upon those lovely reminders
for they are meat to the soul of the sheep . IMMANUEL , THE LORD GOD ALL MIGHTY is with the sheep .
March onwards in the trenches .

 

[civic]

let all that draws breath praise and thank the glorious LORD . stay in the Bible my friend . feast everyday upon those lovely reminders
for they are meat to the soul of the sheep . IMMANUEL , THE LORD GOD ALL MIGHTY is with the sheep .
March onwards in the trenches .

Yes the Good Shepherd of the sheep- the Son - the Lord ( Jesus ) is my Shepherd I shall not want- David in Psalm 23. He was Israels Great Shepherd.

 

[TOTHALORDBEALLGLORY]

I'm sorry,,,but this is one of the funniest reasons I've ever read/heard for denying the Trinity.
If a woman goes into a hospital with a fat belly....
And come home with a baby...
Is it NECESSARY to state that she was pregnant?

I DON'T THINK SO.




The Apostles SAW GOD AT WORK IN THE RESURRECTION.

Did you really just state that?

Nothing more to say.

Do you consider yourself to be a Christian?
If you do, you MUST believe in the Trinity.
You MUST believe that Jesus is God.
Otherwise, you're not Christian.
Christians believe Jesus is God.

People will believe just about any thing these days .
marvel not dear sister . they love to twist things . You might even hear a response like
OH SHE JUST HAD GAS and STOLE A BABY . cause it never said SHE was pregnant .
Gotta admit that one have to be ONE SERIOUS MEAN case of Gas to appear pregnant .

 

[TOTHALORDBEALLGLORY]

nope in Revelation He is sitting on the throne and its Christ who is identified as the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End- not the Father.

next fallacy

Rev 22:13, “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.”

We can see here that Whoever is the Alpha/Omega also claims to be the first/last AND the beginning/end. It’s the same Person.

If we look back in Rev 1:17-18 we see the following:

“…Fear not; I am the first and the last: I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.”

So, the One Who is first/last (and then is also Alpha/Omega and beginning/end) is the same Person who was dead and is alive forever more. It doesn’t take a scholar to figure out Who is the One speaking here. It does take a lot of mental gymnastics to explain away something so obvious.

The term "first/last" is used 4 times in Rev. Twice it is used along with "Alpha/Omega" with the Person claiming to be "first/last" AND the "Alpha/Omega."

"Alpha/Omega" is used 4 times in Rev. Twice with "first/last" and twice with "beginning/end."

"Beginning/end" occurs 3 times: twice with "Alpha/Omega" and once with "Alpha/Omega" AND "first/last."

In all of these texts, the speaker always refers to Himself with both or all of the titles. To say, "Well, this time it's Jehovah who is the first/last, this next time it's Jesus, then later it's Jehovah again..." is the mental gymnastics to which I referred.

Is God the first/last or is Jesus the first/last? Is God the Alpha/Omega or is Jesus the Alpha/Omega? Is God the beginning/end or is Jesus the beginning/end. An obvious way to reconcile the verses is to understand that Jesus is God.

According to unitarians, it seems God claimed to be the first/last in one sense while Jesus claimed to be first/last in another sense. You seem to gloss over the blatant connection of first/last with beginning/end and Alpha/Omega. In each verse, the Speaker who claims one title also claims one or both of the others. It's all the same person.

I usually wait patiently for unitarians to reply but this point has been nagging at me so I have to comment preemptively. I really am baffled by their suggestion from other discussion in the past that “first/last” has some meaning here other than the obvious one (a title synonymous with Alpha/Omega). You even say that Alpha/Omega is never used of the Son? Incredible!! We both have said that context is king so I would like to remind other readers of the context of Rev 1:17-18 (beginning in v.10, Young’s Literal):

I was in the Spirit on the Lord's-day, and I heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, saying, I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last;' and, `What thou dost see, write in a scroll, and send to the seven assemblies that [are] in Asia; to Ephesus, and to Smyrna, and to Pergamos, and to Thyatira, and to Sardis, and to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.'

And I did turn to see the voice that did speak with me, and having turned, I saw seven golden lamp-stands, and in the midst of the seven lamp-stands, [one] like to a son of man, clothed to the foot, and girt round at the breast with a golden girdle, and his head and hairs white, as if white wool -- as snow, and his eyes as a flame of fire; and his feet like to fine brass, as in a furnace having been fired, and his voice as a sound of many waters, and having in his right hand seven stars, and out of his mouth a sharp two-edged sword is proceeding, and his countenance [is] as the sun shining in its might.

And when I saw him, I did fall at his feet as dead, and he placed his right hand upon me, saying to me, `Be not afraid; I am the First and the Last, and he who is living, and I did become dead, and, lo, I am living to the ages of the ages. Amen! and I have the keys of the hades and of the death.

Do you realize this is one scene? The Speaker identifies Himself in v. 11 as “the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last.” John turns to see who is speaking and sees “one like to a son of man” (other translations have “the Son of man”). Perhaps John is saying, "I saw someone who looked like Jesus." Then finally, in v. 17-18, the Speaker indeed identifies Himself as the One who is living and became dead and is now alive again forever.

Unitarians: I guess you identify the Alpha and Omega in v. 8 as Jehovah and v. 11 as Jesus? I guess you don’t see the term “the First and the Last” as a title equivalent to “the Alpha and Omega”? If so, you are definitely seeing something in the text that an ordinary reading doesn’t see beacuse of your bias.

It’s a title ascribed to the Almighty. I didn’t think it needed a more precise definition to be understood. What about, “the one who is and who was and who to come”? Does that need to be defined? I guess we could talk about a precise definition but I don’t think that will change my point. The Alpha/Omega is self-described as “the Almighty (1:8) AND the First/Last (22:13). The First/Last is self-described as the one who was dead and is alive forever more (1:18). Again, there are either 2 people who are the first and last OR Jesus is the Almighty.

Conclusion: Scripture declares YHWH is the First and the Last and besides Me there is no God/YHWH. Christ is YHWH.

hope this helps !!!

I am the First and the last
besides me there IS NO OTHER GOD .
There was none before . I will share my GLORY with no other .
Same GOD said all that and more . His title He used , I AM THE FIRST and the LAST
yet i hear the same phrase from CHRIST JESUS in revelation .
It was been written HE WHOM GOD ROSE from the Grave . AND GOD DID .
Now watch this .
NO man takes my life from ME , i have power to lay it down and i have power to RAISE IT UP .
Pretty neat huh . IF one really desires to know the truth
and one reads thier lovely bible , it can become quite clear in time
as to why JESUS even said , PHILLIP if you have SEEN ME you have SEEN the Father so why do you say SHOW us the Father .
GOD IS HIS WORD and that is a fact as HE IS HIS SPIRIT .

 

[TOTHALORDBEALLGLORY]

Yes the Good Shepherd of the sheep- the Son - the Lord ( Jesus ) is my Shepherd I shall not want- David in Psalm 23. He was Israels Great Shepherd.

Onwards in the glorious Lord .

 

[civic]

I am the First and the last
besides me there IS NO OTHER GOD .
There was none before . I will share my GLORY with no other .
Same GOD said all that and more . His title He used , I AM THE FIRST and the LAST
yet i hear the same phrase from CHRIST JESUS in revelation .
It was been written HE WHOM GOD ROSE from the Grave . AND GOD DID .
Now watch this .
NO man takes my life from ME , i have power to lay it down and i have power to RAISE IT UP .
Pretty neat huh . IF one really desires to know the truth
and one reads thier lovely bible , it can become quite clear in time
as to why JESUS even said , PHILLIP if you have SEEN ME you have SEEN the Father so why do you say SHOW us the Father .
GOD IS HIS WORD and that is a fact as HE IS HIS SPIRIT .

this is the stumbling block of the uni who forfeits their salvation by denying the Son.

1 Peter-
For in Scripture it says:

“See, I lay a stone in Zion,
a chosen and precious cornerstone,
and the one who trusts in him
will never be put to shame.”
7Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe,

“The stone the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone,”

“A stone that causes people to stumble
and a rock that makes them fall.

 

[Doug Brents]

I believe he's a resurrected human in heaven because that's the last way he was described before being taken to heaven. Many decades after the fact, when talking about Jesus, people just kept right on calling him a man. A spirit, an angel, or God isn't a man. He's literally still the Son of Man/Son of God. Same titles for the same person.

See, Paul still called him a man decades later.

1 Tim 2
5For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

Abe Lincoln is dead, dust, gone, but he is still referred to as a man, as a leader, as a president. Just because he is no longer in the form that he once was does not change the way we talk about him. The same applies to Jesus. He may be in Heaven again, but He is still referred to as we knew Him when He was living on Earth.

Well, Jesus being the Word isn't how any aside from John described Jesus. When others like Matthew or Luke talked about the origins of Jesus, they began with the fact that he was descended from Adam like everyone else. They didn't mention anything about him being incarnated. Look at it this way... if you were to remove John's writings from the New Testament, you would not know anything about the Word becoming flesh because no one talked about it.

But John is Scripture. And we do have His writings. And he was an Apostle inspired by God to write a fourth Gospel about Jesus.

It's highly likely that you are misunderstanding John. For example, John didn't believe Jesus is God and there's proof because of some other things he said. Did you read John and Peter's prayer together in Acts 4:23-31? They prayed to the Sovereign Lord and Creator and in that prayer they said David and Jesus are His servants.

Sure, Jesus was God's servant while He was here on Earth. He lowered Himself to the place of a servant, and emptied Himself of the independent use of His power and knowledge, and His glory, and His position. But not of His deity or authority.

So I don't believe John turned right around and contradicted himself. I would interpret John 1:1-14 in light of 1 John 1:1-3 because John said the Word of life is eternal life, but eternal life is an impersonal thing, not a person.

Figurative language. When something solid is said to be something figurative, it doesn't cease to be solid. It is understood to be both solid and figurative.

I can see how one may come to that conclusion if they cherry pick a specific version or ignore the context. You're also probably relying on the "Granville-Sharp rule" which is not a rule in English or Greek. They don't teach students in school about this "rule" because it has exceptions and only exists in translations where the "rule" is written in. The GS rule was invented. For example, the KJV does not contain this rule for Titus 2:13 and shows clear distinction between God and Jesus.

The JKV mistranslates Titus 2:13, but the NKJV, the NASB, and many other word-for-word translations do not.

As you know, the Greek didn't contain English punctuation marks, but were later added in after being translated. The RSV , KJV, and a couple other versions of Romans 9:5 doesn't call Jesus God.

The RSV, KJV and all other translations that I have read (https://biblehub.com/romans/9-5.htm) do indeed call Jesus the Messiah and God over all.

2 Peter 1:1 doesn't directly call Jesus God. Did you read 2 Peter 1:2? It makes clear distinction between God and Jesus. Peter was probably one of the clearer examples of someone who didn't believe Jesus is God. His sermons in Acts portray Jesus as a man who God was with.

Again, Peter makes it very clear that Jesus is God in both of these verses.

Jesus also said that the father of the Pharisees is the devil. Jesus was saying they were lying about their accusations that he had claimed to be God.

That is not the lie He was accusing them of telling. Their hedge around the Scriptures was the lie they were living, and enforcing it as if it were Scripture was what He was condemning. smh

In John 10, Jesus said that those to whom the word of God had come to are themselves gods because they are sons of the Most High. Jesus is also a son of the Most High, but not the only son.

He's not?
John 3:16
1 John 4:9
Luke 1:35
And many more.

I had a feeling you would leave out Acts 2 because this verse is clear that the Lord God they call on to be saved and Jesus aren't the same person. When you finally realize that YHWH and Jesus aren't the same person you will understand the verses clearly.

Acts 2
21And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.’
22“Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know—

Again, you overlook the truth. Jesus as a man was not the same person as God the Father who was still in Heaven at the time. But He was still God in the flesh. Jesus can be (and is) both man and God at the same time. The verses and passages you focus on describe Him as a man, but there are also those many passages that describe Him as God, equal with and joint to the Father.

 

[Doug Brents]

Jesus does not sit on the throne. He sits to the right of it as second in command since he's the head of the body of Christ.

Rev 3:21
Matt 25:31
Rev 22:3 - The throne of God and the Lamb... and His servants shall worship Him (two subjects, but singular pronoun - the two are one)
Rev 7:16-17
I could go on, and on.

 

[Peterlag]

Rev 3:21
Matt 25:31
Rev 22:3 - The throne of God and the Lamb... and His servants shall worship Him (two subjects, but singular pronoun - the two are one)
Rev 7:16-17
I could go on, and on.

You assume the throne of his glory is the throne of God.

When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

 

[Peterlag]

nope in Revelation He is sitting on the throne and its Christ who is identified as the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End- not the Father.

next fallacy

Rev 22:13, “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.”

We can see here that Whoever is the Alpha/Omega also claims to be the first/last AND the beginning/end. It’s the same Person.

If we look back in Rev 1:17-18 we see the following:

“…Fear not; I am the first and the last: I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.”

So, the One Who is first/last (and then is also Alpha/Omega and beginning/end) is the same Person who was dead and is alive forever more. It doesn’t take a scholar to figure out Who is the One speaking here. It does take a lot of mental gymnastics to explain away something so obvious.

The term "first/last" is used 4 times in Rev. Twice it is used along with "Alpha/Omega" with the Person claiming to be "first/last" AND the "Alpha/Omega."

"Alpha/Omega" is used 4 times in Rev. Twice with "first/last" and twice with "beginning/end."

"Beginning/end" occurs 3 times: twice with "Alpha/Omega" and once with "Alpha/Omega" AND "first/last."

In all of these texts, the speaker always refers to Himself with both or all of the titles. To say, "Well, this time it's Jehovah who is the first/last, this next time it's Jesus, then later it's Jehovah again..." is the mental gymnastics to which I referred.

Is God the first/last or is Jesus the first/last? Is God the Alpha/Omega or is Jesus the Alpha/Omega? Is God the beginning/end or is Jesus the beginning/end. An obvious way to reconcile the verses is to understand that Jesus is God.

According to unitarians, it seems God claimed to be the first/last in one sense while Jesus claimed to be first/last in another sense. You seem to gloss over the blatant connection of first/last with beginning/end and Alpha/Omega. In each verse, the Speaker who claims one title also claims one or both of the others. It's all the same person.

I usually wait patiently for unitarians to reply but this point has been nagging at me so I have to comment preemptively. I really am baffled by their suggestion from other discussion in the past that “first/last” has some meaning here other than the obvious one (a title synonymous with Alpha/Omega). You even say that Alpha/Omega is never used of the Son? Incredible!! We both have said that context is king so I would like to remind other readers of the context of Rev 1:17-18 (beginning in v.10, Young’s Literal):

I was in the Spirit on the Lord's-day, and I heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, saying, I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last;' and, `What thou dost see, write in a scroll, and send to the seven assemblies that [are] in Asia; to Ephesus, and to Smyrna, and to Pergamos, and to Thyatira, and to Sardis, and to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.'

And I did turn to see the voice that did speak with me, and having turned, I saw seven golden lamp-stands, and in the midst of the seven lamp-stands, [one] like to a son of man, clothed to the foot, and girt round at the breast with a golden girdle, and his head and hairs white, as if white wool -- as snow, and his eyes as a flame of fire; and his feet like to fine brass, as in a furnace having been fired, and his voice as a sound of many waters, and having in his right hand seven stars, and out of his mouth a sharp two-edged sword is proceeding, and his countenance [is] as the sun shining in its might.

And when I saw him, I did fall at his feet as dead, and he placed his right hand upon me, saying to me, `Be not afraid; I am the First and the Last, and he who is living, and I did become dead, and, lo, I am living to the ages of the ages. Amen! and I have the keys of the hades and of the death.

Do you realize this is one scene? The Speaker identifies Himself in v. 11 as “the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last.” John turns to see who is speaking and sees “one like to a son of man” (other translations have “the Son of man”). Perhaps John is saying, "I saw someone who looked like Jesus." Then finally, in v. 17-18, the Speaker indeed identifies Himself as the One who is living and became dead and is now alive again forever.

Unitarians: I guess you identify the Alpha and Omega in v. 8 as Jehovah and v. 11 as Jesus? I guess you don’t see the term “the First and the Last” as a title equivalent to “the Alpha and Omega”? If so, you are definitely seeing something in the text that an ordinary reading doesn’t see beacuse of your bias.

It’s a title ascribed to the Almighty. I didn’t think it needed a more precise definition to be understood. What about, “the one who is and who was and who to come”? Does that need to be defined? I guess we could talk about a precise definition but I don’t think that will change my point. The Alpha/Omega is self-described as “the Almighty (1:8) AND the First/Last (22:13). The First/Last is self-described as the one who was dead and is alive forever more (1:18). Again, there are either 2 people who are the first and last OR Jesus is the Almighty.

Conclusion: Scripture declares YHWH is the First and the Last and besides Me there is no God/YHWH. Christ is YHWH.

hope this helps !!!

“‘I am the Alpha and the Omega,’ says the Lord God.” These words apply to God, not to Christ. The one, “who is, and who was and who is to come” is clearly identified in the context as God, not Jesus Christ. Revelation 1:4-5 reads: “Grace and peace to you from him who is, and who was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits before his throne, and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.” The separation between “the one who is, was and is to come” and Jesus Christ can be clearly seen. The one “who is, and who was and who is to come” is God.

The phrase “the Alpha and the Omega,” has caused many people to believe this verse refers to Christ. However, study of the occurrences of the phrase indicates that the title “Alpha and Omega” applies solely to God. Scholars are not completely sure what the phrase “the Alpha and the Omega” means. Lenski concludes, “It is fruitless to search Jewish and pagan literature for the source of something that resembles this name Alpha and Omega. Nowhere is a person, to say nothing of a divine Person, called ‘Alpha and Omega,’ or in Hebrew, Aleph and Tau.

Although there is no evidence from the historical sources that anyone is named “the Alpha and Omega,” Bullinger says that the phrase “is a Hebraism, in common use among the ancient Jewish Commentators to designate the whole of anything from the beginning to the end; e.g., ‘Adam transgressed the whole law from Aleph to Tau’ (Jalk. Reub., fol. 17.4). That would make the expression the figure of speech, polarmerismos, similar to "and there was evening, and there was morning” which stands for the whole day, in Genesis 1. The best scholarly minds have concluded that the phrase has something to do with starting and finishing something, or the entirety of something. Norton writes that these words, “denote the certain accomplishment of his purposes; that what he has begun he will carry on to its consummation."

 

[Runningman]

Abe Lincoln is dead, dust, gone, but he is still referred to as a man, as a leader, as a president. Just because he is no longer in the form that he once was does not change the way we talk about him. The same applies to Jesus. He may be in Heaven again, but He is still referred to as we knew Him when He was living on Earth.

We call Abe a man still because that's exactly what he was. Same with Jesus.

But John is Scripture. And we do have His writings. And he was an Apostle inspired by God to write a fourth Gospel about Jesus.

Yes, but Scripture is vulnerable to translation error/bias. If a Trinitarian translates a Bible it'll have Trinitarian ideas in it. If a Unitarian translates a Bible it'll have Unitarian ideas in it.

Sure, Jesus was God's servant while He was here on Earth. He lowered Himself to the place of a servant, and emptied Himself of the independent use of His power and knowledge, and His glory, and His position. But not of His deity or authority.

Jesus and David are both God's servant. Since David isn't God then neither is Jesus.

Figurative language. When something solid is said to be something figurative, it doesn't cease to be solid. It is understood to be both solid and figurative.

You acknowledge that literary devices can be used in the Bible. So the Word being a he in John 1:1-14 can just be personification. Think about it... words aren't literally a person.

The JKV mistranslates Titus 2:13, but the NKJV, the NASB, and many other word-for-word translations do not.

Oh the version(s) that don't agree with your theology are mistranslations.

The RSV, KJV and all other translations that I have read (https://biblehub.com/romans/9-5.htm) do indeed call Jesus the Messiah and God over all.

They don't.

Romans 9 (KJV)
5Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

Romans 9 (RSV)
5 to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed for ever.[a] Amen.

Again, Peter makes it very clear that Jesus is God in both of these verses.

Context means Jesus isn't God. 2 Peter 1:1 isn't a stand alone long wolf verse that flies in the face of Scripture.

2 Peter 1
1Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ: 2Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord,

That is not the lie He was accusing them of telling. Their hedge around the Scriptures was the lie they were living, and enforcing it as if it were Scripture was what He was condemning. smh

Yes their accusations that Jesus is God is a lie. Jesus will say who he is when he is asked. For example, Jesus said he is the Messiah to the woman at the well in John 4, but when the Pharisees accused him of claiming to be God Jesus refuted them. He didn't agree.

He's not?
John 3:16
1 John 4:9
Luke 1:35
And many more.

Yes, the only "Begotten" son. So you admit the Son of God was begotten?

Again, you overlook the truth. Jesus as a man was not the same person as God the Father who was still in Heaven at the time. But He was still God in the flesh. Jesus can be (and is) both man and God at the same time. The verses and passages you focus on describe Him as a man, but there are also those many passages that describe Him as God, equal with and joint to the Father.

Did you know there are many verses and passages where Jesus lacks divine qualities inherent to God and about two dozens names and titles that he doesn't share with God?

 

[Doug Brents]

You assume the throne of his glory is the throne of God.

When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

You pick one verse out of the four that you think you can counter what it says.

I assume nothing.
Rev 3:21 - "The one who overcomes, I will grant to him to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat with My Father on His throne."
We will sit with Jesus on His throne, just as Jesus sits with the Father on His throne.
Matt 25:31 - "But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne."
He does not sit beside the throne. He sits ON the throne.
Rev 22:3 - "There will no longer be any curse; and the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and His bond-servants will serve Him"
One throne, two who sit on it, and they are called His and Him, singular not plural.
Rev 7:16-17 - "for the Lamb in the center of the throne will be their shepherd, and will guide them to springs of the water of life; and God will wipe every tear from their eyes."
Lamb of God (Jesus) will sit in the center of the throne.
Notice in all of these that the throne is singular. There are not multiple thrones, but one singular throne, and Jesus sits on it with the Father.

 

[Doug Brents]

We call Abe a man still because that's exactly what he was. Same with Jesus.

Jesus was indeed a man, but He did not start that way, nor is He still a man. He is now sitting on the throne with the Father in Heaven.

Yes, but Scripture is vulnerable to translation error/bias. If a Trinitarian translates a Bible it'll have Trinitarian ideas in it. If a Unitarian translates a Bible it'll have Unitarian ideas in it.

The language in which the NT was written is a dead language that was in common use for a very short period of time. That is part of what made it "the fullness of time" for Christ to come. Because it was not used for very long, there are very few ways to properly translate most passages of Scripture into any other language. Yes, it is possible to change the translation to fit your personal bias (transliteration and other ways of changing from the original text), but if the translator is honest with the original meanings of the words, there can be no bias introduced into the text.

And the Scriptures are self-correcting, meaning that there are so many cross-references and quotes from one book to the other that it is very difficult to change the meaning of the whole.

Jesus and David are both God's servant. Since David isn't God then neither is Jesus.

Your logic is faulty.

You acknowledge that literary devices can be used in the Bible. So the Word being a he in John 1:1-14 can just be personification. Think about it... words aren't literally a person.

It could just be personification, but in verse 14 we are told that the Word (Logos) became (or took on, or put on) flesh. It wasn't just a personified idea, but it became a man. God became a man.

Oh the version(s) that don't agree with your theology are mistranslations.

No, the versions that are not consistent with the vast majority of other translations. That is one reason it is a good thing that there are numerous translations done by many different teams. They can be used to crosscheck each other.

They don't.

Romans 9 (KJV)
5Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

Romans 9 (RSV)
5 to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed for ever.[a] Amen.

There is no punctuation given in the Greek text. So it requires the form of the words used to tell us what they mean. These versions of this verse do not agree with the original language word's meanings, nor do they agree with the rest of Scripture's statements about who and what Jesus is.

Context means Jesus isn't God. 2 Peter 1:1 isn't a stand alone long wolf verse that flies in the face of Scripture.

2 Peter 1
1Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ: 2Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord,

You are correct that 2 Pet 1:1-2 is not a standalone passage, nor does it disagree with the rest of Scripture. It states clearly, as does the rest of Scripture, that Jesus is God.

Yes their accusations that Jesus is God is a lie. Jesus will say who he is when he is asked. For example, Jesus said he is the Messiah to the woman at the well in John 4, but when the Pharisees accused him of claiming to be God Jesus refuted them. He didn't agree.

John 10:25-38 - "Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe; the works that I do in My Father’s name, these testify of Me. 26 But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep. 27 My sheep listen to My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; 28 and I give them eternal life, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”

31 The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus replied to them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?” 33 The Jews answered Him, “We are not stoning You for a good work, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.” 34 Jesus answered them, “Has it not been written in your Law: ‘I said, you are gods’? 35 If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be nullified), 36 are you saying of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? 37 If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; 38 but if I do them, even though you do not believe Me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father.”
The Pharisees accuse Him of saying He is the Son of God (equal with God), and He says that His works testify for themselves. And they take what He said as confirmation that He was blaspheming. They understood exactly what He was claiming, and if it had been a false claim they would have been right in executing Him for blasphemy. But it just so happens that He was the only man ever that this claim was not false, nor was it blasphemy.

Luke 22:70 - "And they all said, “So You are the Son of God?” And He said to them, 'You say correctly that I am.' 71 And then they said, “What further need do we have of testimony? For we have heard it ourselves from His own mouth!'"
Again, the Pharisees accuse Him of saying He is the Son of God (equal with God), and He says that they are correct. And they take what He said as confirmation that He was blaspheming. They understood exactly what He was claiming, and if it had been a false claim they would have been right in executing Him for blasphemy. But it just so happens that He was the only man ever that this claim was not false, nor was it blasphemy.

Yes, the only "Begotten" son. So you admit the Son of God was begotten?

The point in those verses is that Jesus is the ONLY Son of God.
He was begotten by God through Mary. But Jesus preexisted His birth through Mary, and His spirit was not created as all other human's souls are.

Did you know there are many verses and passages where Jesus lacks divine qualities inherent to God and about two dozens names and titles that he doesn't share with God?

Absolutely, and all of these cases are in relation to His incarnation, not His spiritual origins. He is and was God before He became a man, and while He was less than the Father (even less than the angels) while incarnated, He started as, and went back to being, equal with the Father.

 

[101G]

1 Corinthians 12:4 "Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit." 1 Corinthians 12:5 "

The spirit of God also called the spirit of Christ. Not God who is the Holy Spirit.

And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord." 1 Corinthians 12:6

Lord here is Jesus.

"And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all."

God here is God.

1 Corinthians 12:7 "But the manifestation of the Spirit (THE HOLY SPIRIT) is given to every man to profit withal."

The manifestation of the spirit is the spirit of God also called the spirit of Christ. Not God who is the Holy Spirit.

1 Corinthians 12:8 "For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;" 1 Corinthians 12:9 "To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;" 1 Corinthians 12:10 "To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:"

The spirit of God also called the spirit of Christ. Not God who is the Holy Spirit.

1 Corinthians 12:11 "But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will."

The spirit of God also called the spirit of Christ. Not God who is the Holy Spirit.

DINOLJC, to all
Pete how blind are you. the "Lord" is the "LORD" shared equally in flesh. listen carefully. Isaiah 63:5 "And I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me."
pete, pete, his OWN "ARM" is him. scripture, Isaiah 53:1 "Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?" Pete, Pete, God is .... "REVEALING his, his, his, OWN ARM". listen,
Isaiah 53:2 "For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him." Isaiah 53:3 "He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not." Isaiah 53:4 "Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted." Isaiah 53:5 "But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed." Isaiah 53:6 "All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." Isaiah 53:7 "He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth."

Pete did you understand the scriptures, who is God's ... "OWN ARM" is?

101G.

 

[101G]

The words “HOLY SPIRIT” in the Bible are primarily used in two very different ways: One way is to refer to God Himself and the other is referring to God’s nature that He gives to people.

tell us then who is this NATURE? Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" and Form here is,
G3444 μορφή morphe (mor-fee') n.
1. form.
2. (intrinsically) fundamental nature.
[perhaps from the base of G3313 (through the idea of adjustment of parts)]
KJV: form
Root(s): G3313

and the NATURE of God is "Spirit". scripture, John 4:24 "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth."
and the Lord Jesus has the SAME "EQUAL NATURE", and this is G3444 μορφή morphe ....... INTERNAL NATURE.

so the Lord Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit. the almighty one.

101G.

 

[101G]

GOD IS A SPIRIT and those who worship him must do so in Spirit and in Truth . THE SPIRIT IS TRUTH , AS GOD IS TRUTH
AS HIS WORD IS TRUTH . I suppose folks think that somehow the Spirit is what exactly .............
SO i say to those ask not WHAT IS THE SPIRIT , rather ask WHO IS THE SPIRIT . cause its not a what , ITS A WHO .
and that WHO IS GOD who spread HIS SPIRIT throughout the church giving to each one certain gifts and etc .
And that SPIRIT IS CHRIST . Me thinks men have seriously messed things up indeed .
But unto those whose eyes , whose ears , whose hearts have been opened by THE HOLY GOD , BY HIS SPIRIT , HIS WORD
as they read the scrips TRUTH WILL Be revealed to them and understanding will come .
But unto those who sit under wise sounding men who love to do word plays and use whatever kool sounding greek or hebrew
word or lexicon etc , THEY BETTER watch out and beware for men SURELY can decieve .
I suggest a friendly reminder to all and it comes coupled with a dire warning in love
ITS TIME THIS PEOPLE get back into the bible for their own selves cause men be fleecing the flocks big time .

thank you. 100% agree.

101G

 

[Peterlag]

tell us then who is this NATURE? Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" and Form here is,
G3444 μορφή morphe (mor-fee') n.
1. form.
2. (intrinsically) fundamental nature.
[perhaps from the base of G3313 (through the idea of adjustment of parts)]
KJV: form
Root(s): G3313

and the NATURE of God is "Spirit". scripture, John 4:24 "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth."
and the Lord Jesus has the SAME "EQUAL NATURE", and this is G3444 μορφή morphe ....... INTERNAL NATURE.

so the Lord Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit. the almighty one.

101G.

Philippians 2:6 is not a teaching on the trinity or that we should confess or believe that Jesus is God. From the Septuagint and their other writings, the Jews were familiar with morphē referring to the outward appearance, including the form of men and idols. To the Greeks, it also referred to the outward appearance, including the changing outward appearance of their gods and the form of statues. The only other New Testament use of morphē outside Philippians is in Mark, and there it refers to the outward appearance. Also, the words related to morphē clearly refer to an outward manifestation or appearance. The word morphē refers to an outward appearance or manifestation. Jesus Christ was in the outward appearance of God, so much so that he said, “He who has seen me has seen the Father.” Christ always did the Father’s will, and perfectly represented his Father in every way.

 

[Peterlag]

DINOLJC, to all
Pete how blind are you. the "Lord" is the "LORD" shared equally in flesh. listen carefully. Isaiah 63:5 "And I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me."
pete, pete, his OWN "ARM" is him. scripture, Isaiah 53:1 "Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?" Pete, Pete, God is .... "REVEALING his, his, his, OWN ARM". listen,
Isaiah 53:2 "For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him." Isaiah 53:3 "He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not." Isaiah 53:4 "Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted." Isaiah 53:5 "But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed." Isaiah 53:6 "All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." Isaiah 53:7 "He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth."

Pete did you understand the scriptures, who is God's ... "OWN ARM" is?

101G.

God does not have an arm. He's Spirit. It's a figure of speech.