Worshipping The Son

[praise_yeshua]

The still, small voice.

We all need that. Elijah recognized it.
I must admit, I find sometimes that I confuse it with my own. I believe we all do. Elijah had to end up in the silence of being alone with God to hear it clearly.

 

[civic]

It would have been a massacre...

For sure

 

[Johann]

shhh - you are spoiling the FUN

Hmm-I see-we are having FUN-"scuse the PUN"

 

[Johann]

“And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness about me. You have neither heard HIS voice at any time nor seen HIS form, and you do not have his word residing in you, because you do not believe the very one whom he sent.” John 5:37-38

If one reads this verse in isolation from the rest of the Holy Bible then the meaning becomes obvious that no one at any time has ever seen the Father’s form or heard his voice. Yet a completely different picture emerges when we read this in light of the following texts:

“‘Father, glorify your name.’ Then a voice came out of heaven: ‘I have glorified it and will glorify it again.’ The crowd that was standing there heard it and began to say that it had thundered. Others said: ‘An angel has spoken to him.’ Jesus answered: ‘This voice has occurred, not for my sake, but for your sakes.’” John 12:28-30

“Six days later Jesus took Peter and James and his brother John along and led them up into a lofty mountain by themselves. And he was transfigured before them; his face shone as the sun, and his outer garments became brilliant as the light. And look! there appeared to them Moses and E·li′jah conversing with him. Then Peter said to Jesus: “Lord, it is fine for us to be here. If you wish, I will erect three tents here, one for you, one for Moses, and one for E·li′jah.’ While he was still speaking, look! a bright cloud overshadowed them, and look! a voice out of the cloud said: ‘This is my Son, the beloved, whom I have approved. Listen to him.’ At hearing this, the disciples fell facedown and became very much afraid.” Matthew 17:1-6

In these examples, people saw the Father as he appeared as/in a cloud and even heard his voice. Therefore, Jesus could not possibly have meant that no one had ever heard or seen the Father. Rather, Jesus’ statements were directed towards his enemies, basically telling them that THEY had not seen the Father’s form or heard his voice.

In a similar manner, the texts which say that God cannot be seen do not mean that the Father can never be seen in any sense whatsoever. Rather, these verses mean that no one can see the full glory of the Father, which is why he appears in various forms since this allows his servants to see a glimpse of what he is truly like.

Just to bring it closer to home.

I think we should be more Biblical thinkers-and leave the "fun"

J.

 

[Johann]

Yes Trinitarians are monotheistic

Jesus repeatedly endorsed the Shema. Like any other Jew, he seemed to believe that God was numerically one. For example, a scribe once asked him, “What commandment is the foremost of all?” (Mark 12.28; cf. Matthew 22.36). Jesus answered by quoting the Shema, saying it was “foremost” (v. 29). The scribe replied, “Right, Teacher, You have truly stated that HE IS ONE; AND THERE IS NO ONE ELSE BESIDES HIM” (V. 32). Jesus accepted this as correct by replying, “You are not far from the kingdom of God” (v. 34). Did Jesus mean that God was one person and not two or three? It seems that he did.

The Johannine Jesus even more precisely identified God as numerically one. He said to his accusers, “How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and you do not seek the glory that is from the one and only God?” (John 5.44). Later, he prayed to the “Father” concerning his disciples, “This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent” (17.1, 3). Herein, Jesus not only described the Father as “the one and only God” but distinguished himself in doing so, which represents a clear denial that he himself is God.

Trinitarian scholars insist that they are monotheistic, thus believing in one God. But most of them define “one” as a unity rather than numerically. Many Muslims and Jews, who also claim to be monotheistic, reject this by alleging that Trinitarians are tritheistic, meaning that they believe in three gods.

So, what is monotheism? Henry More, a Cambridge Platonist philosopher, coined the word “monotheism” in the 17th century. It represents a transliterated conjoining of two Greek words. The word “mono” derives from the Greek word monos, meaning “only,” “alone,” or “single.” But as a prefix, “mono” can also mean numerically “one.” The word “theistic” derives from theos, the Greek word for “god,” and thus means “belief in god.” Joining these two words together signifies belief in numerically one god/God in contrast to the word polytheism, meaning “belief in many gods” or “more than one god.” Yet Trinitarians define the one God of the Bible as three co-equal Persons. It therefore seems questionable that Trinitarian Christianity should be categorized as monotheistic. That’s why some modern scholars reject the word “monotheism” as a useful category.

Jews have always vehemently defended their monotheism against Trinitarianism. And they have denied any hint of Trinitarianism in their Scriptures. For many religious Jews, the church doctrine of the Trinity seems blasphemous, and this is surely how Jews would have viewed it during the time of Jesus. Raymond E. Brown rightly says of that era, “For the Jew ‘God’ meant God the Father in heaven.”

 

[civic]

Jesus repeatedly endorsed the Shema. Like any other Jew, he seemed to believe that God was numerically one. For example, a scribe once asked him, “What commandment is the foremost of all?” (Mark 12.28; cf. Matthew 22.36). Jesus answered by quoting the Shema, saying it was “foremost” (v. 29). The scribe replied, “Right, Teacher, You have truly stated that HE IS ONE; AND THERE IS NO ONE ELSE BESIDES HIM” (V. 32). Jesus accepted this as correct by replying, “You are not far from the kingdom of God” (v. 34). Did Jesus mean that God was one person and not two or three? It seems that he did.

The Johannine Jesus even more precisely identified God as numerically one. He said to his accusers, “How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and you do not seek the glory that is from the one and only God?” (John 5.44). Later, he prayed to the “Father” concerning his disciples, “This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent” (17.1, 3). Herein, Jesus not only described the Father as “the one and only God” but distinguished himself in doing so, which represents a clear denial that he himself is God.

Trinitarian scholars insist that they are monotheistic, thus believing in one God. But most of them define “one” as a unity rather than numerically. Many Muslims and Jews, who also claim to be monotheistic, reject this by alleging that Trinitarians are tritheistic, meaning that they believe in three gods.

So, what is monotheism? Henry More, a Cambridge Platonist philosopher, coined the word “monotheism” in the 17th century. It represents a transliterated conjoining of two Greek words. The word “mono” derives from the Greek word monos, meaning “only,” “alone,” or “single.” But as a prefix, “mono” can also mean numerically “one.” The word “theistic” derives from theos, the Greek word for “god,” and thus means “belief in god.” Joining these two words together signifies belief in numerically one god/God in contrast to the word polytheism, meaning “belief in many gods” or “more than one god.” Yet Trinitarians define the one God of the Bible as three co-equal Persons. It therefore seems questionable that Trinitarian Christianity should be categorized as monotheistic. That’s why some modern scholars reject the word “monotheism” as a useful category.

Jews have always vehemently defended their monotheism against Trinitarianism. And they have denied any hint of Trinitarianism in their Scriptures. For many religious Jews, the church doctrine of the Trinity seems blasphemous, and this is surely how Jews would have viewed it during the time of Jesus. Raymond E. Brown rightly says of that era, “For the Jew ‘God’ meant God the Father in heaven.”

I'll deal with this fallacious argument tomorrow. There are 3 major monotheistic world religions- Islam, Christianity and Judaism. Are you a trinitarian ? Jesus was a Trinitarian.

He taught the Father was God, He was God and the Holy Spirit was God.

hope this helps !!!

 

[civic]

Jesus repeatedly endorsed the Shema. Like any other Jew, he seemed to believe that God was numerically one. For example, a scribe once asked him, “What commandment is the foremost of all?” (Mark 12.28; cf. Matthew 22.36). Jesus answered by quoting the Shema, saying it was “foremost” (v. 29). The scribe replied, “Right, Teacher, You have truly stated that HE IS ONE; AND THERE IS NO ONE ELSE BESIDES HIM” (V. 32). Jesus accepted this as correct by replying, “You are not far from the kingdom of God” (v. 34). Did Jesus mean that God was one person and not two or three? It seems that he did.

The Johannine Jesus even more precisely identified God as numerically one. He said to his accusers, “How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and you do not seek the glory that is from the one and only God?” (John 5.44). Later, he prayed to the “Father” concerning his disciples, “This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent” (17.1, 3). Herein, Jesus not only described the Father as “the one and only God” but distinguished himself in doing so, which represents a clear denial that he himself is God.

Trinitarian scholars insist that they are monotheistic, thus believing in one God. But most of them define “one” as a unity rather than numerically. Many Muslims and Jews, who also claim to be monotheistic, reject this by alleging that Trinitarians are tritheistic, meaning that they believe in three gods.

So, what is monotheism? Henry More, a Cambridge Platonist philosopher, coined the word “monotheism” in the 17th century. It represents a transliterated conjoining of two Greek words. The word “mono” derives from the Greek word monos, meaning “only,” “alone,” or “single.” But as a prefix, “mono” can also mean numerically “one.” The word “theistic” derives from theos, the Greek word for “god,” and thus means “belief in god.” Joining these two words together signifies belief in numerically one god/God in contrast to the word polytheism, meaning “belief in many gods” or “more than one god.” Yet Trinitarians define the one God of the Bible as three co-equal Persons. It therefore seems questionable that Trinitarian Christianity should be categorized as monotheistic. That’s why some modern scholars reject the word “monotheism” as a useful category.

Jews have always vehemently defended their monotheism against Trinitarianism. And they have denied any hint of Trinitarianism in their Scriptures. For many religious Jews, the church doctrine of the Trinity seems blasphemous, and this is surely how Jews would have viewed it during the time of Jesus. Raymond E. Brown rightly says of that era, “For the Jew ‘God’ meant God the Father in heaven.”

And who wants to believe what a lost Jew thinks about God ? I'll go with what the saved Jews think about God as Plural in Persons.

 

[Johann]

I'll deal with this fallacious argument tomorrow. There are 3 major monotheistic world religions- Islam, Christianity and Judaism. Are you a trinitarian ? Jesus was a Trinitarian.

Everything to you is "fallacious"-I believe in the Triune God-and we are veering OFF topic-yes?

 

[DavidTree]

Hmm-I see-we are having FUN-"scuse the PUN"

Love your fellowship in the Son as we have fun on the run.

Good Night Brother

 

[civic]

Everything to you is "fallacious"-I believe in the Triune God-and we are veering OFF topic-yes?

Only what opposes the Tri-Unity of God and the teaching of Jesus.

 

[civic]

Shaliach in the OT and its function.

Well the main function or a general definition of a "shaliach" is as follows: A shaliaḥ (שָלִיחַ; pl. שְלִיחִים, sheliḥim) in Halakha is a Jewish legal or agent. Accordingly, a shaliaḥ performs an act of legal significance for the benefit of the sender, as opposed to him or herself. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaliach

A Chabad shliach (שליח, pl. שליחים/שלוחים, shlichim/shluchim) is a Chabad member sent out to promulgate Judaism and Chasidut around the world. Chabad shluchim today number about 4,000 worldwide, and can be found in many of even the most remote worldly locales.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaliach_(Chabad) Now, I am bringing this up for a very good reason and I want to cut to the chase of my point in this little exercise. The basic job of a "shaliach or the definition is an agent sent on a specfic mission to represent the interst of someon else. In short there are restrictions to the function of a shaliach and I will give you the best example.

Now, you have at Genesis 16:7 the very first appearance of the angel of the Lord. If you read the context from verse 7 to Genesis 17:1-2 you will discover that the Lord God Almighty is the speaker even though the the angel of the Lord is actually speaking. At verse 10 the angel of the Lord says that He will greatly multiply the descendants of Hagar. Then at Genesis 17:1 and 2 it's the Lord God Almighty who will multiply his descendants. You cannot get away from the fact that the same being is taking in the passages. Even at Genesis 16:13 Hagar says I have see the Lord God and am still alive.

Now, lets jump to Genesis 22 where God is going to test Abraham. You have the Lord God Almighty speaking from Genesis 22:1-10. There is no question about this fact. At verse 11 it states, "But the angel of the Lord called to him (Abraham) from heaven and said, "Abraham, Abraham!" And he said, "Here I am." Then at verse 15 the angel of the Lord called to Abraham from heaven a second time." (Note: why does the angel of the Lord have to call out for God Himself a second time from heaven?) Is not the Lord God Himself capable of calling out from heaven Himself. I mean He did call out from heaven at Mark 1:11. He did not need the so-called shaliah then.

After the angel of the Lord calls out from heaven the second time which is Genesis 22:15 here is what this so-called shaliach/emissary says, "By Myself I have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this thing, and have not withheld you son, you only son. Indeed, I will greatly multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens, and as the sand which is on the seashore etc."

So you see from following the sequence of events a shaliach is limited or he can only do so much on behalf of the sender. He cannot swear an oath for the sender as you see the scriptures say. He cannot multiply the seed of anyone as you see the scriptures say.

Not only that but the real kicker of all of this is found in the NT at Hebrews 6:13. The writer of the Hebrews states, "For when God made the promise to Abraham, SINCE HE COULD SWEAR BY NO ONE GREATER, HE SWORE BY HIMSELF, VS14, SAYING, "I WILL SURELY BLESS YOU , AND I WILL MULTIPLY YOU." This text is referring back to Genesis 22 and Abraham. A shaliach cannot swear an oath on behalf of the sender and it even says God swore by Himself. In short, the shaliach argument will not work and I maintain that the messenger of the Lord is the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ. james

hope this helps !!!