John 1:1 - Jesus is the Father or he's not the one true God?

[tigger 2]

I read an interesting perspective on God the Son and the Father. He wasn't the Son of God until He was born. Prior to that He was God, the Second person of the Trinity, who emptied Himself and became a Son.
"For to which of the angels did He ever say: “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You”? And again: “I will be to Him a Father, And He shall be to Me a Son”? Heb. 1:5
In the beginning He was with God, He was God. That implies at least two persons. You're aren't with yourself, so you must be with someone else, God. And then we see all three at Jesus baptism which cancels out modalism.
Anyways, I think I had enough of this bunch. Most of them have me on ignore since I exposed the darkside of the JW's (Auntie Jane's posts about Christendom). That was it, I am an Opposer now ... a memo was sent out. It's a dead end.

...........................................
Well, you could actually apply some true research to my carefully researched post concerning John 1:1c (post #2 above). Where have I made an error? How do you refute the actual grammar used by John himself? Where have I misquoted a trinitarian NT grammar expert? Are there any other proper examples which would disprove the conclusion I have found concerning the 20 or so proper examples presented in my studies? Are there any flaws in choosing the examples I have found in John's own writing? Etc.

There is plenty to do besides merely saying something is false or presenting other scriptures which appear to disagree (depending on the translator's opinion and disregard of other alternate translations).

 

[PinSeeker]

We can't use John 1:14 to say the logos is Jesus by simply saying the logos is Jesus.

Well, I understand that you won't, but John does (and of course it's Gods Word), so yes, we can, and I do.

That is essentially how this verse is used as a proof for the trinity.

Right, because that's exactly what it says... or at least that God is a duality, because Jesus is God

The logos is not Jesus unless you want to make him the Father as per John 17:3 and 1 Cor 8:6, both declaring the Father to be the only true God.
We've already talked about you're spinning of these verses/passages several times, Rich. Yes, in John 17:3, Jesus, in the form of man (Philippians 2), called the Father the only true God. Hard as you want to believe it does, it does absolutely nothing to discount the fact that Jesus was also in the form of God (Philippians 2). And in John 17:5 ~ in probably the same breath as John 17:3 ~ He called upon the Father to glorify Him (Jesus) in His (the Father's) own presence with the glory that He (Jesus) I had with Him (the Father) before the world existed. In 1 Corinthians 8, Paul's principle purpose in that particular passage is debunking the prevalent believe among many in Corinth that there was more than one God and more than one Lord (polytheism). So no, that Jesus is the Logos does not insinuate in any way that the Son and the Father are one and the same person. Jesus is the Word ~ the Logos ~ made flesh, exactly as John says in John 1 (and shows throughout his gospel).

Why not believe the 3rd phrase on John 1:1 and simply believe, "...and the logos was God?"

LOL! I absolutely do.

Okay, the rest... You can play with words all you want; it comes to nothing, really.

...There, now you've had a non-trinitarian answer to John 17:5.

Yep. It comes to nothing.

BTW, in the OP I asked that we confine the discussion to John 17:3 and 1 Cor 8:6. I was wondering how those verses do not preclude Jesus from being God since, as far as I know, even Trinitarians understand Jesus to be the Son, not the Father. I brought that up only to be met with silence, which is not surprising in the least.

I have answered this several times, particularly pointing out the fact that Jesus is both the Son of God and the Son of Man. And I have asked you to give me your reasoning as to how that could be ~ I'm sure it would be very, um, "interesting" ~ but still, regarding that, the only silence has come from you, Rich. I asked you for your explanation of that fact at least twice, and still... crickets. You're the one guilty of silence, my friend, and it is quite deafening.

Jesus was a microscopic God embryo in Mary?

LOL! That's kind of a funny way of putting it, but yes. He was always of the Holy Spirit, just as Gabriel said He would be (Luke 1:35).

Obtuse?

Yes.

Junk logic? Really?

Yes.

I said that given those bare facts it logically follows that Trinitarians make Jesus the Father. Where's the junk in that?

Facts that are not really facts ~ or facts understood incorrectly ~ invariably produce junk logic.

PinSeeker: But are you and your wife not one flesh, in the sense that Paul alluded to in Ephesians 5 (and referred to Genesis 2:24)? I mean, that would be a problem...

Well, you've not told me what it means either.

Ah, you don't get to turn my question around on me, Rich. I'll be glad to (probably) correct your understanding of it, but the question remains open to you. And yes, this is another instance of your deafening silence.

Well, there is only so much time in the day. That's precisely why I wanted to confine this discussion to only 2 verses.

Seems there's more to it than just limited time...

But as usual, and as I specifically asked everyone to avoid, all I get are more verses that, taken in a Trinitarian way, contradict those 2 verses in a major way.

In your (clearly flawed, as I've shown several times) opinion. Sure.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[user]

So He was praying to Himself ... back and forth, praying and then pretending He is doing what the Father tells Him to do.

Jesus said, when you seen me you have seen the Father...

John 14:8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
[9] Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?


When Jesus prayed, that was the flesh tabernacle praying.
When Jesus said, I hunger and I thirst that was the flesh tabernacle - God/Spirit does not hunger nor thirst.
God himself had planned to later Tabernacle (dwell) with us in another way. Instead of meeting between the Wings of the Cheribums, he chose to dwell with us in bodily form...

John 1:14 "And the Word (God) was made flesh, and dwelt among us..."

Colossians 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

John 14:10 records Jesus saying, "Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? The WORDS that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that DWELLETH IN ME, he doeth the works.

2 Corinthians 5:19 "To wit, that God was IN CHRIST, reconciling the world unto Himself..."

God told Moses to make the Old Testament tabernacle with rams' skins dyed red, and a covering above of badgers' skins (Exodus 26:14). From the outside, it was not particularity beautiful. Jesus, the New Tabernacle, is not a man of outer beauty that we should desire him...

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.

When the priest was in the Holy Place, and about to enter into the Holiest Of Holies, he knew God was on the other side of the Veil. The New Testament tells us that Jesus' flesh, his skin, is the VEIL...

Hebrews 10:19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,
[20] By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;

 

[APAK]

@Kermos @GEN2REV @PinSeeker and any one else in this same category. I have a challenge for you, and any other person that keeps parroting John 10:30 means the Father is the same as the Son or visa versa, interchangeable, as in one essence or being or whatever you imagine it to mean. This is pure nonsense and shows ignorance in the understanding of scripture. Even a serious trinitarian student would be ashamed of what you guys think this verse means.

I'll tell you what, let me attempt to open your minds up and get the old stale knots out of it and do some serious refreshing Bible study of this verse alone.

Write a short commentary showing how John:10:30 is directly related to John 14:11 and 23 at least, and John 17:11 and 21. Take a day or two, I do not care.

Yahshua carries on with persistence and a sense of urgency a common theme surrounding John 10:30 as he keeps getting interrupted. He seriously wants to convey an important message to his audience and his Father. If you can find the local and surrounding context you will find what this message is all about and thus what John 10:30 means very clearly. And it should then arrest you notion that it means they are interchangeable beings or something of that order.

I hope you take me on. We all can learn something this way. Thanks

 

[farouk]

I read an interesting perspective on God the Son and the Father. He wasn't the Son of God until He was born. Prior to that He was God, the Second person of the Trinity, who emptied Himself and became a Son.
"For to which of the angels did He ever say: “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You”? And again: “I will be to Him a Father, And He shall be to Me a Son”? Heb. 1:5
In the beginning He was with God, He was God. That implies at least two persons. You're aren't with yourself, so you must be with someone else, God. And then we see all three at Jesus baptism which cancels out modalism.
Anyways, I think I had enough of this bunch. Most of them have me on ignore since I exposed the darkside of the JW's (Auntie Jane's posts about Christendom). That was it, I am an Opposer now ... a memo was sent out. It's a dead end.

John 3.16 says God gave His only begotten Son: He was the Son already when He was given; he did not become the Son.

Hebrews 1 says: 'Unto the Son He saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever'.

 

[Stan B]

In the beginning, Elohim (a plural form) meaning God is more than one person.
"Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”
Gen. 1: 25
"Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil."
Gen. 3:22
In both verses the word "us" is referring to God. These are pronouns. [A pronoun is a word that is used instead of a noun or noun phrase. Pronouns refer to either a noun that has already been mentioned or to a noun that does not need to be named specifically.]
God is not talking to His angels, for angels do not create anything.
God is love. Love cannot be alone. Love needs to express itself, have a relationship. Can you say you are a loving person if you lived on an island all by yourself. When a person says they are in love, that always means with another person. You could love yourself, but if that was all you did, that is selfish, self serving and not the kind of love that we see God as being.
So God must be plural or do you think He was alone before the creation of anything? "Let Us make man in Our image!" The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit have this loving relationship, they are ONE.
3 persons, 1 God.
No greater an expression of love is that you would sacrifice your life for another person. That is what God did. He became flesh, a human, dwelt among us and died for us. Jesus is the expression of God's love. Jesus did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped by men ... at least some men.

In the beginning the GODS created the Heavens et al.

Scriptural truth merely confirms the plurality of God, but NEVER in all of Scripture has our infinite God been reduced to a mere trinity.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

John 3.16 says God gave His only begotten Son: He was the Son already when He was given; he did not become the Son.

Hebrews 1 says: 'Unto the Son He saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever'.

"Today I have begotten you". That day is referring to His physical birth, and His death, physical.
"ever and ever" means ages and ages, a time period going forward. He became the Son of God, He became King, became High Priest, became our sacrificial Lamb, became our Savior. He soon will have a physical earthly kingdom for 1000 years and sit in Jerusalemnas King.
It is arguable that before His birth He did not have those titles. He was God, Who emptied Himself and became flesh in time and fulfilled hundreds of prophecies and will fulfill hundreds more in the near future.

 

[Kermos]

John 17:1-3,

1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:

2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.

3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

Jesus was talking to his Father and called Him the only true God. This is in complete agreement with Corinthians.

1 Cor 8:6,

But to us [there is but] one God, the Father, of whom [are] all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom [are] all things, and we by him.

Again, the Father is called the one God.

John calls Jesus the son more than 50 times and never calls him the Father.

John 1:1,

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

If we say Jesus is God then that means he is either the Father (which is totally counter to the Creeds) or he is not the true God (John 17:3) nor the one God (1 Cor 8:6).

Many solve the problem by finding out exactly what the "word" (logos) is in John 1:1. Hint: it's not Jesus.

Please confine the discussion to these verses in John. All the other so-called proof verses don't change what John clearly said. All verses have to fit.

The word of Rich R "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee exclusively being the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent" (in effect, your adulteration of John 17:3).

The Word of God "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent" (John 17:3).

Respecting John 17:3, the word of Rich R contrasts against the Word of God because the word of Rich R adds the words "exclusively being" to the Word of God thus Rich R adulterates the Word of God such that it is no longer the Word of God but converted to the word of Rich R.

Rich R conveys "But to us [there is but] one God composed of the Father only, of whom [are] all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom [are] all things, and we by him" (in effect, your adulteration of 1 Corinthians 8:6).

The Apostle Paul conveys "But to us [there is but] one God, the Father, of whom [are] all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom [are] all things, and we by him" (1 Corinthians 8:6).

Respecting 1 Corinthians 8:6, your thoughts add "composed of the" and "only" to the Apostle Paul's writing.

Respecting 1 Corinthians 8:6, Rich R, you disagree with the Apostle Paul because the Apostle Paul calls Jesus "the great God" with "looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of the great God and Savior of us, Christ Jesus" (Titus 2:13).

A word about your thoughts. It is written, "'For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways,' declares YHWH. 'For [as] the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways And My thoughts than your thoughts.'" (Isaiah 55:8-9).

A word about adding to scripture as you have done. It is written "do not add to His words or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar" (Proverbs 30:6), and the above explanation of your thoughts shows where you added to scripture.

Of the new Jerusalem, the Apostle John wrote "nothing unclean, and no one who practices abomination and lying, shall ever come into it, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life" (Revelation 21:27) - notice that no one who practices lying gets in, and a human adding to scripture is the human lying.

 

[Truther]

If that's all it takes to be God, then we are all Christ!

Col 1:27,

To whom God would make known what [is] the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:
​

God in Christ is not the same as God is Christ. Otherwise everything in our silverware drawer would make the drawer itself to be silverware.

We do not have dwelling in us all of the fullness of the Godhead, bodily.

That was only reserved for one man,

 

[Truther]

Well, I understand that you won't, but John does (and of course it's Gods Word), so yes, we can, and I do.


Right, because that's exactly what it says... or at least that God is a duality, because Jesus is God

The logos is not Jesus unless you want to make him the Father as per John 17:3 and 1 Cor 8:6, both declaring the Father to be the only true God.
We've already talked about you're spinning of these verses/passages several times, Rich. Yes, in John 17:3, Jesus, in the form of man (Philippians 2), called the Father the only true God. Hard as you want to believe it does, it does absolutely nothing to discount the fact that Jesus was also in the form of God (Philippians 2). And in John 17:5 ~ in probably the same breath as John 17:3 ~ He called upon the Father to glorify Him (Jesus) in His (the Father's) own presence with the glory that He (Jesus) I had with Him (the Father) before the world existed. In 1 Corinthians 8, Paul's principle purpose in that particular passage is debunking the prevalent believe among many in Corinth that there was more than one God and more than one Lord (polytheism). So no, that Jesus is the Logos does not insinuate in any way that the Son and the Father are one and the same person. Jesus is the Word ~ the Logos ~ made flesh, exactly as John says in John 1 (and shows throughout his gospel).


LOL! I absolutely do.

Okay, the rest... You can play with words all you want; it comes to nothing, really.


Yep. It comes to nothing.


I have answered this several times, particularly pointing out the fact that Jesus is both the Son of God and the Son of Man. And I have asked you to give me your reasoning as to how that could be ~ I'm sure it would be very, um, "interesting" ~ but still, regarding that, the only silence has come from you, Rich. I asked you for your explanation of that fact at least twice, and still... crickets. You're the one guilty of silence, my friend, and it is quite deafening.


LOL! That's kind of a funny way of putting it, but yes. He was always of the Holy Spirit, just as Gabriel said He would be (Luke 1:35).


Yes.


Yes.

Facts that are not really facts ~ or facts understood incorrectly ~ invariably produce junk logic.


Ah, you don't get to turn my question around on me, Rich. I'll be glad to (probably) correct your understanding of it, but the question remains open to you. And yes, this is another instance of your deafening silence.


Seems there's more to it than just limited time...


In your (clearly flawed, as I've shown several times) opinion. Sure.

Grace and peace to you.

You are the first person I have ever met in years to admit you think that one of the persons of the Godhead became a microscopic embryo and over many years, eventually became a man.

Very honest.

 

[user]

Jesus is not talking about Himself, anotherwise He would say, "Listen, I must go to the Father, but then my Spirit will come back and I will live in you and/or the Father will send Me back to you in spirit."

Actually that is exactly what has happened.
In the book of John, after the last supper, Jesus has a private conversation with the apostles...

John 14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
[8] Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
[9] Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

[16] And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever;
[17] Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
[18] I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.


We read that the world cannot see "the Spirit of truth", nor does the world know him. Jesus then said "But ye know him". Jesus is saying that the one standing here talking to you is the one that will be in you....

Colossians 1:27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:

Galatians 4:6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.

Romans 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

1 Corinthians 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

2 Corinthians 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

 

[ChristisGod]

@Kermos @GEN2REV @PinSeeker and any one else in this same category. I have a challenge for you, and any other person that keeps parroting John 10:30 means the Father is the same as the Son or visa versa, interchangeable, as in one essence or being or whatever you imagine it to mean. This is pure nonsense and shows ignorance in the understanding of scripture. Even a serious trinitarian student would be ashamed of what you guys think this verse means.

I'll tell you what, let me attempt to open your minds up and get the old stale knots out of it and do some serious refreshing Bible study of this verse alone.

Write a short commentary showing how John:10:30 is directly related to John 14:11 and 23 at least, and John 17:11 and 21. Take a day or two, I do not care.

Yahshua carries on with persistence and a sense of urgency a common theme surrounding John 10:30 as he keeps getting interrupted. He seriously wants to convey an important message to his audience and his Father. If you can find the local and surrounding context you will find what this message is all about and thus what John 10:30 means very clearly. And it should then arrest you notion that it means they are interchangeable beings or something of that order.

I hope you take me on. We all can learn something this way. Thanks

It means exactly what it means He is claiming to be God when He said I and the Father are One.

John 10
Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”

31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”

33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

 

[APAK]

It means exactly what it means He is claiming to be God when He said I and the Father are One.

John 10
Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”

31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”

33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

Does not say anything at all C....you have to do at least a commentary to even let me know that you know what it means. I'll tell you what, translate your post into a logical and informative commentary and see where it goes from there. Now you have to be persuasive in your argument premise(s) and conclusion(s), as I already see you have widened the scope of what I asked. Need to stay focused. Can you do it is the question?

 

[ChristisGod]

Does not say anything at all C....you have to do at least a commentary to even let me know that you know what it means. I'll tell you what, translate your post into a logical and informative commentary and see where it goes from there. Now you have to be persuasive in your argument premise(s) and conclusion(s), as I already see you have widened the scope of what I asked. Need to stay focused. Can you do it is the question?

The context of John 10:30 makes it clear as to its meaning hence the "blasphemy " . The surrounding verses are the commentary. I don't need to comment further just point out the biblical facts from the passage which I did. You on the other hand must make "comments" to explain away the simple meaning in the text.

hope this helps !!!

 

[PinSeeker]

You are the first person I have ever met in years to admit you think that one of the persons of the Godhead became a microscopic embryo and over many years, eventually became a man.

Very honest.

Do you think He was not a man when He was a "microscopic embryo," Truther? He certainly was. Yeah, " A person is a person no matter how small." (Horton Hears a Who; Dr. Suess). Hey, you know, they can even identify male and female sperm, now, and parents doing in vitro fertilization can select the gender of their child. So yes, Jesus was a man ~ and God ~ through His time in Mary's womb in its entirety, as well as after. Honest? Yeah, okay, I mean, it is what it is.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[APAK]

The context of John 10:30 makes it clear as to its meaning hence the "blasphemy " . The surrounding verses are the commentary. I don't need to comment further just point out the biblical facts from the passage which I did. You on the other hand must make "comments" to explain away the simple meaning in the text.

hope this helps !!!

C, before you are quick to the draw, to shoot down the largest object in the text you see, why not see the story play out first from its origon. Just keep you powder dry and maybe start with the beginning of John 10 say. That is one way to encircle and create some logic and draw a sound conclusion.

example...

Context/Premise 1: John 10:1-16 Yahshua speaks of his close partnership with his Father to bring all those the Father chooses, to him, for safekeeping and salvation. Incidentally John the Baptist was given the unique privilege from the Father of presenting and opening the gate to the green pastures over to Yahshua. A ceremony of recognizing the true shepherd. He would become the Father's shepherd of his chosen people, the true gatekeeper of life from that time henceforth, Yahshua would lay down his life for the Father's chosen ones....build and discuss...build and discuss....see what is developing here?...it should be getting quite obvious, that who is this Christ, the Son of God and who is his Father. We have to build up or discuss and reference other scripture as I already eluded to.....

 

[ChristisGod]

C, before you are quick to the draw, to shoot down the largest object in the text you see, why not see the story play out first from its origon. Just keep you powder dry and maybe start with the beginning of John 10 say. That is one way to encircle and create some logic and draw a sound conclusion.

example...

Context/Premise 1: John 10:1-16 Yahshua speaks of his close partnership with his Father to bring all those the Father chooses, to him, for safekeeping and salvation. Incidentally John the Baptist was given the unique privilege from the Father of presenting and opening the gate to the green pastures over to Yahshua. A ceremony of recognizing the true shepherd. He would become the Father's shepherd of his chosen people, the true gatekeeper of life from that time henceforth, Yahshua would lay down his life for the Father's chosen ones....build and discuss...build and discuss....see what is developing here?...it should be getting quite obvious, that who is this Christ, the Son of God and who is his Father. We have to build up or discuss and reference other scripture as I already eluded to.....

Why stop or start there? The entire gospel of John declares His Deity as Creator right from the beginning in John 1:1-3.

hope this helps !!!

 

[APAK]

C, before you are quick to the draw, to shoot down the largest object in the text you see, why not see the story play out first from its origon. Just keep you powder dry and maybe start with the beginning of John 10 say. That is one way to encircle and create some logic and draw a sound conclusion.

example...

Context/Premise 1: John 10:1-16 Yahshua speaks of his close partnership with his Father to bring all those the Father chooses, to him, for safekeeping and salvation. Incidentally John the Baptist was given the unique privilege from the Father of presenting and opening the gate to the green pastures over to Yahshua. A ceremony of recognizing the true shepherd. He would become the Father's shepherd of his chosen people, the true gatekeeper of life from that time henceforth, Yahshua would lay down his life for the Father's chosen ones....build and discuss...build and discuss....see what is developing here?...it should be getting quite obvious, that who is this Christ, the Son of God and who is his Father. We have to build up or discuss and reference other scripture as I already eluded to.....

@Christophany ....more...verse 10:15...'as the Father knows me and I know the Father"....a key phrase....like 10:30 in more ways than you know...
and verse 19: the Pharisees were confused and angered, said he was demon-possessed, and like many today are still confused as to who is the Christ and who is the Father.....keep building as we play out the story....then eventually we go to the Garden of the eve of the Messiah's death....this is how a decent commentary or even Sermon is done so both the writer/orator and the audience are on the same page...with common understanding....

 

[APAK]

Why stop or start there? The entire gospel of John declares His Deity as Creator right from the beginning in John 1:1-3.

hope this helps !!!

Don't give up on me now..be patient and follow along at least. With your words then there would be no need to discuss or study anything...it's all so obvious aye...and that is wishful thinking. We cannot take the tree of scripture and replace or modify it with a tree of say trinitarianism now can we...? Leave scripture alone, intact. The HS can guide one to the truth...

 

[ChristisGod]

Don't give up on me now..be patient and follow along at least. With your words then there would be no need to discuss or study anything...it's all so obvious aye...and that is wishful thinking. We cannot take the tree of scripture and replace or modify it with a tree of say trinitarianism now can we...? Leave scripture alone, intact. The HS can guide one to the truth...

I will get back later after work tonight. I'm not ignoring you and will engage you with John 10.