Aspen and Tigger 2 discuss 'who is God?'

[GodsGrace]

I do agree on this point although I look at it perhaps differently than some do. I do not worship the Bible. For me it remains by itself a dead book.

Agreed.

[I am not against theologians. They are just well studied men, but by study alone we will never get all of God's message to man. By reading from the theologians alone we will likely find ourselves in a ditch. Reading them is like reading posts on this forum. You may well and correctly say that they know more, but what they know is not necessarily knowledge of the Good which is God alone. We need a sifter.

I remember when I was a child at home my mother was a great cook and baker. She made all of her own pie crusts and baked goods from scratch. She always had a sifter through which she sifted the flour that came out of the sack before it went into the mix. It took all of the little lumps and clumps out making it a fine evenly distributed powder. It made a big difference in the finished product.

Our sifter is, or should be, the Holy Spirit in us.[/QUOTE]
Agreed again.
I always say I sift when I listen to someone speaking.
I'm just a plain ole' traditional Christian. No weird ideas.
Acts 17:11 The Bereans.

That they were decided by them could be a problem. Men have been making mistakes from day one. We may certainly consider what they decided, but at the same time don't let our respect for them be so great that we never doubt them and never even consider the things they decided against...

Well, it's not day one anymore. It's been 2,000 years that Christianity has been put together and, yes, there is a definitin to what makes a Christian. Otherwise some descriptions sound Buddhist, for example. We are unique.
Jesus claimed to be God. He resurrected. He changed history, literally. (Rome).

And, of course I don't trust all of them.
Calvinist theologians got it all wrong.
I tend to trust mainline churches.

You say if we we're only going to get what the Holy Spirit will give, but what is there that God would neglect to give to anyone who is coming to Him with the right attitude and asking of Him continuously? Did not Jesus say,

"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened." Matt 7:7-8

I'll name two big items:
The Holy Trinity (not easy to find with reading alone)
Justification and Sanctification (it could get all mixed up)

What is easier? Is it easier to take hold of the things that those Fathers put together so long ago? Remember what was written about Jesus himself?
"And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man." Luke 2:52

In other words, Jesus grew and so must we grow. If we take what someone else said as the final word on it, no matter how studious or wise or devout that person was, will we not eventually stagnate and die? Take hold of things for the moment, yes, things that for the moment fill a space in us, but never presume that that is the end of the road when we still have time left in which to grow. A carnal child grows to adulthood learning all along the way, but should he stop learning because he reached his 21st birthday, or his 30th birthday, or even his 70th birthday? I reached my 74th last month and still in the things of God I intend to grow until there is no more time for me:

"He must increase, but I must decrease." John 3:30

The "I" that needs to decrease is that in me which follows or wishes to follow the ways of the flesh [the old man]. The "He" is the Jesus in me that leads me to or along the Way of God [the new or inner man].

I agree with progressive revelation, but some of it is degressive. In some areas we are going backwards instead of frontwards, so, yes, we do also need to look back at the ECF, they were they closest to Jesus. And the Apostolic Fathers more than anyone.

Wrong question, unless being a Christian means a person is always pleasing to God. What does God expect or desire from us?

"But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you." Matt 6:33

To me that verse means that if we continuously put those first things first, then anything and everything else we need will be added to us. What else do we need? We can try to define them, but only God always knows what they are for each individual.

Remember that we are to be one part of the Body of Christ. Not every part has precisely the same functions.

I can't remember what I said here, but what God expects from us to to obey His commandments and to worship Him and to treat His creatures (us) in the way He would want us to.
Oh. And to also love ourselves.

That which connects the parts of the Body of Christ to the Head [Jesus] and to the other parts of the Body is the Holy Spirit dwelling in each and every part.

So how often is it really our job to decide the correctness of every other person we meet according to God? If we really need to know and we are seeking those first things first of Matt 6:33 will not what is needed be given to us? No generalizations regarding the things of God work all of the time. That is trying to put Him in a box and He does not fit.

A current connection with Jesus through the Holy Spirit is always required. Will not seeking always those first things first accomplish that?

Agreed as to the parts of the Body of Christ.
It's never my job to judge another regarding the correctness of another person. However, if they're doing something obviously wrong, it would be nice to say so in a very kind and delicate manner. We were instructed by Paul to do this.

I never put God in a box. He's too big for that.

 

[GodsGrace]

GG: "As to John 17:3 you'll get the standard reply which @aspen has given you. When the 2nd person of the Trinity was incarnated as the person Jesus, He did lower Himself, even though He retained many aspects of God - or attributes. He was human 100%. He was God 100%.

"Since JESUS' Father was God, and not Joseph, He did have some God "DNA" in Him. So, as a human, it was correct for Him to refer to God Father, as Father."
...................................

But the point was that Jesus called his Father 'God ALONE' (or 'the ONLY true God'). And yet I believe you are saying that Jesus is 100% God and I, would suppose, that the HS is 100% God. So, if that were true, the Father cannot be the "ONLY true God."[/QUOTE]
I did speak to this in a P.S. to you. You might have missed it.
What I said is that Father IS the only ONE true God.
You know Deuteronomy 6:4
"Hear O Israel! The LORD (might be Yahweh) is our God, the LORD is one!
NASB

At the time of Deuteronomy, and even in the time of Christ, people of different cultures in the area, for instance Greeks, Babylonians, were worshipping different gods - some had one for every reason.
Indeed the Hebrews, Israelites, Jews, had ONLY ONE God.
So when Jesus prayed, He prayed to the One true Father, One true God. This is easy to accept if you can accept the Trinity.

As for Titus 2:13, it is one in a class of a handful of scriptures that many trinitarian translators use in an attempt to avoid an alternate non-trinitarian translation.

In an attempt to prove the trinity doctrine, Granville Sharp made up a rule in 1798. It is often called “Sharp’s Rule” by trinitarians. It says, in effect, that when two or more words (nouns) in NT Greek are joined by the word “and” (kai) they all refer to the same person if the word “the” (the article) comes before the first noun and not before the other noun(s): “THE king AND _master of the castle.”

Sharp invented this rule after he noticed this particular construction (sometimes called a “Sharp’s construction”) was used with “God” and “Christ” in 5 places in the NT. IF he could convince others that his “rule” was true, then they would think there was finally (after 1400 years of a “trinity” tradition) absolute grammatical Bible proof that God and Jesus are the same “person”!

Even NT Grammarian Daniel B.Wallace himself (who desperately tries for some kind of “absolute” scriptural proof for a trinity idea) complained that,

“so many grammarians and exegetes objected to the validity of Granville Sharp’s Rule with reference to texts dealing with the Deity of Christ”!

He specifically mentions “the great Greek grammarian,” G. B. Winer (trinitarian) and “one of the greatest grammarians of this [nineteenth/twentieth] century,” J. H. Moulton (trinitarian) as rejecting this “rule”!

I have also seen that the Roman Catholic scholar Karl Rahner rejects this rule as do C. F. D. Moule and Henry Alford. Even famed trinitarian scholar Dr. James Moffatt (“probably the greatest biblical scholar of our day”) showed his rejection of the “absoluteness” of this rule by his rendering of Titus 2:13.

In fact, even trinitarian NT Grammarian Daniel B. Wallace himself complains that the common translation of Titus 2:13 as found in the KJV (“the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ”) treats “‘God’ and ‘Savior’ separately”!

In vol. 5, p. 257 the respected The Expositor's Greek Testament says: "In the present case [Jude 1:4], however, the second noun (kupiov) belongs to the class of words which may stand without the article .... A similar doubtful case is found in Tit. ii. 13.... ." [Except for kupiov, emphasis has been added by me.]

It is no secret to NT Grammarians that when you have more than one noun connected by "and" (kai in NT Greek) and the first noun has the article, the following nouns may or may not have the article but they can still be understood to have the article.

Moulton's Grammar of New Testament Greek says:

"(f) Repetition of Article with several nouns connected by kai

"The art. may be carried over from the first noun to the other(s)" - p. 181, Vol. 3, 1963.

We might compare Matt. 22:32 (all nouns with article) with Mark 12:26 (first article understood with following nouns).

I also don't agree with Sharp's Rule.
This cannot be a hard and fast rule. Everything depends on context.

I felt that the word "our" in some versions is very important and that is what I was referring to. Not the word AND.
...our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus...
...our great God and OUR Savior, Christ Jesus...

This is what seems to make the difference to me.
I know a theologian who taught Koine Greek and will ask him about Titus 2:13 - probably next week.

I was going to refer you to Titus 3:4 but 3:6 does not make that feasible.

I feel that the most difficult verse for you to explain would be
Psalm 110-1, Mark 12:36
This would reconcile with Mark 14:62

Psalm 110:1
New American Standard Bible
A Psalm of David. The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet."

Mark 12:36

Mark 12:36
Speaking by the Holy Spirit, David himself declared: 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at My right hand until I put Your enemies under Your feet."'

Mark 14:62
"I am," said Jesus, "and you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven."

More examples:

Titus 2:13

Looking for that blessed hope, and appearing of that glory of that mighty God, and of our Savior Jesus Christ. - GNV.

"we hope and wait for the glorious denouement of the Great God and of Jesus Christ our saviour." - Phillips.

"as we await our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of the great God and of our Savior Jesus Christ, - NAB (1970)

"as we await the blessed hope, the appearance of the glory of the great God and of our savior Jesus Christ, - NAB (1991).

"looking for that blessed hope and glorious appearing of the mighty God and of our Saviour Jesus Christ," - NMB.

I have more on this false 'rule,' but I doubt that you will take the effort to carefully read what I have just written.

........................................

"I've made up my mind; don't bother me with facts."

Are you referring to me?
I've actually thought about this for a long time.
I can't seem to be able to make the switch.
Jesus acted like God. He was different from Buddha or Krishna or anyone else.

I just pray that God in His mercy will forgive the one of us which is incorrect. Since I'm sure that we both love Jesus, be He God or be He the Messiah. Or be He both.

 

[tigger 2]

GG:

I feel that the most difficult verse for you to explain would be
Psalm 110-1, Mark 12:36
This would reconcile with Mark 14:62

Psalm 110:1
New American Standard Bible
A Psalm of David. The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet."

Mark 12:36

Mark 12:36
Speaking by the Holy Spirit, David himself declared: 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at My right hand until I put Your enemies under Your feet."'

Mark 14:62
"I am," said Jesus, "and you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven."

Ps. 110:1 more honestly says: "Jehovah [YHWH] saith unto my Lord [ADN or kurios in OT Greek], Sit thou at my right hand, Until I make thine enemies thy footstool." - ASV.

Unfortunately, early 'Christians' removed God's only personal name (YHWH) from all their writings (probably shortly after 135 A.D. - Bar Kochba's revolution). Fortunately the Jews continued using the Name in copies of the OT and the Greek Septuagint. Unfortunately, the Jews stopped using the Septuagint and 'Christian' copyists who began to make copies of the Septuagint also removed the Name from it. Since most Bibles today translate from the OT Hebrew text, they are knowingly removing God's only personal name and replacing it with an entirely different word in all the thousands of places it occurs in the OT text!

Mark 12:36: Speaking by the Holy Spirit, David himself declared: 'The Lord [kurios] said to my Lord [kurios], "Sit at My right hand until I put Your enemies under Your feet."' Notice that, although a quote from the OT, the name of God has been replaced by kurios ('Lord'), just as the vast majority of modern trinitarian translators also remove the name (YHWH) from the OT and replace it with ADN ('Lord.'). It is interesting, however, that the KJV quotes this verse:

"For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool."

'LORD' (all-capitals) was used by the KJV and many others to replace YHWH in the OT. But it is rare for any Bible to use even that replacement word in the NT.

Mark 14:62, 63: But He kept silent and did not answer. Again the high priest was questioning Him, and saying to Him, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?”

I am," said Jesus, "and you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven."

I'm sorry, but I don't seem to be able to understand what I'm supposed to comment on here concerning the last scripture. Will you give me a hint?

.....................

I don't remember whom I was referring to when I said my long posts will probably never be completely read. If it was you, I apologize.

However, take a look at my discussion of the 'Seven Lessons.' It is studies like those on which I have expended so much time and effort researching and writing that are mostly unread and certainly never responded to as if they had been read carefully.

https://www.christianityboard.com/threads/seven-lessons-for-john-1-1c.24921/

 

[Richard_oti]

@tigger 2 : Just wanted to let you know you are appreciated.

 

[tigger 2]

@tigger 2 : Just wanted to let you know you are appreciated.

Wow! That's something I almost never hear.

Thank you very much.

 

[amadeus]

Agreed again.
I always say I sift when I listen to someone speaking.
I'm just a plain ole' traditional Christian. No weird ideas.
Acts 17:11 The Bereans.

Well when I came to God or came back to Him in 1976, it was through a family
that believed in one God and no trinity. To that time I have only met one Trinitarian in the flesh who served God like they did. I wanted what they had and that is the Way God led me. Was it weird? No but it was different, and I also have no doubt that it was God that drew me to them and Him. God also brought me out of there, but I cannot forget how close that family was and still is to God.

Well, it's not day one anymore. It's been 2,000 years that Christianity has been put together and, yes, there is a definitin to what makes a Christian. Otherwise some descriptions sound Buddhist, for example. We are unique.
Jesus claimed to be God. He resurrected. He changed history, literally. (Rome).

And, of course I don't trust all of them.
Calvinist theologians got it all wrong.
I tend to trust mainline churches.

Time is not enough.

I trust God and find that not one assembly of believers called church, [including the one I attend now] is completely trustworthy.

Yes, there are definitions of Christians, but so far there are a lot of those too that I could not confirm without reservation.

I'll name two big items:
The Holy Trinity (not easy to find with reading alone)

I do not deny the existence of the trinity, but I seriously doubt it. If it were really what God wanted us to believe wouldn't it be something a sincere lover of God could see? I am sincere in my love for God. It is more important to me than any other single thing.

Justification and Sanctification (it could get all mixed up)

Those are words I never really understood before I came to Christian forums and heard people here use them. I still don't use them although I understand now what people mean when they say them.

I agree with progressive revelation, but some of it is degressive. In some areas we are going backwards instead of frontwards, so, yes, we do also need to look back at the ECF, they were they closest to Jesus. And the Apostolic Fathers more than anyone.

I try to respect anyone until they give me reason not to. Without having known any of the ECF personally I say nothing against them. I have read from them and received help in my understanding but I believe the help was really provided by God through their writings. I would not say any one was right just because he was an important Christian leader in his day.

I can't remember what I said here, but what God expects from us to to obey His commandments and to worship Him and to treat His creatures (us) in the way He would want us to.
Oh. And to also love ourselves.

This sounds good to me, but that is without definitions.

Agreed as to the parts of the Body of Christ.
It's never my job to judge another regarding the correctness of another person. However, if they're doing something obviously wrong, it would be nice to say so in a very kind and delicate manner. We were instructed by Paul to do this.

I never put God in a box. He's too big for that.

Give God the glory!

 

[Helen]

Wow! That's something I almost never hear.

Thank you very much.

Well I too am glad you are here ...I appreciated everyone who is here because all who are here make this Site what it is...I even appreciate those who I do not agree with me or I with them ... without them there would be not much discussion.. lol

 

[GodsGrace]

Well when I came to God or came back to Him in 1976, it was through a family
that believed in one God and no trinity. To that time I have only met one Trinitarian in the flesh who served God like they did. I wanted what they had and that is the Way God led me. Was it weird? No but it was different, and I also have no doubt that it was God that drew me to them and Him. God also brought me out of there, but I cannot forget how close that family was and still is to God.

Time is not enough.

I trust God and find that not one assembly of believers called church, [including the one I attend now] is completely trustworthy.

Yes, there are definitions of Christians, but so far there are a lot of those too that I could not confirm without reservation.


I do not deny the existence of the trinity, but I seriously doubt it. If it were really what God wanted us to believe wouldn't it be something a sincere lover of God could see? I am sincere in my love for God. It is more important to me than any other single thing.


Those are words I never really understood before I came to Christian forums and heard people here use them. I still don't use them although I understand now what people mean when they say them.

I understand all you've said and i agree.
Here's what I don't understand. Either from you or @tigger 2
and others like this that I know and respect for their very intellectual study of this subject - much more than I've given it since I accept Jesus is God.

Do you worship Jesus?
Or do you just respect Him'
I mean, what kind of a relationship do you have with Him?
Is Jesus like Krishna to you except you were born in a Christian country?

 

[aspen]

Jesus is God and worthy of worship. He was not on Earth during His ministry to be worshiped, but he has now been exalted to his rightful place.

 

[amadeus]

I understand all you've said and i agree.
Here's what I don't understand. Either from you or @tigger 2
and others like this that I know and respect for their very intellectual study of this subject - much more than I've given it since I accept Jesus is God.

Do you worship Jesus?

I would say yes that I worship Him. I do believe that He is God.

Or do you just respect Him
I mean, what kind of a relationship do you have with Him?
Is Jesus like Krishna to you except you were born in a Christian country?

The only thing I know about the Hari Krisna's is that they used to hang out at the San Francisco Airport when I was limousine driver there many years ago. I know nothing about their beliefs with which to make a comparison.

Jesus is my Savior. I talk to Him daily. The only Book I read on a daily basis is my Bible.

 

[GodsGrace]

I would say yes that I worship Him. I do believe that He is God.


The only thing I know about the Hari Krisna's is that they used to hang out at the San Francisco Airport when I was limousine driver there many years ago. I know nothing about their beliefs with which to make a comparison.

Jesus is my Savior. I talk to Him daily. The only Book I read on a daily basis is my Bible.

I'm sorry Amadeus.
I incorrectly understood that you did not believe Jesus is God.
I'm happy that I ask a lot of questions.
Just as girls should!!

 

[bbyrd009]

Jesus in his rightful, exalted state; seated at the right hand of the Father is omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent.

except not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

oops

 

[bbyrd009]

2 Greeks came to worship Jesus, and He hid from them.

another v i can't get a Catholic to see hmm

 

[bbyrd009]

(Luke 17:15-16) And one of them, when he saw that he was healed, turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God, And fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks:..."

Do you not see what this verse is saying?

yes, Jesus was being thanked, not worshipped
Luke 17:16 Lexicon: and he fell on his face at His feet, giving thanks to Him. And he was a Samaritan.

 

[Stranger]

yes, Jesus was being thanked, not worshipped
Luke 17:16 Lexicon: and he fell on his face at His feet, giving thanks to Him. And he was a Samaritan.

The leper fell down at the feet of God. A clear declaration for the deity of Jesus Christ.

Stranger

 

[GodsGrace]

The leper fell down at the feet of God. A clear declaration for the deity of Jesus Christ.

Stranger

How about:
My Lord and my God.
John 20:28

 

[Stranger]

How about:
My Lord and my God.
John 20:28

Perfect. Couldn't get any clearer than that.

Stranger

 

[bbyrd009]

The leper fell down at the feet of God. A clear declaration for the deity of Jesus Christ.

Stranger

only it isn't in the Bible that way, except via bad translation, as anyone can read right there

"and he was a Samaritan" should tell you all you need to know, i mean pls

 

[bbyrd009]

The leper fell down at the feet of God. A clear declaration for the deity of Jesus Christ.

Stranger

Strong's Greek: 2168. εὐχαριστέω (eucharisteó) -- to be thankful

there is what he was doing, no deities or declarations need be invented at all, see

 

[bbyrd009]

Perfect. Couldn't get any clearer than that.

Stranger

then bam go with that and ignore all the rest if you like. Worship Jesus, even while you ignore that "2 Greeks" came to do just that, and Jesus "hid from them." Pls go teach it in a church, too.