Jehovah is either God or He is not, correct?

[Wrangler]

When God The Father "spoke", His literal "WORD" (coming forth out from Him) acted, created...) The Holy Spirit was there as well, "hovering over the deep".

There is only one God, aka the LORD, aka the Father. God is Spirit and his Spirit is holy. This does not mean a distinct ‘person’ was "hovering over the deep". Notice how you are equating this verse by inserting ‘Holy Spirit’ with trinitarianism.

Such desperate reaching to infer what is not explicitly there. No where is ‘God, the Holy Spirit’ in Scripture. Yet, the LORD God is the only God is explicit many times, such as Isaiah 45:6 and ‘For us, there is one God, the Father’ in 1 Cor 8:6.

 

[Nancy]

There is only one God, aka the LORD, aka the Father. God is Spirit and his Spirit is holy. This does not mean a distinct ‘person’ was "hovering over the deep". Notice how you are equating this verse by inserting ‘Holy Spirit’ with trinitarianism.

Such desperate reaching to infer what is not explicitly there. No where is ‘God, the Holy Spirit’ in Scripture. Yet, the LORD God is the only God is explicit many times, such as Isaiah 45:6 and ‘For us, there is one God, the Father’ in 1 Cor 8:6.

YOU replied to Reformed:
"In fact, this disproves the trinity since no mention of the HS."

YOU said to me:
"Notice how you are equating this verse by inserting ‘Holy Spirit’ with trinitarianism."

And YOU "infer" there was no 3rd entity present with God the Father and God the Son...touche'

Well, just WHOSE Spirit was it that was hovering??

 

[Wrangler]

And YOU "infer" there was no 3rd entity present with God the Father and God the Son...touche'

Touché? Reading into unitarian text trinitarian doctrine, inferring, and NOT doing this, but only what is explicitly stated, is not the same. It is the opposite.

Also, I noticed you again just ignore explicit verses cited that destroy the trinity. Too bad you don’t have the courage to challenge all your idolatrous assumptions and indoctrinations.

For instance, why would Jesus say he is going to his God, if he were God?

Well, just WHOSE Spirit was it that was hovering??

God’s Spirit. This is akin to God’s shadow, it is an attribute of God, not a different shadow person of one being.

 

[Nancy]

Touché? Reading into unitarian text trinitarian doctrine, inferring, and NOT doing this, but only what is explicitly stated, is not the same. It is the opposite.

Also, I noticed you again just ignore explicit verses cited that destroy the trinity. Too bad you don’t have the courage to challenge all your idolatrous assumptions and indoctrinations.

For instance, why would Jesus say he is going to his God, if he were God?



God’s Spirit. This is akin to God’s shadow, it is an attribute of God, not a different shadow person of one being.

"Also, I noticed you again just ignore explicit verses cited that destroy the trinity."

Perhaps because this subject has been hashed over and over again with the same verses, on BOTH sides. You will not convince me and neither will I convince you.
Aren't you getting at least a little bit tired of repeating the same things over and over again to the same people?? Walk away, leave it be and if you think this is so important as to drum it into everyone then, why not just leave it be, and pray for our eyes to be opened since you "see" and we do not. Pray for us so we don't believe a lie!

 

[reformed1689]

Yes, what in the world makes you think this has anything to do with Jesus - or the trinity?

In fact, this disproves the trinity since no mention of the HS.

Yes, what in the world makes you think this has anything to do with Jesus - or the trinity?

In fact, this disproves the trinity since no mention of the HS.

Because vers 17 identifies the Word as Jesus. And no, not talking about the Holy Spirit in John 1 has nothing to do with disproving the Trinity. That is a fallacy argument.

 

[reformed1689]

Someone said Jesus is YHWH. I was showing them truth on the matter.

Jesus said He and the Father are one. So no, you are NOT showing any truth on the matter at all.

 

[reformed1689]

If that was truth, then in plain english the second line reads--And God was with God--that is more than 1 God.

No it is not. It is showing they are one in the same.

 

[reformed1689]

If that was truth, then in plain english the second line reads--And God was with God--that is more than 1 God.

And the fact that you say "then in plain English" destroys your credibility.

 

[Keiw]

Jesus said He and the Father are one. So no, you are NOT showing any truth on the matter at all.

One in purpose, John 5:30--- Jesus lives to do his Fathers will. When Jesus went back to heaven he sat at the right hand of God Mark 16:19)--He did not sit at his own right hand. Jesus also said--The Father is greater than i.

 

[Keiw]

No it is not. It is showing they are one in the same.

The LORD( YHWH) said to my lord( Jesus) proves they are not.

 

[Keiw]

And the fact that you say "then in plain English" destroys your credibility.

Only to the darkness.

 

[reformed1689]

One in purpose, John 5:30--- Jesus lives to do his Fathers will. When Jesus went back to heaven he sat at the right hand of God Mark 16:19)--He did not sit at his own right hand. Jesus also said--The Father is greater than i.

It does not say one in purpose. John 10.30

 

[reformed1689]

The LORD( YHWH) said to my lord( Jesus) proves they are not.

Reference?

 

[reformed1689]

Only to the darkness.

No, to any honest student of Scripture who knows the Bible was not "written in plain English."

 

[Keiw]

It does not say one in purpose. John 10.30

The father is greater than i. Living to do his Fathers will shows it is one in purpose. It also says the followers would be one with them. In purpose-Matt 7:21

 

[Keiw]

Reference?

Psalm 110:1 LORD=YHWH--Jesus is called-Lord-- Every spot in the OT where GOD or LORD all capitols is YHWH(Jehovah) belongs. Wicked men removed the name and replaced it with those titles, they had no right to do so. Every translation without that name in the nearly 6800 places are altered versions.

 

[Keiw]

No, to any honest student of Scripture who knows the Bible was not "written in plain English."

Anybody knows it wasnt written in english. It was translated to english. We read it in english correct?

 

[Robert Gwin]

Jesus and Jehovah are one in the same.

Evidence Re?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

You can google it. I have already done my homework.


Bible-James Moffatt, Schoenfield bible-- Goodspeed bible-Was divine, not was God

New test improved version-1808-- new test in Greek and English-1822--Literal translation of NT-1863--- Concise commentary bible R.Young-1885---- Plus a few more= a god.

Moffatts Bible. He is not a linguist. He holds a Doctor of Divinity. He alone translated His Bible and not even a student of Greek. Thei is a paraphrase,not a translation from a scholar.

Schoenfield bible- Another non linguist paraphraser. He also wrote "The Passover Plot" in which He said that Jesus tried ot manipulate HImself to fulfill prophecies to get people to believe He was Messiah. You really shouldn't want to use Him as an expert witness for you cause. He also was a globalist in His day

Goodspeed bible another non linguist paraphraser. While all other translations use between 40-100 language scholars, Good speeds bible only had himself and Smith. Notwithstanding What Goodspeed did was grammatically correct. He was showing Jesus is God in nature and not the Father. god and divine can be used interchangably they both mean the same.

Concise commentary bible R.Young-1885-- not taught in Greek Language

John 1:1 from the 1863 Literal translation: 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;

new test in Greek and English-1822- no results in a web search- so this is nothing

New test improved version-1808- follows the JW opinion of John 1:1, it is a work based on the paraphrase by Archbishop Newcome by Edward Nares. Niether one was a greek scholar.

YOu have a reference source that is bereft of expertise in understanding language.

Here is a website that shows 46 English bibles translated by a minimum of 15 Greek scholars on the translation teams.

John 1:1 Parallel: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (biblehub.com)

they all show why you are wrong!

 

[Enoch111]

they all show why you are wrong!

It's a total waste of time trying to show anti-Trinitarians how wrong and foolish they are. A fool always returns to his folly. As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly. (Proverbs 26:11)