Jesus Christ Asserts Himself As YAHWEH

[Amazed@grace]

as valuable as these are, they are not Inspired by the Holy Spirit, and paraphrase too much in places.

I think the links provided would greatly assist your understanding.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

I think the links provided would greatly assist your understanding.

Thanks. I already have that pdf file, and use it for my studies

 

[Cooper]

you wrote, "It was a mystery before Christ, but no longer". The Mystery of Jesus Christ, and The Holy Trinity, are eternal Mysteries that no human mind will ever comprehend! Jesus Christ as the Eternal God, becomes the God-Man at His Incarnation, fully God and fully Man, apart from sin. Two complete "natures" in One Person. These ARE Mystries that no human can ever understand!

I do not like your know-it-all attitude while you admit you have no understanding. Bye.
.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

I do not like your know-it-all attitude while you admit you have no understanding. Bye.
.

so why don't you show where I am wrong?

 

[Cooper]

so why don't you show where I am wrong?

You only want an argument. Why argue with someone who admits they have no understanding. It all boils down to word play. Just accept the word of Jesus who said to Philip, "He who has seen me has seen the Father."
.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

You only want an argument. Why argue with someone who admits they have no understanding. It all boils down to word play. Just accept the word of Jesus who said to Philip, "He who has seen me has seen the Father."
.

no argument. The fact that Jesus speaks of the Father in the 3rd Person, and as someone other than Himself, is clear that He does not mean that He and the Father are the same Person. They would be Identical Twins, and with the Holy Spirit, Identical Triplets. Nothing impossible here.

 

[Amazed@grace]

Thanks. I already have that pdf file, and use it for my studies

You're welcome. I hope it also helps others in theirs.

 

[Amazed@grace]

no argument. The fact that Jesus speaks of the Father in the 3rd Person, and as someone other than Himself, is clear that He does not mean that He and the Father are the same Person. They would be Identical Twins, and with the Holy Spirit, Identical Triplets. Nothing impossible here.

To believe that you must ignore those passages where Jesus is said to be God with us, before he is knitted together in Mary's womb.

And then you would also have to ignore those passages, shared often here, wherein Jesus Immanuel(God with us), tells his disciples he is the father.

After doing all that one would then be following an ideology of their own making, and by omission of those passages.
Which is Sophistry, not Gospel.

I'd hope you or any who have made this tragic mistake turn from their own preferred understanding and to the words of God himself.
And then find themselves in the covenant of life eternal.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

To believe that you must ignore those passages where Jesus is said to be Gif with us before he is knitted together in Mary's womb.

And then you would also have to ignore those passages, shared often here, wherein Jesus Immanuel(God with us), tells his disciples he is the father.

After doing all that one would then be following an ideology of their own making, and by omission of those passages.
Which is Sophistry, not Gospel.

I'd hope you or any who have made this tragic mistake turn from their own preferred understanding and to the words of God himself.
And then find themselves in the covenant of life eternal.

Neither you nor any one else has shown from John 1.1 that the Word Who is Jesus Christ is the same Person as the God with Whom He is with. When you can explain this then we can move forward

 

[Amazed@grace]

Neither you nor any one else has shown from John 1.1 that the Word Who is Jesus Christ is the same Person as the God with Whom He is with. When you can explain this then we can move forward

You have but to move forward in John 1 and read the entire chapter to learn the truth. Jesus was God.
Believing anything less is not the Good News ,Gospel. It just isn't.

Adding this. You already believe Jesus was God. Please stop playing games with us.
Post 18. Jesus Christ Asserts Himself As YAHWEH

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

You have but to move forward in John 1 and read the entire chapter to learn the truth. Jesus was God.
Believing anything less is not the Good News ,Gospel. It just isn't.

Jesus is God in John 1.1. But there is another Person Who is also call God in the verse

 

[Amazed@grace]

Jesus is God in John 1.1. But there is another Person Who is also call God in the verse

Where?

 

[Cooper]

Jesus is God in John 1.1. But there is another Person Who is also call God in the verse

I sometimes illustrate by talking about the TV program "Undercover Boss" where the head of a large firm, whose spirit pervades the whole company, takes on the persona of a new employee.

Although appearing to be two, he is in fact One.
.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

Where?

Look here @ 712

The Case Against the Trinity

 

[Amazed@grace]

Look here @ 712

The Case Against the Trinity

That isn't to do with the question posed to your prior assertion is it? Post 31 you stated,
Jesus is God in John 1.1. But there is another Person Who is also call God in the verse.


I asked you where that is? In John1.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

That isn't to do with the question posed to your prior assertion is it? Post 31 you stated,
Jesus is God in John 1.1. But there is another Person Who is also call God in the verse.


I asked you where that is? In John1.

Here it is

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

"The Word", 1st Person, then "the Word" is "WITH God" 2nd Person, which is literally, "in the presence of another". Then it says that "The Word was God". But not the same as the God Who He is WITH, as the Greek would have to be different. Instead of "προς τον θεον", John would have had to have wtitten "εν τον θεον", and also for the last clause, "και ο θεος ην ο λογος", instead of what is written, "και θεος ην ο λογος". There is no way that the Greek allows for The Word Who is God, to be identical to the God Who He is WITH. Here it is clear that TWO distinct Persons are meant.

 

[Amazed@grace]

Here it is

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

"The Word", 1st Person, then "the Word" is "WITH God" 2nd Person, which is literally, "in the presence of another". Then it says that "The Word was God". But not the same as the God Who He is WITH, as the Greek would have to be different. Instead of "προς τον θεον", John would have had to have wtitten "εν τον θεον", and also for the last clause, "και ο θεος ην ο λογος", instead of what is written, "και θεος ην ο λογος". There is no way that the Greek allows for The Word Who is God, to be identical to the God Who He is WITH. Here it is clear that TWO distinct Persons are meant.

You're holding to Granville Sharp's rule 6 to arrive at your conclusion?

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

You're holding to Granville Sharp's rule 6 to arrive at your conclusion?

I am holding to my own Greek grammar studies for almost 40 years! If you can show that I am in error, then please feel free to show me. I am very much open to correction and learning, as we all what the Truth of what the Bible teaches.

 

[Cooper]

Here it is

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

"The Word", 1st Person, then "the Word" is "WITH God" 2nd Person, which is literally, "in the presence of another". Then it says that "The Word was God". But not the same as the God Who He is WITH, as the Greek would have to be different. Instead of "προς τον θεον", John would have had to have wtitten "εν τον θεον", and also for the last clause, "και ο θεος ην ο λογος", instead of what is written, "και θεος ην ο λογος". There is no way that the Greek allows for The Word Who is God, to be identical to the God Who He is WITH. Here it is clear that TWO distinct Persons are meant.

You have heard of the "Royal we" have you not, when a person speaks of themselves in the plural.
.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

You have heard of the "Royal we" have you not, when a person speaks of themselves in the plural.
.

There is no WE here. The Greek proposition can only mean "in the presence of another"