Jesus IS God in the flesh!!

[GISMYS_7]

Jesus IS God in the flesh.
Colossians 2:9
Jesus==“For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.”
1 Timothy 3:16 God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

 

[charity]

Jesus IS God in the flesh.​

Colossians 2:9
“For in Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.”
1 Timothy 3:16
"God was manifest in the flesh,
justified in the Spirit,
seen of angels,
preached unto the Gentiles,
believed on in the world,
received up into glory."​

Hello there, @GISMYS_7,

Yes, Praise His Holy Name! The Lord Jesus Christ now risen and glorified and sat at God's right hand, was and is, God made flesh.

'Let this mind be in you,
.. which was also in Christ Jesus:
.... Who, being in the form of God,
...... thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
But made Himself of no reputation,
.. and took upon Him the form of a servant,
.... and was made in the likeness of men:
And being found in fashion as a man,
.. He humbled Himself,
.... and became obedient unto death,
...... even the death of the cross.
Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him,
.. and given Him a name which is above every name:
.... That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
...... of things in heaven,
........ and things in earth,
.......... and things under the earth;
And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.'
(Php 2:5-11)

Thank you
With love in Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[charity]

Hello again, @GISMYS_7,

Let me share what I read recently concerning the Lord's first coming and His work. His ministry was occupied with four great subjects, distinct, definite, and Divine. The first subject was 'The Kingdom of Heaven: It's Character and Requirements', the third was 'Christ's Sufferings', and the fourth, 'Christ's Second Advent', but the second, which I want to share is, 'Christ's Person'.

* In view of the rejection of the kingdom proclaimed, and of the King Himself - Jesus in this second period occupies Himself with His person, showing that He is God, and that, therefore, His word cannot fall to the ground, and that His work cannot fail of its purpose. Hence, at the outset, the moment He comes down from the Mount, He is met by the leper who came 'and worshipped Him.' owning Him as 'Lord' (Matt. 8:2),

* The Centurion (Matt. 8:8) also owns Him as 'Lord', and argues from this, His Divine power:- 'I say to this man go, and he goeth; and to another come, and he cometh; and to my servant do this, and he doeth it. (How much more canst Thou 'speak' with a word only and my servant shall be healed'.)

* In Matthew 8:26, as the great Creator, 'He rebuked the winds and the sea; and there was a great calm;'.
In verse 29 the devils own Him as God, saying, 'What have we to do with Thee Thou Son of God?'

* In Matthew 9:6, they bring to Him the man sick of the palsy; and, as God, He says, 'Son be of good cheer, thy sins be forgiven thee'.
The people realized this as a claim to Deity, for they reasoned in their hearts, 'Why doth this man speak blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God only?' (Mark 2:7, Luke 5:21).

* His miracles wrought during this second period were in perfect keeping with this object. They were all miracles which only Deity could work. He raised two from the dead. The daughter of Jairus from her bed (Matt. 9:18-26). And the widow's son from his bier (Luke 7:11-17). Miracles which only Deity could perform.

* He claimed to be the Lord of the Sabbath, ie., equal to Him Who at the first ordained. 'The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath day' (Matt. 12:8). He cast out devils 'by the Spirit of God', and thus proved Himself to be stronger that 'the strong man', 'and able to bind him and spoil his goods' (Matt. 12:28-29). In the same chapter He declared that He was 'greater than Jonah' (v.41) and 'greater than Solomon' (v.42). He walked upon the sea, and again caused the wind to cease (Matt. 14:25,32), drawing forth the confession 'of a truth Thou art the son of God' (v.33). He wrought two miracles of creation in the feeding of 'the five thousand men, beside women and children' (Matt. 14:15-21), and the 'four thousand men, beside women and children' (Matt. 15: 32-38).

* In John chapters 5-10, there is a long series of claims to Deity, and to equality with the Father. He declares that He is the great 'I Am' (John 8:58). He reveals Himself to the man born blind as 'the Son of God' (John 9:35-37). He is 'the bread of life', 'the good shepherd'; in fact the Jews would stone Him because He made Himself 'God' (10:33).

* This period culminates 'in the coasts of Caesarea Philippi', where He brings it to a crises by asking, 'Whom do men say that I - the Son of man - am? And they said, 'Some say that Thou art John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah, or one of the prophets', He saith unto them, 'But whom say Ye that I am?' And Simon Peter answered and said, 'Thou art the Christ (the Messiah) the Son of the Living God'. And Jesus answered and said unto him, 'Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona (son of Jona), for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father which is in Heaven. And I say unto thee, that thou art Petros ( a roling, movable stone), and upon this Petra (a rock or immovable foundation) will I build my church, ie., I will build it not upon any unstable mortal, but upon the Son of God, - 'The stone which the builders refused' - Christ crucified and risen- the foundation laid by Jehovah in Zion (Matt. 16:13-18; 1 Peter 2:4-6; Acts 4:10-12; Isaiah 28:16).

This was taken from a treasured book of mine by Dr Bullinger, called 'Selected Writings'. I hope you enjoyed it as much as I did.

With love in Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[charity]

'God, Who at sundry times and in divers manners
spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
Hath in these last days spoken unto us by (his) Son,
whom He hath appointed heir of all things,
by whom also He made the worlds; ... '
(Heb 1:1)

Hi @GISMYS_7,

Looking back over my previous entry, I think of the Lord's own words, when He attributed both His words and His works to God the Father:-

'And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch.
Then came the Jews round about Him, and said unto Him,
"How long dost thou make us to doubt?
If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly."
Jesus answered them,
"I told you, and ye believed not:
the works that I do in My Father's name,
they bear witness of Me."'
(Joh 10:23-25)

'"Say ye of Him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world,
'Thou blasphemest'; because I said, 'I am the Son of God?'
If I do not the works of My Father, believe Me not.
But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works:
that ye may know, and believe,
that the Father is in Me, and I in Hm.
Therefore they sought again to take Him:
but He escaped out of their hand,'
(Joh 10:36-39)

'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.'
(Joh 14:10)

Thank you, GISMYS_7
With love in Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[post]

Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers,
to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
(Acts 20:28)​

God's church
bought with God's own blood

the church of Christ -- Romans 16:16
bought with the blood of Christ -- Ephesians 5:23-27

Q.E.D. Christ is God

 

[tigger 2]

Jesus IS God in the flesh.

1 Timothy 3:16 God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

....................................
1 Timothy 3:16

Noted Bible scholar Dr. Frederick C. Grant writes:

“A capital example [of NT manuscript changes by copyists] is found in 1 Timothy 3:16, where ‘OS’ (OC or ὃς, ‘who’) was later taken for theta sigma with a bar above, which stood for theos (θεὸς, ‘god’). Since the new reading suited …. the orthodox doctrine of the church [trinitarian, at this later date], it got into many of the later manuscripts .....” – p. 656, Encyclopedia Americana, vol. 3, 1957 ed. (This same statement by Dr. Grant was still to be found in the latest Encyclopedia Americana that I examined – the 1990 ed., pp.696-698, vol. 3.)

A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament by the United Bible Societies (1971 ed.) tells why the trinitarian UBS Committee chose ὃς [‘who’ or ‘he who’] instead of θς ['God'] as the original reading in their NT text for this verse:

“it is supported by the earliest and best uncials.” And, “Thus, no uncial (in the first hand [by the ORIGINAL writer]) earlier than the eighth or ninth century supports θεὸς [“God”]; all ancient versions presuppose ὃς [or OC, “who” - masc.] or ὅ [“which” - neut.]; and no patristic writer prior to the last third of the fourth century [370 A.D.] testifies to the reading θεὸς. The reading θεὸς arose either (a) accidentally, through the misreading of OC as ΘC, or (b) deliberately....” - p. 641.

In actuality it appears to be a combination of both (with the emphasis on the latter). You see, the word ὃς was written in the most ancient manuscripts as OC (“C” being a common form for the ancient Greek letter “S” at that time). Most often at this time the word for God (θεὸς) was written in abbreviated form as ΘC. However, to show that it was an abbreviated form a straight line, or bar, was always drawn above ΘC. So no copyist should have mistaken ὃς (or OC) for ΘC, in spite of their similarities, simply because of the prominent bar which appeared over the one and not over the other.

What may have happened was discovered by John J. Wetstein in 1714. As he was carefully examining one of the oldest NT manuscripts then known (the Alexandrine Manuscript in London) he noticed at 1 Tim. 3:16 that the word originally written there was OC but that a horizontal stroke from one of the words written on the other side of the manuscript showed through very faintly in the middle of the O. This still would not qualify as an abbreviation for θεὸς, of course, but Wetstein discovered that some person at a much later date and in a different style from the original writer had deliberately added a bar above the original word! Anyone copying from this manuscript after it had been deliberately changed would be likely to incorporate the counterfeit ΘC [with bar above it] into his new copy (especially since it reflected his own trinitarian views)!

Of course, since Wetstein’s day many more ancient NT manuscripts have been discovered and none of them before the eighth century A.D. have been found with ΘC (“God”) at this verse!

Trinitarian scholar Murray J. Harris also concludes: “The strength of the external evidence favoring OC [‘who’], along with considerations of transcriptional and intrinsic probability, have prompted textual critics virtually unanimously to regard OC as the original text, a judgment reflected in NA(26) [Nestle-Aland text] and UBS (1,2,3) [United Bible Societies text] (with a ‘B’ rating) [also the Westcott and Hort text]. Accordingly, 1 Tim 3:16 is not an instance of the Christological [‘Jesus is God’] use of θεὸς.” - Jesus as God, p. 268, Baker Book House, 1992.

And very trinitarian (Southern Baptist) NT Greek scholar A. T. Robertson wrote about this scripture:

“He who (hos [or OC in the original text]). The correct text, not theos (God) the reading of the Textus Receptus ... nor ho (neuter relative [pronoun]), agreeing with [the neuter] musterion [‘mystery’] the reading of Western documents.” - p. 577, Vol. 4, Word Pictures in the New Testament, Broadman Press.

And even trinitarian NT Greek scholar, Daniel B. Wallace uses the relative pronoun ὃς (‘who’) in this scripture and tells us:

“The textual variant θεὸς [‘god’] in the place of ὃς [‘who’ or ‘he who’] has been adamantly defended by some scholars, particularly those of the ‘majority text’ school. Not only is such a reading poorly attested, but the syntactical argument that ‘mystery’ (μυστήριον) being a neuter noun, cannot be followed by the masculine pronoun (ὃς) is entirely without weight. As attractive theologically [for trinitarians, of course] as the reading θεὸς may be, it is spurious. To reject it is not to deny the deity of Christ, of course; it is just to deny any explicit reference in this text.” [italicized emphasis is by Wallace]. - pp. 341-342, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Zondervan, 1996.

The correct rendering of 1 Tim. 3:16, then, is: “He who was revealed in the flesh ….” - NASB. Cf. ASV; RSV; NRSV; NAB; JB; NJB; NIV; NEB; REB; ESV; Douay-Rheims; TEV; CEV; BBE; NLV; God’s Word; New Century Version; Holman NT; ISV NT; Lexham English Bible; The Message; Weymouth; Moffatt; etc.

Even if we were to insist that those later manuscripts that used theos were, somehow, correct, we would have to recognize that it is the anarthrous (without the definite article) theos which we find. This is rarely, if ever, the form used for the only true God (when the known exceptions are taken into account - see MARTIN study). Instead, it either points to the probability that it is a corrupted OC (which of course would not have the article in the first place), or, less probable, but still possible, that Christ is being called “a god.”

 

[tigger 2]

Post 5

Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers,
to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
(Acts 20:28)

................................
Acts 20:28 ("God...with his own blood")

Trinitarians, for obvious reasons, prefer this translation of Acts 20:28 - "... to shepherd ["feed" in some translations] the church of God which He purchased with His own blood." - NASB. This certainly seems to be excellent evidence for a "Jesus is God" doctrine.

But there are 2 major uncertainties about the proper translation of Acts 20:28. Either one of those uncertainties completely nullifies any trinitarian "evidence" proposed for this scripture!

First, even some trinitarian Bibles translate this verse, "the church of the Lord." - NEB; REB; ASV; Moffatt. Since Jesus was often referred to as "the Lord," this rendering negates any "Jesus is God" understanding for Acts 20:28.

Yes, even the popular trinitarian The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, p. 838, Vol. 2, Zondervan Publ., 1986, uses this translation for Acts 20:28 also: "to feed the church of the Lord"!

And the respected, scholarly trinitarian work, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, p. 480, United Bible Societies, 1971, explains about this first uncertainty concerning the translation of Acts 20:28. Although, for obvious reasons, preferring the rendering "the church of God" at this verse, this trinitarian work admits that there is "considerable degree of doubt" about this "preferred" rendering. They admit that "The external evidence is singularly balanced between `church of God' and `church of the Lord.'"

Second, even some trinitarian Bibles render this verse, "to care for the church of God which he obtained with the blood of his own Son." - RSV, 1971 ed. also NRSV; NJB; CEB; CJB CEV; GNT; LEB; MOUNCE; NCV; NET; and VOICE.

The New Testament Greek words tou idiou follow "with the blood" in this scripture. This could be translated as "with the blood of his own." A singular noun may be understood to follow "his own." This would be referring to God's "closest relation," his only-begotten Son.

The NIV Study Bible tells us in a footnote for Acts 20:28: "his own blood. Lit[erally] 'the blood of his own one,' a term of endearment (such as 'his own dear one,' referring to his own son)." - Zondervan, 1985.

Famous trinitarian scholar J. H. Moulton says about this:

"something should be said about the use of [ho idios, which includes tou idiou] without a noun expressed. This occurs in Jn 1:11, 13:1; Ac 4:23, 24:23. In the papyri we find the singular used thus as a term of endearment to near relations .... In Expos. vi. iii. 277 I ventured to cite this as a possible encouragement to those (including B. Weiss) who would translate Acts 20:28 `the blood of one who was his own.'" - A Grammar of New Testament Greek, Vol. 1 (Prolegomena), 1930 ed., p. 90.

And for the above reason noted trinitarian NT scholar and translator William Barclay rendered Acts 20:28:

"... the Church of God which he has rescued through the blood of his own One."

Highly respected trinitarian New Testament scholars Westcott and Hort present an alternate reason for a similar rendering:

"it is by no means impossible that YIOY [huiou, or `of the Son'] dropped out [was inadvertently left out during copying] after TOYIDIOY [tou idiou, or `of his own'] at some very early transcription affecting all existing documents. Its insertion [restoration] leaves the whole passage free from difficulty of any kind." - The New Testament in the Original Greek, Vol. 2, pp. 99, 100 of the Appendix.

And A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, p. 481, tells us:
"Instead of the usual meaning of dia tou haimatos tou idiou [`through the blood of the own'], it is possible that the writer of Acts intended his readers to understand the expression to mean `with the blood of his Own.' (It is not necessary to suppose, with Hort, that huiou may have dropped out after tou idiou, though palaeographically such an omission would have been easy.) This absolute use of ho idios is found in Greek papyri as a term of endearment referring to near relatives. It is possible, therefore, that `his Own' (ho idios) was a title which early Christians gave to Jesus, comparable to `the Beloved'."

Therefore, we can see that a rendering similar to RSV's "the church of God which he obtained with the blood of his own son [or `beloved']" is obviously an honest, proper rendering.

Although the UBS Committee didn't actually commit itself one way or another on this rendering of tou idiou at Acts 20:28, it did mention that "some have thought [it] to be a slight probability that tou idiou is used here as the equivalent of tou idiou huiou [`his own Son']." - p. 481. Obviously this includes those trinitarian scholars who translated the Revised Standard Version (1971 ed.) and Today's English Version.

Note the the even more certain conclusion of trinitarian scholar, Murray J. Harris, after an extensive analysis of this passage:

"I have argued that the original text of Acts 20:28 read [THN EKKLHSIAN TOU THEOU HN PERIEPOIHSATO DIA TOU AIUATOS TOU IDIOU] and that the most appropriate translation of these words is 'the church of God which he bought with the blood of his own one' or 'the church of God which he bought with the blood of his own Son' (NJB), with [HO IDIOS] construed as a christological title. According to this view, [HO THEOS] refers to God the Father, not Jesus Christ.

"If however, one follows many English versions in construing [IDIOS] adjectivally ('through his own blood'), [HO THEOS] could refer to Jesus and the verse could therefore allude to 'the blood of God,' although on this construction of [IDIOS] it is more probable that [THEOS] is God the Father and the unexpressed subject of [PERIEPOIHSATO] is Jesus. So it remains unlikely, although not impossible, that Acts 20:28 [HO THEOS] denotes Jesus." - p. 141, Jesus as Theos, The New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus, Baker Book House, Grand rapids, Michigan, 1992.

Since so many respected trinitarian scholars admit the possibility (and even the probability) of such honest alternate non-trinitarian translations for Acts 20:28, this scripture can't honestly be used as proof for a trinity concept.

 

[GISMYS_7]

Yes!! Satan loves to plant seeds of doubt. First example is in Genesis 1 did God really say?????

 

[post]

Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Christ Jesus, who was faithful to Him who appointed Him, as Moses also was faithful in all His house. For this One has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as He who built the house has more honor than the house. For every house is built by someone, but He who built all things is God. And Moses indeed was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which would be spoken afterward, but Christ as a Son over His own house, whose house we are if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm to the end.
(Hebrews 3:1-6)​

• consider Christ Jesus:
  
• counted worthy of more glory than Moses,
  • in the same way that the builder of a house is more honored than the house
  • Christ is the builder of the house, Moses & we are part of the house
• He who built all things is God
• Christ is God

 

[TheslightestID]

....................................
1 Timothy 3:16

Noted Bible scholar Dr. Frederick C. Grant writes:

“A capital example [of NT manuscript changes by copyists] is found in 1 Timothy 3:16, where ‘OS’ (OC or ὃς, ‘who’) was later taken for theta sigma with a bar above, which stood for theos (θεὸς, ‘god’). Since the new reading suited …. the orthodox doctrine of the church [trinitarian, at this later date], it got into many of the later manuscripts .....” – p. 656, Encyclopedia Americana, vol. 3, 1957 ed. (This same statement by Dr. Grant was still to be found in the latest Encyclopedia Americana that I examined – the 1990 ed., pp.696-698, vol. 3.)

A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament by the United Bible Societies (1971 ed.) tells why the trinitarian UBS Committee chose ὃς [‘who’ or ‘he who’] instead of θς ['God'] as the original reading in their NT text for this verse:

“it is supported by the earliest and best uncials.” And, “Thus, no uncial (in the first hand [by the ORIGINAL writer]) earlier than the eighth or ninth century supports θεὸς [“God”]; all ancient versions presuppose ὃς [or OC, “who” - masc.] or ὅ [“which” - neut.]; and no patristic writer prior to the last third of the fourth century [370 A.D.] testifies to the reading θεὸς. The reading θεὸς arose either (a) accidentally, through the misreading of OC as ΘC, or (b) deliberately....” - p. 641.

In actuality it appears to be a combination of both (with the emphasis on the latter). You see, the word ὃς was written in the most ancient manuscripts as OC (“C” being a common form for the ancient Greek letter “S” at that time). Most often at this time the word for God (θεὸς) was written in abbreviated form as ΘC. However, to show that it was an abbreviated form a straight line, or bar, was always drawn above ΘC. So no copyist should have mistaken ὃς (or OC) for ΘC, in spite of their similarities, simply because of the prominent bar which appeared over the one and not over the other.

What may have happened was discovered by John J. Wetstein in 1714. As he was carefully examining one of the oldest NT manuscripts then known (the Alexandrine Manuscript in London) he noticed at 1 Tim. 3:16 that the word originally written there was OC but that a horizontal stroke from one of the words written on the other side of the manuscript showed through very faintly in the middle of the O. This still would not qualify as an abbreviation for θεὸς, of course, but Wetstein discovered that some person at a much later date and in a different style from the original writer had deliberately added a bar above the original word! Anyone copying from this manuscript after it had been deliberately changed would be likely to incorporate the counterfeit ΘC [with bar above it] into his new copy (especially since it reflected his own trinitarian views)!

Of course, since Wetstein’s day many more ancient NT manuscripts have been discovered and none of them before the eighth century A.D. have been found with ΘC (“God”) at this verse!

Trinitarian scholar Murray J. Harris also concludes: “The strength of the external evidence favoring OC [‘who’], along with considerations of transcriptional and intrinsic probability, have prompted textual critics virtually unanimously to regard OC as the original text, a judgment reflected in NA(26) [Nestle-Aland text] and UBS (1,2,3) [United Bible Societies text] (with a ‘B’ rating) [also the Westcott and Hort text]. Accordingly, 1 Tim 3:16 is not an instance of the Christological [‘Jesus is God’] use of θεὸς.” - Jesus as God, p. 268, Baker Book House, 1992.

And very trinitarian (Southern Baptist) NT Greek scholar A. T. Robertson wrote about this scripture:

“He who (hos [or OC in the original text]). The correct text, not theos (God) the reading of the Textus Receptus ... nor ho (neuter relative [pronoun]), agreeing with [the neuter] musterion [‘mystery’] the reading of Western documents.” - p. 577, Vol. 4, Word Pictures in the New Testament, Broadman Press.

And even trinitarian NT Greek scholar, Daniel B. Wallace uses the relative pronoun ὃς (‘who’) in this scripture and tells us:

“The textual variant θεὸς [‘god’] in the place of ὃς [‘who’ or ‘he who’] has been adamantly defended by some scholars, particularly those of the ‘majority text’ school. Not only is such a reading poorly attested, but the syntactical argument that ‘mystery’ (μυστήριον) being a neuter noun, cannot be followed by the masculine pronoun (ὃς) is entirely without weight. As attractive theologically [for trinitarians, of course] as the reading θεὸς may be, it is spurious. To reject it is not to deny the deity of Christ, of course; it is just to deny any explicit reference in this text.” [italicized emphasis is by Wallace]. - pp. 341-342, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Zondervan, 1996.

The correct rendering of 1 Tim. 3:16, then, is: “He who was revealed in the flesh ….” - NASB. Cf. ASV; RSV; NRSV; NAB; JB; NJB; NIV; NEB; REB; ESV; Douay-Rheims; TEV; CEV; BBE; NLV; God’s Word; New Century Version; Holman NT; ISV NT; Lexham English Bible; The Message; Weymouth; Moffatt; etc.

Even if we were to insist that those later manuscripts that used theos were, somehow, correct, we would have to recognize that it is the anarthrous (without the definite article) theos which we find. This is rarely, if ever, the form used for the only true God (when the known exceptions are taken into account - see MARTIN study). Instead, it either points to the probability that it is a corrupted OC (which of course would not have the article in the first place), or, less probable, but still possible, that Christ is being called “a god.”

The bible says Christ is the son of God, and one thing I've learned on these boards, if someone wants to believe false doctrin badly enough, they will find a way to make it appear the bible backs up that doctrin, even if it does not.

I choose to believe God when he tells us simply, "This (Jesus) is my son, in which I am well pleased" over long winded creations by man that try to prove otherwise.

 

[GISMYS_7]

Yes!!! The one true almighty God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit =the one true almighty God!!! For some this eternal truth is just far over their head and their understanding of truth.

Wonder why Jesus says= Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the ""Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost"": Matthew28:19

 

[post]

I choose to believe God when he tells us simply

How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?
Turn you at my reproof: behold! I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you!
(Proverbs 1:22-23)​

friend, nothing the omniscient Creator of all things says or does is "simple"
don't ever think bring Him down to our level. it's foolishness.

 

[Angelina]

Jesus IS God in the flesh.
Colossians 2:9
Jesus==“For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.”
1 Timothy 3:16 God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

Hebrews 2 [Amplified]
9 But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while [by taking on the limitations of humanity],
crowned with glory and honor because of His suffering of death, so that by the grace of God [extended to sinners] He might experience death for [the sins of] everyone.

10 For it was fitting for God [that is, an act worthy of His divine nature] that He, for whose sake are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the author and founder of their salvation perfect through suffering [bringing to maturity the human experience necessary for Him to be perfectly equipped for His office as High Priest]. 11 Both Jesus who sanctifies and those who are sanctified [that is, spiritually transformed, made holy, and set apart for God’s purpose] are all from one Father; for this reason He is not ashamed to call them brothers and sisters,

 

[TheslightestID]

How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?
Turn you at my reproof: behold! I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you!
(Proverbs 1:22-23)​

friend, nothing the omniscient Creator of all things says or does is "simple"
don't ever think bring Him down to our level. it's foolishness.

Prove it. I'd dare say anything is simple for God.

Try to keep up...simple mindedness as your scripture speaks of, and simplicity of Gods word are two completely different things. Only the simple minded would try to pull such a deception, and expect to get away with it. Ignoring context in order to decieve, or make yourself seem right.... well, very deceptive.

God word is very simple and put simply, but the lies and twisting of Gods word, are often confusing and lengthy, exactly what the master of confusion wants.

Again, you are not being truthful, and making things up...of course things that God does are simple, like the simple uncomplicate truth of his word. And I dare say, even creation was simple for God...don't sell my father short.

So, in spite of your comment, think I'll continue to take biblical comments such as Jesus being the son of God, to mean, simply, Jesus is the son of God, and leave complicating the issue to those who like to change the word of God.

 

[post]

Prove it. I'd dare say anything is simple for God.

You haven't even understood the straightforward cry of wisdom: how long you simple one will you love your simplicity?

This doesn't mean that anything is difficult for God. It means His ways are high above yours, and His thoughts beyond your finding out.

But you read that and thought, 'God is simple' and your reply was to scoff.
So what does that make you, according to the scripture?

 

[post]

Isaiah 26:4
Trust in the LORD forever,
for in YAH, the LORD, is everlasting strength!

Philippians 4:13
I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.


Is this simple?

 

[post]

Jesus is the son of God

What does 'son of God' mean?

Ya think that's simple?

 

[Curtis]

Jesus IS God in the flesh.
Colossians 2:9
Jesus==“For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.”
1 Timothy 3:16 God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

I’d like to explain something about Colossians 2:9 - the word Godhead is defined in a Greek lexicon as:

New Testament Greek Lexicon

Strong's Number: 2320 Browse Lexicon
Original Word Word Origin
qeoteß from (2316)
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Theotes 3:119,322
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
theh-ot'-ace Noun Feminine
Definition

1. deity
   
   1. the state of being God, Godhead

NAS Word Usage - Total: 1
Deity 1

Godhead is defined as THE STATE OF BEING GOD - deity.

Thus the meaning of Colossians 2:9 is:

In Him dwells ALL the FULNESS of THE STATE OF BEING GOD AND DEITY, bodily.

Nothing else needs to be said. Jesus is deity in the flesh.

 

[post]

Then Jesus said to him,
“Away with you, Satan! For it is written,
‘you shall worship the LORD your God,
and Him only you shall serve.’”
(Matthew 4:10)

But when He again brings The Firstborn into the world, He says:
“let all the angels of God worship Him!”
(Hebrews 1:6)

And as they went to tell His disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying,
“Rejoice!”
So they came and held Him by the feet and worshiped Him.
(Matthew 28:9)​

→ Christ is God

 

[post]

of course things that God does are simple

scripture disagrees with your opinion -- will you love simplicity & despise knowledge? will you scoff and think, God is like you?
=p

Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God!
How unsearchable His judgments and His ways past finding out!
For who has known the mind of the Lord?
Or who has become His counselor?
(Romans 11:33-34)​