Wrangler
Well-Known Member
- Feb 14, 2021
- 20,761
- 8,999
- 113
- 57
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
Proof that Jesus is God
- Thread starter robert derrick
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
- Status
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
- Feb 14, 2021
- 20,761
- 8,999
- 113
- 57
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
Proving trinitarianism cannot hold up to scrutiny. A most important question is just ignored.
Look at the text carefully:
Gen 19:24 Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;
That's two "LORD's", or in the Hebrew:
Gen 19:24 ויהוה המטיר על־סדם ועל־עמרה גפרית ואשׁ מאת יהוה מן־השׁמים׃
That's two "יהוה" (JEHOVAH's), one "יהוה" standing on earth (Genesis 17-19, see Genesis 18:33, etc, the Son sent from the Father, with the two covering Cherubims (Gabriel and 'Herald')), and the other "יהוה" in Heaven (Our Father which art in Heaven) above. In this sense is the "the LORD" on earth as the "Angel" (Messenger, position, not nature) of His Father, the "the LORD" in Heaven.
Except for Jesus, who is. Why not address what I said, and presented instead of not doing so? Why are you so reluctant to even address my evidences, and always hand wave it away? Is that how you address the remaining issues in life - ignore them?
Can we look at this a moment?
Deu 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:
Deu 6:4 שׁמע ישׂראל יהוה אלהינו יהוה אחד׃
Do you know what it says in Hebrew (though I understand the English just fine in context)?
Which is where Paul draws from in 1 Corinthians 8:6, which is the NT expansion (contextual explanation) of Deuteronomy 6:4 in the light of the Son.
I am glad I am neither of those errors ('trinitarianism', 'modalism' (aka Sabellianism, etc)) for scripture does not teach either. I am glad that there are those who point out the errors of both, however, some go too far, and reject the truth in so doing (becoming 'Arian', "Unitarian' and the like) The scriptures teach that there are 3 Persons/Beings that all have existed eternally, being the heavenly eternal Trio (3 Persons/Beings that are not ever 1 Person/Being (being logically incoherent), nor 1 Person/Being masquerading as multiple Persons/Beings (I would call that devil possession if I saw a single person manifest 3 differing personalities).
Yes, but they would be holding to a theological error about the nature and Personality or Personhood of JEHOVAH elohiym. Ultimately they will need to let go their error. For the Holy Ghost is promised to lead them into "all truth".
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
- Feb 14, 2021
- 20,761
- 8,999
- 113
- 57
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
Because you make unfounded assertions. Why do you except Jesus? Just assert it.
I can grasp that taking the form of a servant means that one is not a servant. But I don’t think that helps your cause...
I think we all have some errors about God. Yes, eventually, if one is led by the Spirit, and hopefully begins to walk in the Spirit, the errors will be cleared up.
It’s just getting yucky feeling in here. Making me a little queasy. Begins to sound like Islam to say, There is only one God and Jesus is His prophet, as is being said. It’s actually making me feel physically unwell to see how easy it would be for some men to convert to Islam. They’re actually already there...I’m bowing out. Headachy too.
Last edited:
Brakelite
Well-Known Member
- Feb 6, 2020
- 10,879
- 7,259
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- Australia
- Gender
- Male
The only reason he was mortal was by choice. By taking upon Himself human nature, deity became a mortal man.
The deity and/or divinity of Christ is not dependant upon a theological construct of man. Jesus was His Father's only begotten Son.... Who was sent from the Father's side to become our Savior through His taking upon Himself the fallen human nature of mankind. God's own declaration that"this is My Son" , Peters declaration "thou art the Son", is all the evidence one needs to Christs Divine nature. A literal Son of God has the same nature and the same attributes of God.
Until you try and define each.
We are adopted sons. Angels are created sons. Christ was begotten.
But being adopted affords mankind with unbelievable privileges. We can partake of the divine nature and become like Christ... In fact that is our calling... To be recreated in they image of God.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Thomas Belsham was a Unitarian - Thomas Belsham - Wikipedia
- Abner Kneeland became a Universalist, and later rejected revealed religion and Universalism's Christian God, and became jailed for blasphemy. Biased translation. - Abner Kneeland - Wikipedia
- Monotessaron by John Samuel Thompson derived from Johann Jacob Griesbach's NT (which was not TR based). John Samuel Thompson was a Universalist at the time of the writing of the Monotessaron.
Biased translation, and even bad mss based on Griesbach's nonsense.
"The introduction [one of his two translations, "A Literal Translation ..."] indicates that Parker used the Griesbach rescention of the Vatican manuscript as his main text." - Watch Tower History: The Mystery of Herman Heinfetter see also 1826 JOHN S. THOMPSON. Commentary on the Four Gospels - Based on Wakefield's Translation. Fascinating History.
He loved using the Vatican mss.
"In his 1864 edition of "The English Version" he changed John 1:1 to "the command had relation to a God"." He rejected that Jesus was God (meaning Deity, as he understood a difference in Persons/Beings of Father and Son, and rightly rejected 'trinitarianism') in both.
He sent some of his 'translations' as gifts to Unitarians.
Benjamin Wilson was once a Baptist, becoming a Campbellite, and later forming another church, The Church Of God Of The Abrahamic Faith - Benjamin Wilson (biblical scholar) - Wikipedia or Church of God General Conference - Wikipedia
Tenets of that faith are:
Jesus is God's Son [not Deity], who came into existence beginning with his miraculous conception in Mary's womb [thus did not exist with the Father at the Creation]
The Holy Spirit is God's power [not a Person]
This private interlinear was first published in 1865 and was based on the Griesbach critical Greek New Testament and “the various readings of the Vatican Manuscript, No. 1209 in the Vatican Library.” Wilson was affiliated with the Disciples of Christ, which held the heresy of baptismal regeneration, and was also associated with a cult called the “Restitution Church of God.” The Jehovah’s Witnesses have printed several hundred thousand copies of the Emphatic Diaglott.
Biased through and through. His translation was effected by his rejection of the TR and his use of corrupt Vatican mss, and later rejection of the Son's existence with the Father at Creation.
- Joseph Smith, was a freemason, a con-artist, plagiarist, polygamist, pedophile, arrested and arraigned several times for theft, perjury, and attempting to set up his own monetary system among many other issues. He was definitely biased in his 'translation' (which was nothing of the sort, but simply a corruption of the KJB text, altering it where he pleased).
That this one is even cited, means a desperation for one's position.
Hugh went so far as to say that the crucifixion was an event in the life of Jesus that went wrong.
"... was expelled from the Executive Committee of International Hebrew Christian Alliance (IHCA), of which he had been a member since 1925, (this organisation is now the International Messianic Jewish Alliance or IMJA).[2] He later associated with Messianic Judaism for a while, but was bitterly disillusioned by the experience....
... in 1985 titled The Original New Testament. In 1965 he published the controversial The Passover Plot, a book the thesis of which is that the Crucifixion was part of a larger, conscious attempt by Jesus to fulfill the Messianic expectations rampant in his time, and that the plan went unexpectedly wrong. " - Hugh J. Schonfield - Wikipedia
He's a Heretic who did not even understand the basics, apparently
The "Wuest" (Kenneth Wuest) 'translation' came from the Nestle's Aland text, which also rejected the TR, and picked up on the Westcott and Hort texts. - Kenneth Wuest - Wikipedia
A historical consideration of these men and their theology (they were not Arian, nor promoting Arianism in their translations] can be seen here - Germans, JW’s and John 1:1
For instance, Siegfried Schulz proves the point that he was not Arian, when he translates John 1:1c as in part, that the Word (Person) is "of a divine kind". Meaning that the Person who is "the Word" is of a divine nature, or has divine nature in connection with His Father. In other words, he makes a distinction between God (the Word's Father) and the Word, who is the Son of the Father, having the divine nature, after His Father. It would be like saying a man has a son, and his son is of a human kind. Thus the Father and the Son share the same nature (divinity).
David Bently Hart is supposedly an 'Orthodox theologian' (Eastern Orthodoxy) and identifies with "'Christian Socialism and 'Demo[n]cratic Socialism''" (Jesuitism) and has taught at Loyola (Jesuit) College, MD, as well as Notre Dame (both Jesuit Roman Catholic Institutions). He was not Arian, though he taught 'trinitarianism', and thus his 'translation' would not deny Jesus as Deity. To utilize his 'translation' as such is disingenuous to his own erroneous theology. The guy is obviously a Jesuit masquerading as Orthodox.
Robert Young (Young's Literal), whose actual translation (not commentary) reads: "1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God". He was not an Arian.
This citation is incorrect, and misrepresents Robert Young in his Commentary, which actually reads "(13) Robert Young, 1885 (Concise Commentary), "and a God (i.e. a Divine Being) was the Word"" as see here (page 54) -"AND THE WORD WAS GOD,] more lit. 'and a God (i.e. a Divine Being) was the Word,' that is, he was existing and recognized as such." - Concise Critical Comments on the New Testament
Last edited:
Just trying to understand what you are saying... It's late and I wonder if I should even be involved in such a discussion? Take care old friend!
Rom_8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
What does scripture say? Fallen sinful flesh or unfallen flesh?
I didn't ask anything about "God". I asked about what "flesh" (fallen or unfallen) the Son was in while living as a man on earth.
Not at all, as I never advocated for that heretical doctrine. You simply pulled out the strawman again. Therefore, since I never advocated for, I never need to look for any texts to support the heresy.
I have been telling you that, but you keep misrepresenting my position, which is that there are Three Heavenly Eternal Persons/Beings, the Trio, which has the individuals - Person/Being of the Father, the Person/Being of the Son, and the Person/Being of the Holy Ghost/Spirit working together as a chord, family, team, sharing the same goal, a unified group of Persons/Beings [JEHOVAH (name) Elohiym (individuals of that family)] who are never one Person/Being.
Where ever did I say there was? Feel free to read all my posts in this thread, or even in this forum. You will not find even a single place. I do not advocate your strawman, therefore I never need to look for texts to defend that heresy.
What I have presented from scripture (KJB) is the case that there are Three Eternal Beings/Persons working together in harmony, symphony.
Following your logic, Jesus was not a servant then? ("the form of a servant" which parallels "the form of God")? which again would make Him God/Deity. Damned if you do, damned if you don't, as the old saying goes. I would hate to be in your position.
Asserted? Sure, by scripture. I simply "Amen'ed" it.
John 1:1
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
With Acts 3:22-23.
Act 3:22 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
Act 3:23 And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.
Jesus is the Alpha and Omega. Think about it. Jesus is "God" (John 1:1c), and sent by "God" (John 1:1b; whom the Son was with in the beginning), who was His Father, as Prophet for the Father (Acts 3:22-23).
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
