QUESTION 1 for YOU - IF YOU BELIEVE JESUS is GOD

[StanJ]

Milk
Butter
cheese

They come from the same source yet they are different,Because Jesus came from God it does not make him God.

Well you can believe in your dairy god and I'll continue to believe in my real tripartite GOD.

 

[nothead]

I wrote what I meant. If you didn't understand it the fault lies with your comprehension level not my writing skills.

Well then you wrote awry to you own paradigm sir. HE is a singular God. THEY is your oddball trin God. THEY should be what you write, but you don't. THEY the readers will be forever confused and befuddled by your writing.

The THEY God don't exist by plain simple Bible. THEY never get mentioned, only six possible times in all scripture and I avow not once. He, I, MY MINE along with singular verbs attendant to the One True God occurs almost 11,000 times.

So then who comprehends and who is faulty both in writing skills and comprehension?

The right hand of God signifies power and authority as Jesus confirmed in Matthew 28:18

[SIZE=.75em]18 [/SIZE]And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

IN LINE with 1 Cor 15

25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
[SIZE=.75em]26 [/SIZE]The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
[SIZE=.75em]27 [/SIZE]For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.
[SIZE=.75em]28 [/SIZE]And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

All power was GIVEN by God unto him, putting ALL under Jesus with the exception of God.

Secondly how is it that God with God gets power only from the other God? God by definition doesn't get power from another God.

The Holy Spirit is who Jesus promised in Luke 24:49 and Acts 1:4-5. The same Holy Spirit He instructed His disciples to baptize in the name of in Matthew 28:19.
Paul knew and saw that Jesus was God and Savior as he stated in Titus 2:13. Acts 5:3-4 also shows the Holy Spirit was God not just His spirit.
Sorry but there are just too many verses to show the Father/Son/Holy Spirit are The Triune God.

NONE of your verses depict a Triune God. We can go over these one by one. If you like. But I suspect you are entrenched in your bias.

The term IN context of the Bible refers to God as Tripartite. Using a dictionary to understand God's word only means you don't know it or it's creator. The Holy Spirit is who teaches us God's Word and if you have no received/been baptised by Him you have no idea how to assimilate God's word.
Is this the same Richard Hanson that said he never trusted anything written about history prior to 600 AD?
There is no doubt Jesus the Son is subordinate to God the Father, that is the order of God's plan of salvation. They are not three independent beings, they are three in ONE. Maybe you should stop thinking one dimensionally and think three dimensionally seeing as we live in three dimensions. According to your understanding there is no such thing as a cube, and the world is flat.
The Godhead is clearly spelled out in the NT, despite your denials.

Em the one true God is three dimensional, and more however many dimensions there are. What a baby analogy! Maybe try using C.S. Lewis SLUG analogy too, your pundits being just as infantile as you: "If you want to get the hang of it (God incarnating as a man) just think how it's like to be a slug or a crab."

"Mere Christianity." MERE alright. God is a slug. WHOO HOO!! Can't even tell when you blaspheme can you?

God ain't no slug crab rock, carved image man beast or bug. No cast iron, gold metal or stick. And He ain't no Trinity either. God is exactly what He said from the git-go, the singular unit of One Being. The ECHAD of the Adonai.

 

[StanJ]

O did he Stan?

Down through the ages this verse has been rigorously debated because Trinitarians & Arians have struggled to correctly interpret the phrase great God and Savior. But Stan, you have entered the mind of a man now dead for almost 2000 years to inform us here today that "this is what he meant!"

No mention of how he might have written this and in what sense it was given. No honesty on your part to say 1. This could mean both the Father (great God) and to Jesus (Savior). Or that Greek scholars have wrestled over this verse because there is only one article, which precedes both names. They acknowledge the writer could have multiple ideas going on here but no Stan knows Pauls mind!

What we know is there is not a single person in God and Jesus and that they are given distinctly different names, responsibilities and hierarchy.

God manifestation demands a Father making Himself known through a Son.

[SIZE=80%]1:1 [/SIZE]From Paul, a slave[SIZE=80%]2[/SIZE] of God and apostle of Jesus Christ, to further the faith[SIZE=80%]3[/SIZE] of God’s chosen ones and the knowledge of the truth that is in keeping with godliness, [SIZE=80%]1:2 [/SIZE]in hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the ages began.[SIZE=80%]4[/SIZE] [SIZE=80%]1:3 [/SIZE]But now in his own time[SIZE=80%]5[/SIZE] he has made his message evident through the preaching I was entrusted with according to the command of God our Savior. [SIZE=80%]1:4 [/SIZE]To Titus, my genuine son in a common faith. Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior!

When Jesus said He who has seen (character) me has seen the Father we can see how his appearing will be likened to God appearing because the Son always does the will of his Father.

P.

By the way Stan a triad requires 3 not 2 ;)

Yes he did.

Don't really care about all the trouble and false teaching Arians have caused. I'll deal with you here.
Jesus is alive and sits at the right hand of God which you would know if you actually read and believed the NT.
I have the Holy Spirit in me because I am God's temple and I am under the NEW covenant, so yes I know.
Sadly you cannot say the same thing. You don't KNOW God or Jesus or the Holy Spirit.

So according to the scripture you quoted above and your fallacious POV, we have two saviors? :wacko:

I find it very disingenuous of you to quote what Paul says in Titus 1, and avoid or refuse to acknowledge what he adds to this in Titus 2:11-15

11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all people. 12 It trains us to reject godless ways and worldly desires and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, 13 as we wait for the happy fulfillment of our hope in the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ. 14 He gave himself for us to set us free from every kind of lawlessness and to purify for himself a people who are truly his, who are eager to do good. 15 So communicate these things with the sort of exhortation or rebuke that carries full authority. Don’t let anyone look down on you.

 

[kjw47]

Ya know....it's not so much if people think Jesus is not God........it's all the other cult thinking which comes with that thinking that is the problem.
Just sayin :)

Only cults teach Jesus is God. Everyone who knows God and Jesus--believe Jesus who taught--only the Father is the true God.-John 17:1-6

 

[StanJ]

Well then you wrote awry to you own paradigm sir. HE is a singular God. THEY is your oddball trin God. THEY should be what you write, but you don't. THEY the readers will be forever confused and befuddled by your writing.
The THEY God don't exist by plain simple Bible. THEY never get mentioned, only six possible times in all scripture and I avow not once. He, I, MY MINE along with singular verbs attendant to the One True God occurs almost 11,000 times.
NONE of your verses depict a Triune God. We can go over these one by one. If you like. But I suspect you are entrenched in your bias.Em the one true God is three dimensional, and more however many dimensions there are. What a baby analogy! Maybe try using C.S. Lewis SLUG analogy too, your pundits being just as infantile as you: "If you want to get the hang of it (God incarnating as a man) just think how it's like to be a slug or a crab."
"Mere Christianity." MERE alright. God is a slug. WHOO HOO!! Can't even tell when you blaspheme can you?
God ain't no slug crab rock, carved image man beast or bug. No cast iron, gold metal or stick. And He ain't no Trinity either. God is exactly what He said from the git-go, the singular unit of One Being. The ECHAD of the Adonai.

Your response is so incohesive here, I can't be bothered trying to figure out what you are babbling on about. Bottom line is you either accept ALL scripture including where it clearly shows Jesus being our GOD and Savior, which is proper hermeneutical exegesis, or you don't and continue in your fallacious attempts to present a false god.
Obviously you can't think in 3 dimensions or you would get it. Apparently you also like to pull quotes out of context, and don't know that C.S. Lewis fully supported the trinity Godhead, and in his book Mere Christianity, ch 24, writes;
The last chapter was about the difference between begetting and making. A man begets a child, but he only makes a statue. God begets Christ but He only makes men. But by saying that, I have illustrated only one point about God, namely, that what God the Father begets is God, something of the same kind as Himself. In that way it is like a human father begetting a human son.
I suggest you actually read his book to see what he did believe before trying to fallaciously misrepresent what he did say.

 

[kjw47]

They're called connotations, not meanings, and the one you use here is wrong. I gave you the proper one based on the context.
1 Cor 15:24-28 is about the Son as the Son, not the Son as God. You fail to properly understand the different roles fulfilled by Jesus Christ.
Although Paul’s argument in this section is difficult in its details, its thrust is clear and powerful. The Corinthians must understand that the Resurrection is not an isolated event with limited repercussions. It is rather an integrating and culminating event in God’s sovereign rule over history. Redemption is not complete “until he has put all his enemies under his feet” (v. 25, a clear reference to Ps. 110:1), and since death is “the last enemy” (v. 26), Christ’s work is not done until death is destroyed. Paul’s statement that the Son “will also be subjected” to the Father (v. 28) does not mean that the Son is inferior in dignity and being. Rather, in His messianic work the Son subjects Himself to the will of the Father “when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father” (v. 24). The climax of Christ’s submissive, messianic work is this total conquest over His enemies, “that God may be all in all,” when His absolute rule is universally acknowledged.

Jesus teaches he has and serves a God--his Father------ we all must choose who we believe---- Jesus said proof of ones love for him was by listening to HIM.

 

[StanJ]

Only cults teach Jesus is God. Everyone who knows God and Jesus--believe Jesus who taught--only the Father is the true God.-John 17:1-6

and yet all those that do teach God is not triune ARE labeled cults.
This is an utterly self serving and fallacious statement by you.

Jesus teaches he has and serves a God--his Father------ we all must choose who we believe---- Jesus said proof of ones love for him was by listening to HIM.

Maybe you should try incorporating ALL that Jesus said and not just verses that you eisegetically use to support your dogma. Jesus also said "before Abraham, I AM."

 

[nothead]

Your response is so incohesive here, I can't be bothered trying to figure out what you are babbling on about. Bottom line is you either accept ALL scripture including where it clearly shows Jesus being our GOD and Savior, which is proper hermeneutical exegesis, or you don't and continue in your fallacious attempts to present a false god.
Obviously you can't think in 3 dimensions or you would get it. Apparently you also like to pull quotes out of context, and don't know that C.S. Lewis fully supported the trinity Godhead, and in his book Mere Christianity, ch 24, writes;
The last chapter was about the difference between begetting and making. A man begets a child, but he only makes a statue. God begets Christ but He only makes men. But by saying that, I have illustrated only one point about God, namely, that what God the Father begets is God, something of the same kind as Himself. In that way it is like a human father begetting a human son.
I suggest you actually read his book to see what he did believe before trying to fallaciously misrepresent what he did say.

What is unclear about a respected pundit who gives analogy of the INCARNATION to a slug or crab?

THINK ABOUT WHAT IT IS LIKE TO BE A SLUG OR CRAB.

Er, um guhhhhh...I tought about tit and um...er buhhhhh well, um I don't think I would LIKE2b a slug or crab, em berrrr um.

So what single thing could Lewis be saying which would be EDIFYING to us or God? Is he HONORING God by saying this? Are we thinking men sir, or LOBOTS on the LAMPAGE??

God cannot beget a literal son in ontology, this makes two Gods, sir. Morph them together and what else can you get? SLUGGOD?? Part glorified man, part God? Think about it, what it WOULD BE LIKE to be a slug or crab sir.

See I blaspheme and risk getting the BOOT here. You guys do so and what happens? Pats on the back? Holy kisses left and right?

Slimy slug kisses? Slug kissen cousins are ye?

and yet all those that do teach God is not triune ARE labeled cults.
This is an utterly self serving and fallacious statement by you.


Maybe you should try incorporating ALL that Jesus said and not just verses that you eisegetically use to support your dogma. Jesus also said "before Abraham, I AM."

Ego eimi without the complement ALWAYS means "I am [he]." NO JEW will say "I am" existentially or as the name of God. God's name IS NOT "I AM."

And "I am" existentially means something Greek in philosophy, as in "I think therefore I am."

WHY does a Jew never say this? Em, since he already KNOWS he exists?

Think about it, you don't have to THINK about it, you DO exist, yeah?

 

[Madad21]

False translation. From the Koine, "ego eimi" without the complement explicit still has by convention an IMPLICIT complement, specifically [he] in all other verses of John. But NOT Jn 8:58. WHY is this, Jesus tells the Samaritan woman "ego eimi" without any complement....the blind man in chpt 9 says "ego eimi" without a complement, and it is translated the usual "I am [he]." No one thought HE was saying "I am."

The "ego" in "ego eimi" is the emphasis "I". the "ego" refers to himself specifically.

In the context of the conversation that's going on at the time it is only natural that the translator will use the most common rendering of the greek to create a smooth translation. In the context and in view of all other renderings of the words he will instinctively know the correct and smooth translation.

The other rendering makes no contextual sense.

Even the YLT translates it as "I am"

I mean honestly why would they get so upset and pick up stones to bash him because he confesses that before Abraham "I have been"

Logically If that was the case they would have looked at each other realized he was a nut job and he would have been discredited as a laughing stock and sent away as a loony.

No the most logical contextual translation for it renders it "I am" it explains exactly why they reacted the way they did, tearing their clothes in anger picking up stones to cast at him, this was blasphemy.

but to say before Abraham I was is not blasphemy, in fact its not anything. it does not warrant the same response. (unless your incredibly dramatic and going for an oscar)

 

[nothead]

The "ego" in "ego eimi" is the emphasis "I". the "ego" refers to himself specifically.

In the context of the conversation that's going on at the time it is only natural that the translator will use the most common rendering of the greek to create a smooth translation. In the context and in view of all other renderings of the words he will instinctively know the correct and smooth translation.

The other rendering makes no contextual sense.

Even the YLT translates it as "I am"

Example of ego eimi with a complement:

I am the Bread of Life

Example of ego eimi without the complement:

I am [he]. Before Abraham was, I am he the Messiah.

Up the chapter the very same thing was said, and it is translated by most, "I am he"

[SIZE=.75em]24 [/SIZE]I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

I mean honestly why would they get so upset and pick up stones to bash him because he confesses that before Abraham "I have been"

Logically If that was the case they would have looked at each other realized he was a nut job and he would have been discredited as a laughing stock and sent away as a loony.

No the most logical contextual translation for it renders it "I am" it explains exactly why they reacted the way they did, tearing their clothes in anger picking up stones to cast at him, this was blasphemy.

but to say before Abraham I was is not blasphemy, in fact its not anything. it does not warrant the same response. (unless your incredibly dramatic and going for an oscar)

To claim messiah was enough for them. To go hinky and such. Remember they did for Stephen and he did not make ANY claim for himself. Actually his claim was the same as Jesus.'

 

[Madad21]

Example of ego eimi with a complement:

I am the Bread of Life

Example of ego eimi without the complement:

I am [he]. Before Abraham was, I am he the Messiah.

Up the chapter the very same thing was said, and it is translated by most, "I am he"

[SIZE=.75em]24 [/SIZE]I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.




To claim messiah was enough for them. To go hinky and such. Remember they did for Stephen and he did not make ANY claim for himself. Actually his claim was the same as Jesus.'

LoL i can see it now

They say to Jesus "'Thou art not yet fifty years old, and Abraham hast thou seen?

Jesus replies 'Verily, verily, I say to you, Before Abraham's coming .....I am.....He;'

The jews are so upset and they go to tear their clothes, but then they stop, and look at each other a little confused, and they ask "hang on, did you just say 'I am..he?"

Jesus replies "yes thats right I am he"

The Jews scratch their heads "umm, he who?,...do you mean..Abraham?, I mean we were about to kill you because we thought you where about to confirm our suspicions that you think you are the great I AM."

Mate Im telling you its all in the translation by context, that has alway been the first rule of Greek in to english. if it dont fit in the context, it dont make sense.

 

[nothead]

LoL i can see it now

They say to Jesus "'Thou art not yet fifty years old, and Abraham hast thou seen?

Jesus replies 'Verily, verily, I say to you, Before Abraham's coming .....I am.....He;'

The jews are so upset and they go to tear their clothes, but then they stop, and look at each other a little confused, and they ask "hang on, did you just say 'I am..he?"

Jesus replies "yes thats right I am he"

The Jews scratch their heads "umm, he who?,...do you mean..Abraham?, I mean we where about to kill you because we thought you where about to confirm our suspicions that you think you are the great I AM."

Mate Im telling you it all in the translation by context, that has alway been the first rule of Greek in to english. if it dont fit in the context, it dont make sense.

Jesus always made sense brother

You are not yet 50 years old, and YOU HAVE SEEN ABRAHAM??

See, you are assuming Jesus is sequentially existing in the flesh after Abraham and this is what they meant, but why use THIS age....50?

I assume this was a cultural concept, that a rabbi 50 yrs of age would be seen as a vision seer, that a faithful man would then be seen as one who would dream God's dreams...the actual age in any case is kinda out there in the context not explained.

Anyway, speaking of CONTEXT the thing about it was, they were ALREADY hot under their linen collars since Jesus called their father the Devil. I would be too, Jesus called my father the Devil. Makes me mad to THINK he would say such a thing. Even a spiritual father, they thought of ABRAHAM as their fadda in de faith, sir.

And you better NOT be talkin' bout me fadda lak dat. HOMEBOY.

Ancient street talking homeboys, eh?

See now I give you actual reality, um? Like it is, like it is, sweeheart.

SO now, then they ask him, "You ain't even 50 yet homeboy, an' you think you saw Abraham in WHAT VISION?"

And Jesus responds with an explanation of ABRAHAM'S alleged vision OF HIM as a man of God which Jesus said he saw Abraham have...before Abraham was born, I WAS. But he says it in the present tense since IT HAPPENED HE IS the Messiah HAS COME and Abraham saw HIS DAY.

And Jesus saw in vision Abraham seeing in vision Jesus' day. Whoo HOO!! Nothead figured it out? Think?

 

[kjw47]

and yet all those that do teach God is not triune ARE labeled cults.
This is an utterly self serving and fallacious statement by you.


Maybe you should try incorporating ALL that Jesus said and not just verses that you eisegetically use to support your dogma. Jesus also said "before Abraham, I AM."

Yes the Jewish leaders asked Jesus if he lived before Abraham, Jesus answered them honestly--your teachers twist it into Jesus saying that he was God there, but he did not, but he did exist before Abraham--collosians 1:15, proverbs 8:23, rev 3:14---Also in the ot a more correct rendering of I am is--I shall prove to be what I shall prove to be. --I am is a little off of Hebrew context.

 

[StanJ]

What is unclear about a respected pundit who gives analogy of the INCARNATION to a slug or crab?

THINK ABOUT WHAT IT IS LIKE TO BE A SLUG OR CRAB.

Er, um guhhhhh...I tought about tit and um...er buhhhhh well, um I don't think I would LIKE2b a slug or crab, em berrrr um.

So what single thing could Lewis be saying which would be EDIFYING to us or God? Is he HONORING God by saying this? Are we thinking men sir, or LOBOTS on the LAMPAGE??

God cannot beget a literal son in ontology, this makes two Gods, sir. Morph them together and what else can you get? SLUGGOD?? Part glorified man, part God? Think about it, what it WOULD BE LIKE to be a slug or crab sir.

See I blaspheme and risk getting the BOOT here. You guys do so and what happens? Pats on the back? Holy kisses left and right?

Slimy slug kisses? Slug kissen cousins are ye?

Ego eimi without the complement ALWAYS means "I am [he]." NO JEW will say "I am" existentially or as the name of God. God's name IS NOT "I AM."

And "I am" existentially means something Greek in philosophy, as in "I think therefore I am."

WHY does a Jew never say this? Em, since he already KNOWS he exists?

Think about it, you don't have to THINK about it, you DO exist, yeah?

Only in your mind, which seems very incohesive based on your responses. In the entirety of Lewis' works, he FULLY supports the Triune nature of God. That you do not know this confirms you don't know Lewis at all, but use words out of context to try and further your fallacious views.

I know Lewis, he has earned my respect as a man of God and my admiration to a certain degree. I don't know you and have no reason at all to accept ANYTHING you have to say as true. You simply support my current POV that all Arians are basically apostate.

You also obviously know nothing about what God said to Moses in Exodus 3:14 in order to tell the people who God was. This just confirms you have NO idea who God is other than in your own small deluded non inspired imagination. God makes who He is real to those who accept what His word says He is. You sir have nothing but incohesive babble to put forth.

Yes the Jewish leaders asked Jesus if he lived before Abraham, Jesus answered them honestly--your teachers twist it into Jesus saying that he was God there, but he did not, but he did exist before Abraham--collosians 1:15, proverbs 8:23, rev 3:14---Also in the ot a more correct rendering of I am is--I shall prove to be what I shall prove to be. --I am is a little off of Hebrew context.

This assertions shows just how little you understand the words of Christ.

The violent response of the Jews to Jesus’ “I AM” statement indicates they clearly understood what He was declaring—that He was the eternal God incarnate. Jesus was equating Himself with the "I AM" title God gave Himself in Exodus 3:14.

 

[nothead]

Only in your mind, which seems very incohesive based on your responses. In the entirety of Lewis' works, he FULLY supports the Triune nature of God. That you do not know this confirms you don't know Lewis at all, but use words out of context to try and further your fallacious views.

I do know he was trin. Through and through. I say his SLUG analogy has no merit and is a heretical blaspheme. But we as gomers read him and go, "Em...well yeah, okadokay...."

...without THINKING that this is the most Godawfullest STOOPITest ever thing to say about God. If THIS is support for the INCARNATION, then who would ever BELIEVE in it? HUH?

I know Lewis, he has earned my respect as a man of God and my admiration to a certain degree. I don't know you and have no reason at all to accept ANYTHING you have to say as true. You simply support my current POV that all Arians are basically apostate.

Okay then. Make his slug analogy real to us, sir. Explain WHAT IT IS WHICH EDIFIES GOD OR MAN here sir. I dare you. Look it up. Google it and make your book report.

And I will stand down. Don't be sassy. Be specific. REFUTE.

You also obviously know nothing about what God said to Moses in Exodus 3:14 in order to tell the people who God was. This just confirms you have NO idea who God is other than in your own small deluded non inspired imagination. God makes who He is real to those who accept what His word says He is. You sir have nothing but incohesive babble to put forth.

I know for instance God tells Moses His definitive NAME for all generations, a memorial forever. Which means even now God has ONE NAME. Not "Jesus" not "Son," not "Holy Spirit," and not nothing else. More definitive than "el shaddai" the name He gives Abraham. The One True God's name and this is the third person declension of "he will be" or "aeie." The exact pronunciation of no one knows. YHWH.

Not "I am." Not ego eimi.

This assertions shows just how little you understand the words of Christ.

My understanding beats your understanding with both my understanding's arms tied behind my understanding's back.

Tuck your understanding's tail between it's legs and slither on now...

The violent response of the Jews to Jesus’ “I AM” statement indicates they clearly understood what He was declaring—that He was the eternal God incarnate. Jesus was equating Himself with the "I AM" title God gave Himself in Exodus 3:14.

He insulted their 'father' and said he was the Devil. This would get my goat too. You ASSUME what me and you should not, making donkeys of ourselves if we do.

He said he saw Abraham 'seeing his day.' Before he was even made or born, Abraham 'saw' him. This really took the cake.

No I don't know what flavor it was.

 

[JonD]

The violent response of the Jews to Jesus’ “I AM” statement indicates they clearly understood what He was declaring—that He was the eternal God incarnate. Jesus was equating Himself with the "I AM" title God gave Himself in Exodus 3:14.
[/quote]
That is entirely correct and in absolute harmony and agreement with true Bible believing, respected, commentators throughout our ages who were/are well aware of the statement that Jesus made. To place any other construct upon it is to pervert the true nature of the passage.

 

[Purity]

The violent response of the Jews to Jesus’ “I AM” statement indicates they clearly understood what He was declaring—that He was the eternal God incarnate.

And it couldn't mean anything else "could" it Jon?

LoL i can see it now

They say to Jesus "'Thou art not yet fifty years old, and Abraham hast thou seen?

Jesus replies 'Verily, verily, I say to you, Before Abraham's coming .....I am.....He;'

The jews are so upset and they go to tear their clothes, but then they stop, and look at each other a little confused, and they ask "hang on, did you just say 'I am..he?"

Jesus replies "yes thats right I am he"

The Jews scratch their heads "umm, he who?,...do you mean..Abraham?, I mean we were about to kill you because we thought you where about to confirm our suspicions that you think you are the great I AM."

Mate Im telling you its all in the translation by context, that has alway been the first rule of Greek in to english. if it dont fit in the context, it dont make sense.

Mazda

Would you like to understand the true interpretation of John 8:58?

I have no problem with different translations of the Greek. When I want to see what the connotations of the Greek are, I look them up. I'm not writing about doctrines, I'm writing about RIGHTLY dividing the Word of Truth, unlike you are doing.
Here's what John 1 in the NET Bible says about God, seeing as you are so keen on it.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was fully God. 2 The Word was with God in the beginning. 3 All things were created by him, and apart from him not one thing was created that has been created. 4 In him was life, and the life was the light of mankind. 5 And the light shines on in the darkness, but the darkness has not mastered it.
6 A man came, sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness to testify about the light, so that everyone might believe through him. 8 He himself was not the light, but he came to testify about the light. 9 The true light, who gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was created by him, but the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to what was his own, but his own people did not receive him. 12 But to all who have received him—those who believe in his name—he has given the right to become God’s children 13 —children not born by human parents or by human desire or a husband’s decision, but by God.
14 Now the Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We saw his glory—the glory of the one and only, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father. 15 John testified about him and shouted out, “This one was the one about whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is greater than I am, because he existed before me.’” 16 For we have all received from his fullness one gracious gift after another. 17 For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God. The only one, himself God, who is in closest fellowship with the Father, has made God known.

Now pay attention to God's Word and not your dogma.

Stan, I did as you said and read the NET passage and I couldn't see your Triad god.

You show me a text which doesn't mention the Holy Spirit
Which states Jesus is a created being.
That God's Logos filled him with grace and truth.

One wonders what you were thinking!

 

[JonD]

Correct Jesus isn't God but he manifested Him perfectly - worthy of great praise ;)

And according to yourself who admits that "God only" is to be worshipped and that "Jesus is not God"...you have no problem worshipping Him!

 

[Purity]

And according to yourself who admits that "God only" is to be worshipped and that "Jesus is not God"...you have no problem worshipping Him!

I personally have no problem in praising Christ and do so regularly. If, as the Scripture's state that he is worthy to open the scroll because of his obedience which led him to death and his subsequent exaltation to the right hand of the Father on High, then yes this is worthy of great praise. My initial comments were given to accommodate those who feel more strongly that God alone is worthy of praise; something as you know Jesus taught. Some believe the time of Jesus' praise will be in the Kingdom age once he has ascended the throne his father David and promised in Luke 1:32. You see Jon no matter how you approach this subject you are left with an exalted Son who inherited a name, a position in the Heavens and a future Kingdom which he himself will give back to his Father.

The Apsotles understood this here:

Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ.

The direction of praise is to the God (creator) and Father (life giver) of Jesus and the blessings originate in Him through Jesus Christ.

Can you see this Jon as the early Apostles did?

 

[Madad21]

Mazda

Would you like to understand the true interpretation of John 8:58?

Thanks Bruv, But I already understand how to translate Greek into english. I did the course and I have my copy of Dobsons