If the Son was begotten of the Father, and the Father is God, surely the Son inherits the exact same attributes and nature as His Father? Like Father like Son? The Son when we speak of our Saviour and Lord, was not created as the angels were and therefore a son by creation...nor was he as we are , sons by adoption. No, Christ was a Son begotten in the express image of the Father. And only a Son born in deity could atone for a law given by deity. And only a Son whose life is His own to give, can offer His life a sacrifice for many. Angels as with all created beings could not give their life an offering for sin as their lives belonged to God anyway...their life was not theirs to give. But Christ's life was the life of the Father...self existent...thus He had the power to lay it down as He testified. No created being could atone for a law that He Himself was subject to.
The necessity of the Trinity
- Thread starter SovereignGrace
- 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!
BARNEY BRIGHT
Well-Known Member
What I know is you want me to believe you and not the scriptures. When Jesus was making his Father's name known to his Apostles Jesus didn't say he was the Father. The True God is The Father and God of Jesus. The scriptures continue to show us that even after Jesus had died been resurrected and gone back into heaven. Things such as this which are written in scripture you want me to deny and listen to you instead. As I continue to tell people God is quiet capable to clearly communicate with us. If Jesus wanted us to believe he was The True God he was quite capable of clearly communicating that. He wouldn't have continued to say long after he gone back into heaven that the True God was his Father and God.
If you study the LXX, the bible of believers in the first century, YAHWEH = Lord = Jesus.
When the Christ was on earth, He wanted all the glory to go to His Father. Yes, that is correct, the Christ is not the Father, He is the Son, the Son of God, God the Son, the second Person in the Triune Godhead.
The Deity of Jesus Christ
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
Here we can see the Word, the Son of God, God the Son, the second Person in the Triune Godhead being spoken about. It clearly states He was with God and He was also God. Everything made, He made...read Genesis 1 and it says God created everything we see.
Then it says this about the Word...
The Word Made Flesh
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.[John 1:14]
Again, the Christ became flesh and dwelt among us. This Word is very God of very God.
101G
Well-Known Member
those scriptures that you posted are correct. but one thing. in your posting of John 1:3 is not the LORD is the one who made all things?. and is not Jesus Lord?. so are you saying that the the LORD is the Lord the same person? yes or no.
if no please explain.
PICJAG.
10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
101G
Well-Known Member
we must say you're on fire this morning. yes, "He was in the world, and the world was made by him".
"MADE BY HM?", let's check the record. Acts 4:24 "And when they heard that, they lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is".
THAT'S the "Lord", only the "L" is in caps. now this, Nehemiah 9:6 "Thou, even thou, art LORD alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee".
IT'S THE "LORD" ALL CAPS THAT MADE ALL THINGS.
now, the bible never makes a mistake. so the "Lord" is the "LORD" in flesh, John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:2 "The same was in the beginning with God.
John 1:3 "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Oh how easy it is to hear the TRUTH.
PICJAG.
BARNEY BRIGHT
Well-Known Member
CoreIssue
Well-Known Member
BARNEY BRIGHT
Well-Known Member
God is the one who put his personal name YAHWEH in the scriptures. If the True God YAHWEH wanted only to go by the title, "Lord" then why did The True God put his personal name YAHWEH in the scriptures. The LXX of Jesus day had YAHWEH in it. Now the people who lived after Jesus, his Apostles and the 1st century Christians they took the name YAHWEH out and replaced it with words like Lord and God, but Who gave them this authority to take God's personal name YAHWEH out of the scriptures. As I said God is the one who put his personal name YAHWEH in the scriptures and he certainly did nothing wrong when he put his personal name YAHWEH in the scriptures. Why do the people who lived after Jesus, his Apostles and 1st century Christians have such a problem with the name YAHWEH when it was The True God YAHWEH who put his name in the scriptures. I honestly believe it to be wrong to take Gods personal name out of the scriptures when it was The True God YAHWEH who put his personal name in the scriptures.
The translators of the LXX substituted Lord (Greek kurios) for YAHWEH. It was the bible of most believers in the first century. The naturally associated Lord with Jesus Christ = YAHWEH.
Is that why the New World Translation deliberately corrupted John 1:1, so that they could continue teaching this heresy? If Jesus is not God, then you will have to pay for your own sins.
BARNEY BRIGHT
Well-Known Member
And what I'm telling you is that the LXX of the 1st century that Jesus Christ and the Apostles used in their day YAHWEH was used in that translation not Lord, so when Jesus read Isaiah 61:1,2 YAHWEH is what he read in that scripture not Lord and Jesus wasn't saying he was YAHWEH.
Many reference works have suggested that the name YAHWEH ceased to be used by about 300 B.C.E. Evidence for this date supposedly was found in the absence of the Tetragrammaton (or a transliteration of it) in the Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, begun about 280 B.C.E. It is true that the most complete manuscript copies of the Septuagint now known do consistently follow the practice of substituting the Greek words Kyʹri·os (Lord) or The·osʹ (God) for the Tetragrammaton. But these major manuscripts date back only as far as the fourth and fifth centuries C.E. More ancient copies, though in fragmentary form, have been discovered that prove that the earliest copies of the Septuagint did contain the divine name YAHWEH not Lord.
One of these is the fragmentary remains of a papyrus roll of a portion of Deuteronomy, listed as P. Fouad Inventory No. 266. It regularly presents the Tetragrammaton, written in square Hebrew characters, in each case of its appearance in the Hebrew text being translated. This papyrus is dated by scholars as being from the first century B.C.E., and thus it was written four or five centuries earlier than the manuscripts mentioned previously.
It was the people who lived after Jesus went into heaven and the Apostles had died that replaced the Devine name YAHWEH with Lord.
Last edited:
BARNEY BRIGHT
Well-Known Member
People who speak about how the New World Translation translates John 1:1 act like this debate how John 1:1 is to be translated either no nothing concerning the history of how this passage is to be translated or deliberately lie about the New World Translation. It has been proven that way back at least a thousand years or more that a translation translated John 1:1 similarly to the New World Translation:The Bible translation in a language that was spoken in the earliest centuries of our Common Era is very interesting.
The language is the Sahidic dialect of Coptic. The Coptic language was spoken in Egypt in the centuries immediately following Jesus’ earthly ministry, and the Sahidic dialect was an early literary form of the language. Regarding the earliest Coptic translations of the Bible, The Anchor Bible Dictionary says: “Since the [Septuagint] and the [Christian Greek Scriptures] were being translated into Coptic during the 3d century C.E., the Coptic version is based on [Greek manuscripts] which are significantly older than the vast majority of extant witnesses.”
The Sahidic Coptic text is especially interesting for two reasons. First, as indicated above, it reflects an understanding of Scripture dating from before the fourth century, which was when the Trinity became official doctrine. Second, Coptic grammar is relatively close to English grammar in one important aspect. The earliest translations of the Christian Greek Scriptures were into Syriac, Latin, and Coptic. Syriac and Latin, like the Greek of those days, do not have an indefinite article. Coptic, however, does. Moreover, scholar Thomas O. Lambdin, in his work Introduction to Sahidic Coptic, says: “The use of the Coptic articles, both definite and indefinite, corresponds closely to the use of the articles in English.”
Hence, the Coptic translation supplies interesting evidence as to how John 1:1 would have been understood back then. What do we find? The Sahidic Coptic translation uses an indefinite article with the word “god” in the final part of John 1:1. Thus, when rendered into modern English, the translation reads: “And the Word was a god.” Evidently, those ancient translators realized that John’s words recorded at John 1:1 did not mean that Jesus was to be identified as Almighty God. The Word was a god, not Almighty God.
The point I'm making is that how John 1:1 is to be translated goes back thousands of years. It didn't start with the New World Translation. Do I agree with the New World Translation in how it translates John 1:1? Yes, and I really don't worry about people who are trying to get me to deny that it was the only begotten Son who became flesh.
Barney, are you a Jehovah's Witness?
(Not hating, just asking. Sorry if this was addressed already)
CoreIssue
Well-Known Member
You like to throw that one hate around. Just because somebody recognizes your religion as a cult does not mean they hate you.
BARNEY BRIGHT
Well-Known Member
As i said the Bible of the believers of the first century didn't have the word Lord in place of YAHWEH. Instead it had the personal name YAHWEH not Lord. It was those who lived after Jesus went into heaven and the apostles died off that instituted Lord instead of the personal name of YAHWEH.
CoreIssue
Well-Known Member
And your point is?
Right here you said Jesus when his name in the Hebrew is Yahushua.
But you use Jehovah when it is YHWH. But that is a Tetragram because his real name was too holy to speak.
This name thing is a nonsense argument because we do not know what God's true name is if he has such a thing.
This is not true. The LXX translated YAHWEH (kurios) Lord. This is the bible of the first century believers who knew Jesus is YAHWEH.
You need to study independently apart from JW indoctrination, if you value your soul. Jesus is YAHWEH. Thai is what the name Jesus Christ means.
JESUS IS JEHOVAH (Yahweh).
Isa 40:3 The voice of one who calls out, “Prepare the way of Yahweh in the wilderness! Make a level highway in the desert for our God.
Now compare that to:
Mat 3:3 For this is he who was spoken of by Isaiah the prophet, saying, “The voice of one crying in the wilderness, make ready the way of the Lord. Make his paths straight.”
John was preaching Jesus, the Old Testament Yahweh according to Isaiah 40:3.
Again:
Num 21:5 The people spoke against God, and against Moses, “Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? For there is no bread, and there is no water; and our soul loathes this disgusting bread.”
6 Yahweh sent venomous snakes among the people, and they bit the people. Many people of Israel died.
Compare to:
1Cor 10:9 Let’s not test Christ, as some of them tested, and perished by the serpents.
And, again:
Gen 2:4 This is the history of the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that Yahweh God made the earth and the heavens.
John 1:3 All things were made through him. Without him was not anything made that has been made.
There it is, three times. The Old Testament says Yahweh did it, the New Testament says Jesus did it.
The only logical conclusion is to see that Jesus is Yahweh and Yahweh is Jesus.
Borrowed from Tom Cassidy
Similar threads
- Locked
