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!
On Gods nature in general. Yes that there is a plurality w/in the Godhead. Also each 'person' being involved in creation, the resurrection of Jesus....and other attributes of God that each possess.ok yeah 2nd cent... wat 700 verses stating dat there are 3 Gods? or 3 persons? 3 persons maybe!
He's more One than He is three...I'll tell you that much.On Gods nature in general. Yes that there is a plurality w/in the Godhead. Also each 'person' being involved in creation, the resurrection of Jesus....and other attributes of God that each possess.
On Gods nature in general. Yes that there is a plurality w/in the Godhead. Also each 'person' being involved in creation, the resurrection of Jesus....and other attributes of God that each possess.
Awesome, brother!
So have I (as I declared in the OP).
They each share the same attributes, essence and nature. Yet Jesus isn't the Father. The Father isn't the Spirit nor is the Spirit Jesus or any combinatino of the above.He's more One than He is three...I'll tell you that much.
You should do a study on the Oneness of the Lord, it will help you to understand His Triune nature better.
Here's a link to some information where you can begin your study...
Trinity vs. Tritheism: Understanding the Trinity.
(especially the first four posts).
From Genesis to Revelation. There are some good books on the trinity or just start reading.I know dat man but wheres the 700 verses you were talking about??
Jesus, in His Spirit, is the Father:They each share the same attributes, essence and nature. Yet Jesus isn't the Father. The Father isn't the Spirit nor is the Spirit Jesus or any combinatino of the above.
Sorry but saying Jesus is the Father in any capacity is to completely miss that relationship within the Godhead. Do a word study on logos. Jesus as the word i.e. logos answers the question.Jesus, in His Spirit, is the Father:
Jhn 14:7, If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
Jhn 14:8, Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
Jhn 14:9, Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
Jhn 14:10, 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.
Jhn 14:11, Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.
But I really think that you are ignoring the reality of the verse at hand. Did you read it?Sorry but saying Jesus is the Father in any capacity is to completely miss that relationship within the Godhead. Do a word study on logos. Jesus as the word i.e. logos answers the question.
Ya, Jesus did not mean he was actually the father. That's why I suggested a word study on logos.But I really think that you are ignoring the reality of the verse at hand. Did you read it?
Oh yes He did.Ya, Jesus did not mean he was actually the father.
That's why I suggested a word study on logos.
Then you have a schizophrenic savior. Sorry about that. All you've done is pile up a bunch of verses using similar terms then with a broad brush say they all mean the same thing. Poor exegesis but very good eisegesis. Your hermeneutic needs some work.Oh yes He did.
Put your fingers in your ears and cry, la la la la la, I don't wanna hear the sound of the coming King...
But Jesus actually means what He says.
It cannot be eisegesis, because I have not made any of my own comments on what is written, except for what can be drawn out of the text.Then you have a schizophrenic savior. Sorry about that. All you've done is pile up a bunch of verses using similar terms then with a broad brush say they all mean the same thing. Poor exegesis but very good eisegesis. Your hermeneutic needs some work.
Jesus isn't the Father or the Spirit or you have a schizophrenic God.Oh yes He did.
Put your fingers in your ears and cry, la la la la la, I don't wanna hear the sound of the coming King...
But Jesus actually means what He says.
If it's not eisegesis because you made no comments then by the same token it can't be exegesis either. So please, exegete away. Catholics do this all day long, plop down a bunch of verses and expect us to just buy into it. We don't. You'll need more than a bunch of verses piled on top of one another to convince me that Jesus is the Father.It cannot be eisegesis, because I have not made any of my own comments on what is written, except for what can be drawn out of the text.
Truly, it is exegesis that I have set forth before you.
Be careful...you appear to me to be prideful over what you have studied, thinking that you cannot be wrong about what you believe in.
I would suggest really looking at each one of the scriptures that I have presented, and ask the Lord if the statements I have made concerning them are drawn from the text or read into the text.
My understanding is that my statements are drawn from the text.
But if you can show me otherwise, I'm all ears.