No, I'm trying to bring God glory, you are the one at risk of disgracing God with your triune and god-man theories.
To @DNB concerning the Deity of Christ...
- Thread starter justbyfaith
- 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
@justbyfaith ....can you define '(the) word' in scripture....any way you want to make your point...it is important to eventually stop throwing around words and phrases and go to scripture to see what some of these key terms mean....you have insisted that 'word' means a person, namely our Savior...
...what is the Greek term or symbol for 'word' and what can this 'word' mean?..hint: there are several major meanings and not one of them are used for a PERSON....stay within the NT..
Thanks
...what is the Greek term or symbol for 'word' and what can this 'word' mean?..hint: there are several major meanings and not one of them are used for a PERSON....stay within the NT..
Thanks
I think that the real question is what does the "Word" (capital "W") mean in holy scripture?
The answer is that the Word was in the beginning, was with God, and was God (John 1:1).
Without Him nothing has been made that has been made (John 1:3).
The Word, also became flesh and dwelt among us; and we beheld His glory, (the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth (John 1:14).
So, who is the Word but God in the flesh, Jesus Christ?
To me, these things are foundational...some of the first things that you learn as a newbie to the faith.
The answer is that the Word was in the beginning, was with God, and was God (John 1:1).
Without Him nothing has been made that has been made (John 1:3).
The Word, also became flesh and dwelt among us; and we beheld His glory, (the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth (John 1:14).
So, who is the Word but God in the flesh, Jesus Christ?
To me, these things are foundational...some of the first things that you learn as a newbie to the faith.
I said, what I said, and I meant every single word of it.
The doctrine of the trinity is from the devil.
The point here is simple. You have your view and people can agree or disagree.
Are we allowed to disagree, or if anyone disagrees they are evil?
I wish we were these logical searchers after truth rather than emotional creatures trying to find a safe place to make sense of this world so we can cope. We deceive ourselves with the idea we can be objective, rather than every position we take is emotionally charged and founded.
It is why I will always exalt Jesus and His walk, because that is so important in my life.
And the reason why others will denigrate Jesus, because other loyalties and focus capture them.
A lot of the discussions are not about the words, but about our bias and how far we can go.
And as far as I can see spiritual reality, denying Jesus as God denies the Kingdom.
So little wonder I am the enemy etc. Will anyone shift from these positions? I have only seen very few, even when faced with the final curtain.
God bless you
You interpretation of this event is about a hidden name.
God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.'" Exodus 3:14
the hebrew word eh-yeh - appears to mean "I am"
It is always possible this sentence is a missquote, but it appears quite straight forward.
I would like you to explain how one can go from this simple proposition to your apparent alternative interpretation. Throughout church history the view has been consistent, so to propose another is to go against not just scripture but church history.
God bless you
This is an interesting analysis but it misses the point. The phrase "I am" is an object statement of the subject of the sentence. What follows is the description of the subject.
When the Lord said say "I am has sent me to you"
"I am" is the source of the sending, so is the descriptive name the Lord is giving to Himself.
God bless you
@justbyfaith
This is a much bigger topic than you think or realize....and what you were taught was not reliable and without depth, I'm sure of it.
I can start off this way.....
Well as you say you were taught to believe what you know today concerning your faith and doctrine. Like most, I also was told what to believe until the Spirit took hold over me years later and sorted some of these taught beliefs of grave errors of mine. One of them was about the Word and about Christ. You know that English was not one of the original language texts of scripture? There was no English spoken or written until say the 1400s...primitive form at that ...
In the original written text of the NT - it was primarily in Greek and some in Aramaic...and as you may know, scripture was written down without commas, semi-colons, periods or spaces between words. In fact all letters were capitalized.
When this scripture text was translated into the modern languages, including English, the translators chose themselves, I expect with some leadership advice along the way, to keep some leading letters capitalized or not, for emphasis and separation.
If you notice in the NT, the term 'word' is capitalized to 'Word' 7 times. And even different translators disagree when to or not capitalize it.
The term 'word' or 'Word' is transliterated as 'logos' over 300 times in the NT.
Now what are the odds of deliberate translator bias in making 'word' into 'Word?' Quite high! They must have had something in mind for sure....7x/300 found.....
The term logos from which word/Word is derived follows ONLY 2 threads of meaning, only 2....the 1st is to convey internal activity: his mental activity, plan(ning), thoughts, intellect, logic or reason, and the 2nd is to convey external communication: a command, voice, speaking, saying, instructing, sending a message or news....many more...this is how 'logos' is used in the NT.
Notice, it is never used to convey a person or a name or title of a person, ever.
IMO and there are many scholars that agree with me and even some noted Trinitarians, the 'word' in John 1:1 specifically does not and cannot possibly represent or be substituted for Jesus, Jesus Christ. or even Christ. You cannot substitute the term word with these other names of a person.
In John 1:1, the 'word' means both of the 2 threads of the meaning of 'logos'....internal self expression and external expression of YHWH our God, ONLY and no one else. He is alone with his own WORD.
In the beginning was the word of God, indeed...and indeed....
This 'word' means God's internal self-expression using his purpose, plan and reason/desire to create or influence or change (anything, anyone, anywhere, anytime), and then externally to communicate all his purpose and plans to his creation with commands or his voice directly or through others, as in his Son. He eventually created a unique Son, and used him to reveal his divine power, his own WORD (YHWH's word). The Son does not have this unique attribute, the ORIGIN of the word of God.
Yahshua is allowed to use the 2nd conveyed meaning of logos to execute YHWH's mind as his voice or message. The mind of Yahshua is NOT the same as the mind of his Creator, YHWH. Yes, they both work inseparably AS one mind or as ONE per scripture. This does not make them equal at all. Christ is the image of YHWH, indeed.
Again and today, his Son is using it (the Father's WORD) in the application of the 2nd conveyance only, portion of the word...the executioner of the EXTERNAL communication, mental activity of the Father to the world and us; and he is thus called the Word of God. Yahshua has the power to execute the thoughts and desires of his Father totally today, by himself. That is Yahshua's name today, the Word OF God (YHWH) - he is NOT the Word himself.
You see this term 'word' when associated with YHWH himself is a very complex 'word' indeed. It is YHWH's own word. And it is divine only because it is of YHWH only, and not his Son.
And we must get all this right and cannot over simplify it and jump ahead by trying to also understand verse John 1:14 in the process - to try and kill two birds with one stone, or to wrap it all up in a neat bow, if you will.
We cannot get confused and make YHWH's personal (W)word, his own personal attribute, as meaning the same, or is interchangeable with, the Son, the holy vessel and messenger and executioner of this word of YHWH. Can you see how silly this makes the the Greek word 'logos.' WE make a new meaning for logos if we do this, and not intended in scripture.
And more importantly, how degrading it is to lower our Creator and his intrinsic Word to the level of the unique person he created for our salvation. To the level and personage of his Son, his personal vessel and our human Saviour? Once you do this, you MUST then find in scripture by constraint, force-able and unnatural union that his Son, Yahshua, is also the co-author of creation with his Father, and he then must be created before the world and he is even God or YHWH himself......in doing this we completely fall off the cliff, indeed.
I'll stop here for now...if you have any queries then let me know....APAK
APAK
This is a much bigger topic than you think or realize....and what you were taught was not reliable and without depth, I'm sure of it.
I can start off this way.....
Well as you say you were taught to believe what you know today concerning your faith and doctrine. Like most, I also was told what to believe until the Spirit took hold over me years later and sorted some of these taught beliefs of grave errors of mine. One of them was about the Word and about Christ. You know that English was not one of the original language texts of scripture? There was no English spoken or written until say the 1400s...primitive form at that ...
In the original written text of the NT - it was primarily in Greek and some in Aramaic...and as you may know, scripture was written down without commas, semi-colons, periods or spaces between words. In fact all letters were capitalized.
When this scripture text was translated into the modern languages, including English, the translators chose themselves, I expect with some leadership advice along the way, to keep some leading letters capitalized or not, for emphasis and separation.
If you notice in the NT, the term 'word' is capitalized to 'Word' 7 times. And even different translators disagree when to or not capitalize it.
The term 'word' or 'Word' is transliterated as 'logos' over 300 times in the NT.
Now what are the odds of deliberate translator bias in making 'word' into 'Word?' Quite high! They must have had something in mind for sure....7x/300 found.....
The term logos from which word/Word is derived follows ONLY 2 threads of meaning, only 2....the 1st is to convey internal activity: his mental activity, plan(ning), thoughts, intellect, logic or reason, and the 2nd is to convey external communication: a command, voice, speaking, saying, instructing, sending a message or news....many more...this is how 'logos' is used in the NT.
Notice, it is never used to convey a person or a name or title of a person, ever.
IMO and there are many scholars that agree with me and even some noted Trinitarians, the 'word' in John 1:1 specifically does not and cannot possibly represent or be substituted for Jesus, Jesus Christ. or even Christ. You cannot substitute the term word with these other names of a person.
In John 1:1, the 'word' means both of the 2 threads of the meaning of 'logos'....internal self expression and external expression of YHWH our God, ONLY and no one else. He is alone with his own WORD.
In the beginning was the word of God, indeed...and indeed....
This 'word' means God's internal self-expression using his purpose, plan and reason/desire to create or influence or change (anything, anyone, anywhere, anytime), and then externally to communicate all his purpose and plans to his creation with commands or his voice directly or through others, as in his Son. He eventually created a unique Son, and used him to reveal his divine power, his own WORD (YHWH's word). The Son does not have this unique attribute, the ORIGIN of the word of God.
Yahshua is allowed to use the 2nd conveyed meaning of logos to execute YHWH's mind as his voice or message. The mind of Yahshua is NOT the same as the mind of his Creator, YHWH. Yes, they both work inseparably AS one mind or as ONE per scripture. This does not make them equal at all. Christ is the image of YHWH, indeed.
Again and today, his Son is using it (the Father's WORD) in the application of the 2nd conveyance only, portion of the word...the executioner of the EXTERNAL communication, mental activity of the Father to the world and us; and he is thus called the Word of God. Yahshua has the power to execute the thoughts and desires of his Father totally today, by himself. That is Yahshua's name today, the Word OF God (YHWH) - he is NOT the Word himself.
You see this term 'word' when associated with YHWH himself is a very complex 'word' indeed. It is YHWH's own word. And it is divine only because it is of YHWH only, and not his Son.
And we must get all this right and cannot over simplify it and jump ahead by trying to also understand verse John 1:14 in the process - to try and kill two birds with one stone, or to wrap it all up in a neat bow, if you will.
We cannot get confused and make YHWH's personal (W)word, his own personal attribute, as meaning the same, or is interchangeable with, the Son, the holy vessel and messenger and executioner of this word of YHWH. Can you see how silly this makes the the Greek word 'logos.' WE make a new meaning for logos if we do this, and not intended in scripture.
And more importantly, how degrading it is to lower our Creator and his intrinsic Word to the level of the unique person he created for our salvation. To the level and personage of his Son, his personal vessel and our human Saviour? Once you do this, you MUST then find in scripture by constraint, force-able and unnatural union that his Son, Yahshua, is also the co-author of creation with his Father, and he then must be created before the world and he is even God or YHWH himself......in doing this we completely fall off the cliff, indeed.
I'll stop here for now...if you have any queries then let me know....APAK
APAK
Last edited:
I see you are not reading and understanding my words at all. How unfortunate. There is NO translated 'I AM' from Hebrew to English in the Exodus verse you are referencing here...cannot make it any simpler.
Please Go back and read my second post to Ron Coates in Post #64...you surely must be able to understand it and they know what I've been patiently telling you.
Yes, the hebrew word eh-yeh - appears to mean "I am" as you said, BUT that is not what is transliterated. It is ehyeh ’ăšer ’ehyeh.....BIG difference..
I done with this subject if it is not clear to you by now FH...wasting my time at least
One of us is profoundly wrong, maybe both, ...but you will have the incriminating time on Judgement Day, trying to explain how God revealed to you that He was a trinity, ...let me see how you address Him on that day, will you call Him Father, or Jesus, or Holy Spirit?
Consider the ramifications of your position versus mine, on Judgement Day? Who will have all the explaining to do? Do you expect to see three divine persons on the tribunal? Will you recognize who is who when, according to trinitarian theology, there is absolutely nothing that distinguishes one from the other, besides their names - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?
Or will there only be one, and if one, how will you address Him - Father, Son, or Holy Spirit?
Do you really think that the 'I Am' statements will justify your position before Him, to call Him three-in-one, or Jesus the god-man?
...you won't even dare open up your mouth with such nonsense, when you are before Him!
I would say that our Lord is Omnipotent, sovereign, and loving; and that therefore we can trust the Bible as it is presented to us in English, in any translation that does not water down the message by taking out words, phrases, sentences, and paragraphs; that it is the unadulterated word of the Lord preserved for us so that we can know His entire counsel as He intended for us to read it.
The term "the Word" is in fact used to refer to a human being; for the Word became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:14).
Again, the Word became flesh and dwelt among us; so yes, the Word does in fact refer to Jesus Christ.
Again, the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. So yes, the Word is interchangeable with the Son as He came to exist in a human body.
I will definitely refer to Jesus as "Abba" on that day.
The term "the Word" is in fact used to refer to a human being; for the Word became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:14).
Again, the Word became flesh and dwelt among us; so yes, the Word does in fact refer to Jesus Christ.
Again, the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. So yes, the Word is interchangeable with the Son as He came to exist in a human body.
I will definitely refer to Jesus as "Abba" on that day.
Last edited:
I won't need to explain to Him then, as I've explained it to everyone now...in posts #1-#6 of the following thread:
True Trinity.
God as the Holy Spirit dwells within me...so I won't be referring to the One on the throne before me as Holy Spirit.
And Jesus and the Father are ONE; yet distinct from one another: in that the Father is the Spirit who inhabiteth eternity and Jesus is the same Spirit in the flesh.
The Father is Omnipresent while the Son dwells in a finite human body.
But they are the same Person.
I know that it will not be departing from the truth to refer to Jesus as "Abba, Father" therefore.
But I am certain that we will also call Him by name.
I am certain that we will also address the Father by the name that is above every name.
And Jesus and the Father are ONE; yet distinct from one another: in that the Father is the Spirit who inhabiteth eternity and Jesus is the same Spirit in the flesh.
The Father is Omnipresent while the Son dwells in a finite human body.
But they are the same Person.
I know that it will not be departing from the truth to refer to Jesus as "Abba, Father" therefore.
But I am certain that we will also call Him by name.
I am certain that we will also address the Father by the name that is above every name.
After consulting with another moderator we have concluded that it is against forum rules to start a thread that singles out a member in the main title and OP.
Therefore this thread is now closed.
Therefore this thread is now closed.
- Status
Similar threads
