What do you think this text says about the deity of Christ?

[justbyfaith]

Or in my personal study found here: Examining the Trinity: Hebrews 1:8 - “Thy Throne, O God”

A website full of false teaching and heresy.

Pro 19:27, Cease, my son, to hear the instruction that causeth to err from the words of knowledge.

 

[justbyfaith]

from post #190

Heb. 1:8 (the OP, Remember?)

Here is a smattering of my study of this scripture:

Literal word-for-word translation of Heb. 1:8: “Toward but the son the throne of you the god into the age of the age”

Since the very premise of your rebuttal is a changing of the literal rendering of holy scripture, I would venture to say that your conclusion is, frankly, baloney.

I most certainly hold to the concept that the kjv is superior if it is not the only version of the Bible that has the truth; and that it is authoritative over and above all other translations; being inspired and inerrant.

This "narrow-minded" view may in fact be essential to your salvation:

Mat 7:13, Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Mat 7:14, Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Was Jesus saying he was the "I AM"
Part 1
A text in John’s writings the trinitarians bring up in their arguing that John’s writings teach that Jesus Christ is God. That text is found in Jesus’ argument with the Jews given in John 8:56-58
The expression “I AM” at Exodus 3:14 is used there as a title or a name, and in the Hebrew this expression is the one word Ehyéh (אהיה). Jehovah God was there speaking to Moses and sending him to the children of Israel. Well, then, in John 8:58, was Jesus claiming to be Jehovah God? Not according to many modern Bible translators, such as Moffatt: “I have existed before Abraham was born.” Schonfield and An American Translation: “I existed before Abraham was born.” Stage (German): “Before Abraham came to be, I was.” Pfaefflin (German): “Before there was an Abraham, I was already there!" George M. Lamsa, translating from the Syriac Peshitta, says: “Before Abraham was born, I was.” Dr. James Murdock, also translating from the Syriac Peshitto Version, says: “Before Abraham existed, I was.” The Brazilian Sacred Bible published by the Catholic Bible Center of São Paulo says: “Before Abraham existed, I was existing.”

We must remember, also, that when Jesus spoke to those Jews, he spoke to them in the Hebrew of his day, not in Greek. How Jesus said John 8:58 to the Jews is therefore presented to us in the modern translations by Hebrew scholars who translated the Greek into the Bible Hebrew, as follows: Dr. Franz Delitzsch: “Before Abraham was, I have been.” Isaac Salkinson and David Ginsburg: “I have been when there had as yet been no Abraham.” In both of these Hebrew translations the translators use for the expression “I have been” two Hebrew words, both a pronoun and a verb, namely, aní hayíthi; they do not use the one Hebrew word: Ehyéh. So they do not make out that in John 8:58 Jesus was trying to imitate Jehovah God and give us the impression that he himself was Jehovah, the I AM.

In what language did John write his life account of Jesus Christ? In the Greek language, not in Hebrew; and in the Greek text the controversial expression is Egó eimí. Just by itself, without any introductory material ahead of it, Egó eimí means “I am.” Now this expression Egó eimí occurs also in John 8:24, 28; and in those verses the Authorized or King James Version and the Douay Version and others render the expression into English as “I am he,” the pronoun he being put in italics to indicate that the pronoun he is added or inserted. (AV; AS; Yg) But here, in John 8:58, those versions do not render this same expression as “I am he,” but only as “I am.” They evidently want to give us the idea that Jesus was not simply referring to his existence but also giving himself a title that belongs to Jehovah God, in imitation of Exodus 3:14.

When writing John 8:58, the apostle was not quoting from the Greek Septuagint Version, a translation of the Hebrew Scriptures made by Greek-speaking Jews of Alexandria, Egypt, before the birth of Christ. Let anyone who reads Greek compare John 8:58 in Greek and Exodus 3:14 in the Greek Septuagint, and he will find that the Septuagint reading of Exodus 3:14 does not use the expression Egó eimí for God’s name, when God says to Moses: “I AM hath sent me unto you.” The Greek Septuagint uses the expression ho Ōn, which means “The Being,” or, “The One who is.” This fact is clearly presented to us in Bagster’s translation of the Greek Septuagint, at Exodus 3:14, which reads: “And God spoke to Moses, saying, I am THE BEING [ho Ōn]; and he said, Thus shall ye say to the children of Israel, THE BEING [ho Ōn] has sent me to you.” According to Charles Thomson’s translation of the Greek Septuagint, Exodus 3:14 reads: “God spoke to Moses saying, I am The I Am [ho Ōn]. Moreover he said, Thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, The I Am [ho Ōn] hath sent me to you.” Thus this comparison of the two Greek texts, that of the Septuagint and that of John 8:58, removes all basis for trinitarians to argue that Jesus, in John 8:58, was trying to fit Exodus 3:14 to himself, as if he was Jehovah God.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Scriptures people use to prove Jesus is God

What Jesus said to the apostle Philip? What was that? This: “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.” (John 14:9, AV) Ah, yes, but that is far different from Jesus’ saying, ‘I am the Father.’ Jesus had just told Philip and the other faithful apostles that he was going away to God his Father; and so how could Jesus in the same breath say that Philip, when looking at Jesus, was looking at the Father? Jesus could not have meant that, for he dissociated God his Father from himself, just as when he said: “Ye believe in God, believe also in me.” (John 14:1, AV) Why the expression “also in me,” if Jesus were God himself? Philip asked Jesus: “Lord, shew us the Father,” and Jesus answered that that was what he had been doing all along, namely, showing them the Father. He had been explaining who his heavenly Father was. He had been showing them what his heavenly Father was like. He imitated his Father. He was like him, so much so that when one saw Jesus it was as if seeing his Father.

Jesus could not have meant that the apostles were seeing God, the One whom Jesus addressed or spoke of as Father. Many years after Jesus said those words, the apostle John wrote: “And the Word was made 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. . . . grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” (John 1:14, 17, 18, AV) By thus declaring God his Father, by explaining him, by giving an account of him, by being and acting like him, Jesus produced the effect that the apostles, by seeing Jesus, saw God his Father also.

Jesus said to the Jews: “The Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.” (John 5:37, AV) But those Jews did see Jesus’ shape and hear his voice.

 

[justbyfaith]

Was Jesus saying he was the "I AM"
Part 1
A text in John’s writings the trinitarians bring up in their arguing that John’s writings teach that Jesus Christ is God. That text is found in Jesus’ argument with the Jews given in John 8:56-58
The expression “I AM” at Exodus 3:14 is used there as a title or a name, and in the Hebrew this expression is the one word Ehyéh (אהיה). Jehovah God was there speaking to Moses and sending him to the children of Israel. Well, then, in John 8:58, was Jesus claiming to be Jehovah God? Not according to many modern Bible translators, such as Moffatt: “I have existed before Abraham was born.” Schonfield and An American Translation: “I existed before Abraham was born.” Stage (German): “Before Abraham came to be, I was.” Pfaefflin (German): “Before there was an Abraham, I was already there!" George M. Lamsa, translating from the Syriac Peshitta, says: “Before Abraham was born, I was.” Dr. James Murdock, also translating from the Syriac Peshitto Version, says: “Before Abraham existed, I was.” The Brazilian Sacred Bible published by the Catholic Bible Center of São Paulo says: “Before Abraham existed, I was existing.”

We must remember, also, that when Jesus spoke to those Jews, he spoke to them in the Hebrew of his day, not in Greek. How Jesus said John 8:58 to the Jews is therefore presented to us in the modern translations by Hebrew scholars who translated the Greek into the Bible Hebrew, as follows: Dr. Franz Delitzsch: “Before Abraham was, I have been.” Isaac Salkinson and David Ginsburg: “I have been when there had as yet been no Abraham.” In both of these Hebrew translations the translators use for the expression “I have been” two Hebrew words, both a pronoun and a verb, namely, aní hayíthi; they do not use the one Hebrew word: Ehyéh. So they do not make out that in John 8:58 Jesus was trying to imitate Jehovah God and give us the impression that he himself was Jehovah, the I AM.

In what language did John write his life account of Jesus Christ? In the Greek language, not in Hebrew; and in the Greek text the controversial expression is Egó eimí. Just by itself, without any introductory material ahead of it, Egó eimí means “I am.” Now this expression Egó eimí occurs also in John 8:24, 28; and in those verses the Authorized or King James Version and the Douay Version and others render the expression into English as “I am he,” the pronoun he being put in italics to indicate that the pronoun he is added or inserted. (AV; AS; Yg) But here, in John 8:58, those versions do not render this same expression as “I am he,” but only as “I am.” They evidently want to give us the idea that Jesus was not simply referring to his existence but also giving himself a title that belongs to Jehovah God, in imitation of Exodus 3:14.

When writing John 8:58, the apostle was not quoting from the Greek Septuagint Version, a translation of the Hebrew Scriptures made by Greek-speaking Jews of Alexandria, Egypt, before the birth of Christ. Let anyone who reads Greek compare John 8:58 in Greek and Exodus 3:14 in the Greek Septuagint, and he will find that the Septuagint reading of Exodus 3:14 does not use the expression Egó eimí for God’s name, when God says to Moses: “I AM hath sent me unto you.” The Greek Septuagint uses the expression ho Ōn, which means “The Being,” or, “The One who is.” This fact is clearly presented to us in Bagster’s translation of the Greek Septuagint, at Exodus 3:14, which reads: “And God spoke to Moses, saying, I am THE BEING [ho Ōn]; and he said, Thus shall ye say to the children of Israel, THE BEING [ho Ōn] has sent me to you.” According to Charles Thomson’s translation of the Greek Septuagint, Exodus 3:14 reads: “God spoke to Moses saying, I am The I Am [ho Ōn]. Moreover he said, Thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, The I Am [ho Ōn] hath sent me to you.” Thus this comparison of the two Greek texts, that of the Septuagint and that of John 8:58, removes all basis for trinitarians to argue that Jesus, in John 8:58, was trying to fit Exodus 3:14 to himself, as if he was Jehovah God.

You had better be 100% certain that what you are saying is accurate; because you are gambling your eternity on it if our interpretation of John 8:24 is correct.

I would say that this is the ultimate folly; but, to each his own.

This: “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.” (John 14:9, AV) Ah, yes, but that is far different from Jesus’ saying, ‘I am the Father.’

You are not being honest enough to address the whole of the scripture in question. In it, Jesus says, Do you not believe that I am in my Father, and my Father in me?

The human Jesus is in the Father and the Father is in Him. Since the Father is a Spirit (see John 4:23-24) it can be concluded that the Spirit of Jesus is the Father. I say to you truly that the hypostatic union is sound doctrine.

Why the expression “also in me,” if Jesus were God himself?

Jesus is distinct from the Father in that He is come in the flesh (1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 1:7); while God the Father inhabiteth eternity (Isaiah 57:15).

Jesus said to the Jews: “The Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.” (John 5:37, AV) But those Jews did see Jesus’ shape and hear his voice.

God the Father is a Spirit; and His shape is infinite throughout the Universe. However, He also did condense His entire being into the Person of the Son (see John 14:7-11) so that whenever anyone saw Jesus, they saw the Father. Jesus declared the Father by simply existing; because the Father was in Him; and therefore, whenever anyone saw Him, they saw the Father; even though the true form of the Father is that He is an infinite and eternal Spirit inhabiting eternity. I say to you truly that Jesus is the Father come in human flesh; and therefore, in seeing His human form, you would see the representation of the Spirit who is the Father, but would not see that infinite and eternal Spirit except by watching the behaviour of Jesus Christ, in which you would see how the Father operates in everything that He does.

In like manner, when we love one another, people can see the Father operating in us and through us so that we declare the Father because His Spirit dwells within us (1 John 4:12) and we live like He would live if He were walking the earth..

 

[DNB]

Was Jesus saying he was the "I AM"
Part 1
A text in John’s writings the trinitarians bring up in their arguing that John’s writings teach that Jesus Christ is God. That text is found in Jesus’ argument with the Jews given in John 8:56-58
The expression “I AM” at Exodus 3:14 is used there as a title or a name, and in the Hebrew this expression is the one word Ehyéh (אהיה). Jehovah God was there speaking to Moses and sending him to the children of Israel. Well, then, in John 8:58, was Jesus claiming to be Jehovah God? Not according to many modern Bible translators, such as Moffatt: “I have existed before Abraham was born.” Schonfield and An American Translation: “I existed before Abraham was born.” Stage (German): “Before Abraham came to be, I was.” Pfaefflin (German): “Before there was an Abraham, I was already there!" George M. Lamsa, translating from the Syriac Peshitta, says: “Before Abraham was born, I was.” Dr. James Murdock, also translating from the Syriac Peshitto Version, says: “Before Abraham existed, I was.” The Brazilian Sacred Bible published by the Catholic Bible Center of São Paulo says: “Before Abraham existed, I was existing.”

We must remember, also, that when Jesus spoke to those Jews, he spoke to them in the Hebrew of his day, not in Greek. How Jesus said John 8:58 to the Jews is therefore presented to us in the modern translations by Hebrew scholars who translated the Greek into the Bible Hebrew, as follows: Dr. Franz Delitzsch: “Before Abraham was, I have been.” Isaac Salkinson and David Ginsburg: “I have been when there had as yet been no Abraham.” In both of these Hebrew translations the translators use for the expression “I have been” two Hebrew words, both a pronoun and a verb, namely, aní hayíthi; they do not use the one Hebrew word: Ehyéh. So they do not make out that in John 8:58 Jesus was trying to imitate Jehovah God and give us the impression that he himself was Jehovah, the I AM.

In what language did John write his life account of Jesus Christ? In the Greek language, not in Hebrew; and in the Greek text the controversial expression is Egó eimí. Just by itself, without any introductory material ahead of it, Egó eimí means “I am.” Now this expression Egó eimí occurs also in John 8:24, 28; and in those verses the Authorized or King James Version and the Douay Version and others render the expression into English as “I am he,” the pronoun he being put in italics to indicate that the pronoun he is added or inserted. (AV; AS; Yg) But here, in John 8:58, those versions do not render this same expression as “I am he,” but only as “I am.” They evidently want to give us the idea that Jesus was not simply referring to his existence but also giving himself a title that belongs to Jehovah God, in imitation of Exodus 3:14.

When writing John 8:58, the apostle was not quoting from the Greek Septuagint Version, a translation of the Hebrew Scriptures made by Greek-speaking Jews of Alexandria, Egypt, before the birth of Christ. Let anyone who reads Greek compare John 8:58 in Greek and Exodus 3:14 in the Greek Septuagint, and he will find that the Septuagint reading of Exodus 3:14 does not use the expression Egó eimí for God’s name, when God says to Moses: “I AM hath sent me unto you.” The Greek Septuagint uses the expression ho Ōn, which means “The Being,” or, “The One who is.” This fact is clearly presented to us in Bagster’s translation of the Greek Septuagint, at Exodus 3:14, which reads: “And God spoke to Moses, saying, I am THE BEING [ho Ōn]; and he said, Thus shall ye say to the children of Israel, THE BEING [ho Ōn] has sent me to you.” According to Charles Thomson’s translation of the Greek Septuagint, Exodus 3:14 reads: “God spoke to Moses saying, I am The I Am [ho Ōn]. Moreover he said, Thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, The I Am [ho Ōn] hath sent me to you.” Thus this comparison of the two Greek texts, that of the Septuagint and that of John 8:58, removes all basis for trinitarians to argue that Jesus, in John 8:58, was trying to fit Exodus 3:14 to himself, as if he was Jehovah God.

Thank you Barney, that was a very thorough exposition!
...what an absolute shame that you even needed to explain this!

 

[justbyfaith]

Thank you Barney, that was a very thorough exposition!
...what an absolute shame that you even needed to explain this!

What your itching ears want to hear...2 Timothy 4:3-4.

 

[DNB]

Scriptures people use to prove Jesus is God

What Jesus said to the apostle Philip? What was that? This: “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.” (John 14:9, AV) Ah, yes, but that is far different from Jesus’ saying, ‘I am the Father.’ Jesus had just told Philip and the other faithful apostles that he was going away to God his Father; and so how could Jesus in the same breath say that Philip, when looking at Jesus, was looking at the Father? Jesus could not have meant that, for he dissociated God his Father from himself, just as when he said: “Ye believe in God, believe also in me.” (John 14:1, AV) Why the expression “also in me,” if Jesus were God himself? Philip asked Jesus: “Lord, shew us the Father,” and Jesus answered that that was what he had been doing all along, namely, showing them the Father. He had been explaining who his heavenly Father was. He had been showing them what his heavenly Father was like. He imitated his Father. He was like him, so much so that when one saw Jesus it was as if seeing his Father.

Jesus could not have meant that the apostles were seeing God, the One whom Jesus addressed or spoke of as Father. Many years after Jesus said those words, the apostle John wrote: “And the Word was made 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. . . . grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” (John 1:14, 17, 18, AV) By thus declaring God his Father, by explaining him, by giving an account of him, by being and acting like him, Jesus produced the effect that the apostles, by seeing Jesus, saw God his Father also.

Jesus said to the Jews: “The Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.” (John 5:37, AV) But those Jews did see Jesus’ shape and hear his voice.

Again, an insightful and competent exegesis!
...for even as a trinitarian proof-text, it makes no sense for the Son to 'call' himself the Father, as this is the main tenet of the trinitarian creeds*, that they are not each other. But rather, had Jesus said, 'he who sees me, has seen God', at least, and only for the sake of argument, that would've been more in line with the principle of three persons in one Godhead. For there is not a trinitarian theologian in history that would ever refer to the Son as the Father**, for that is the only thing that separates them - their names, since to them, each one is the all encompassing God.
And, not to mention, that whenever a trinitarian tries to present a text that equates the Father with the Son, or even glorify the Godhead, how conspicuously absent is the third person of the trinity, and without exception!
An absolute deplorable and shameful doctrine!

Caveat:
*Creeds refer to those defined at the first 4 ecumenical councils, and Athanasian.
**even modalist trinitarians will not call the Father the Son simultaneously. He is either one or the other at any given moment.

 

[justbyfaith]

it makes no sense for the Son to 'call' himself the Father, as this is the main tenet of the trinitarian creeds, that they are not each other.

You are not dealing with your normal Trinitarians here...I myself am a Oneness Trinitarian.

For there is not a trinitarian theologian in history that would ever refer to the Son as the Father,

I am a Trinitarian in history who refers to the Son as the Father....what are you talking about?

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

You had better be 100% certain that what you are saying is accurate; because you are gambling your eternity on it if our interpretation of John 8:24 is correct[/Quote\]

If you don't want to agree with what I said about John 8:24,28 then don't agree. I'm simply telling you that the king James Bible and the Douay version of the Bible at these scriptures when it comes to the Greek word Egó eimí they translate it as "I am he" not as "I AM." Do research, check it out yourself. [/Quote\]


Justbyfaith says:
You are not being honest enough to address the whole of the scripture in question. In it, Jesus says, Do you not believe that I am in my Father, and my Father in me?[/Quote\]

Jesus’ following explanation shows that this was so because he faithfully represented his Father, spoke the Father’s words, and did the Father’s works. (Joh 14:10, 11; compare Joh 12:28, 44-49.) It was on this same occasion, the night of his death, that Jesus said to these very disciples: “The Father is greater than I am.”—Joh 14:28.

The disciples ‘seeing’ the Father in Jesus can also be understood in the light of other Scriptural examples. Jacob, for instance, said to Esau: “I have seen your face as though seeing God’s face in that you received me with pleasure.” He said this because Esau’s reaction had been in agreement with Jacob’s prayer to God. (Ge 33:9-11; 32:9-12) After God’s interrogation of Job out of a windstorm had clarified that man’s understanding, Job said: “In hearsay I have heard about you, but now my own eye does see you.” (Job 38:1; 42:5; see also Jg 13:21, 22.) The ‘eyes of his heart’ had been enlightened. (Compare Eph 1:18.) That Jesus’ statement about seeing the Father was meant to be understood figuratively and not literally is evident from his own statement at John 6:45 as well as from the fact that John, long after Jesus’ death, wrote: “No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is in the bosom position with the Father is the one that has explained him.”—Joh 1:18; 1Jo 4:12.[/Quote\]


Justbyfaith says:
I say to you truly that the hypostatic union is sound doctrine.[/Quote\]

At Colossians 2:9 the apostle Paul says that in Christ “all the fullness of the divine quality [form of the·oʹtes] dwells bodily.” Here, again, some translations read “Godhead” or “deity,” which Trinitarians interpret to mean that God personally dwells in Christ. (KJ, NE, RS, NAB) However, Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon defines the·oʹtes in basically the same way it does thei·oʹtes, as meaning “divinity, divine nature.” (P. 792) The Syriac Peshitta and the Latin Vulgate render this word as “divinity.” Thus, here too, there is a solid basis for rendering the·oʹtes as referring to quality, not personality.

A consideration of the context of Colossians 2:9 clearly shows that having “divinity,” or “divine nature,” does not make Christ the same as God the Almighty. In the preceding chapter, Paul says: “God saw good for all fullness to dwell in him.” (Col 1:19) Thus, all fullness dwells in Christ because it “pleased the Father” (KJ, Dy), because it was “by God’s own choice.” (NE) So the fullness of “divinity” that dwells in Christ is his as a result of a decision made by the Father. Further showing that having such “fullness” does not make Christ the same person as Almighty God is the fact that Paul later speaks of Christ as being “seated at the right hand of God.”—Col 3:1.

Considering the immediate context of Colossians 2:9, it is noted that in verse 8, Christians are warned against being misled by those who advocate philosophy and human tradition. They are also told that “carefully concealed in [Christ] are all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge,” and they are urged to “go on walking in union with him, rooted and being built up in him and being stabilized in the faith.” (Col 2:3, 6, 7) In addition, verses 13 to 15 explain that they are made alive through faith, being released from the Law covenant. Paul’s argument, therefore, is that Christians do not need the Law (which was removed by means of Christ) or human philosophy and tradition. They have all they need, a precious “fullness,” in Christ.—Col 2:10-12.

Finally, at 2 Peter 1:3, 4 the apostle shows that by virtue of “the precious and very grand promises” extended to faithful anointed Christians, they “may become sharers in divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world through lust.” Elsewhere in the Scriptures, Christians are referred to as ‘sharing’ with Christ in his sufferings, in a death like his, and in a resurrection like his to immortality as spirit creatures, becoming joint heirs with him in the heavenly Kingdom. (1Co 15:50-54; Php 3:10, 11; 1Pe 5:1; 2Pe 1:2-4; Re 20:6) Thus it is evident that the sharing of Christians in “divine nature” is a sharing with Christ in his glory. Because they have the same divine nature as Jesus when they are resurrected doesn't make them Jehovah God just as it doesn't make Jesus Jehovah God.
The hypostatic union isn't true.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

You are not dealing with your normal Trinitarians here...I myself am a Oneness Trinitarian.



I am a Trinitarian in history who refers to the Son as the Father....what are you talking about?

Where is it written down in Scripture that Jesus is the Father. Understand I care nothing about your interpretations or you taking a scripture out of context to try and prove your point. I'm specifically asking you where in Scripture is it written down that Jesus is the Father.

 

[justbyfaith]

Where is it written down in Scripture that Jesus is the Father.. Understand I care nothing about your interpretations or you taking a scripture out of context to try and prove your point. I'm specifically asking you where in Scripture is it written down that Jesus is the Father.

Isaiah 9:6.

I will say that I am not interested in your changing of scripture and alternate interpretations. I want you simply to take it at face value.

See also the following logic:

There is one Lord in holy scripture (Ephesians 4:5, 1 Corinthians 8:6). And that Lord is the Father (Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21). Yet, no one can say that Jesus is the Lord except by the Holy Ghost (1 Corinthians 12:3), even the Spirit of truth.

Therefore I say to you by the Spirit of truth that Jesus is the one Lord of holy scripture; even the Father.

1 Corinthians 2:13 (kjv) lays forth to us a biblical hermeneutic; in which it is expedient to compare scripture with scripture in order to get the teaching of the Holy Spirit.

I am praying for you.

2Co 10:3, For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
2Co 10:4, (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds; )
2Co 10:5, Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

 

[justbyfaith]

re: post #470...

Please put your posts in a format where I can utilize the quote button to put your information on the table.

I didn't see anything in your post that threatens my theology; or else I would have copied and pasted the dangerous portion and responded to it.

But since it is not anything that I feel would disprove what I believe, I will leave it unanswered because you did not place it in the proper format to be answered.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Isaiah 9:6.

I will say that I am not interested in your changing of scripture and alternate interpretations. I want you simply to take it at face value.

See also the following logic:

There is one Lord in holy scripture (Ephesians 4:5, 1 Corinthians 8:6). And that Lord is the Father (Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21). Yet, no one can say that Jesus is the Lord except by the Holy Ghost (1 Corinthians 12:3), even the Spirit of truth.

Therefore I say to you by the Spirit of truth that Jesus is the one Lord of holy scripture; even the Father.

1 Corinthians 2:13 (kjv) lays forth to us a biblical hermeneutic; in which it is expedient to compare scripture with scripture in order to get the teaching of the Holy Spirit.

I am praying for you.

2Co 10:3, For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
2Co 10:4, (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds; )
2Co 10:5, Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

Like I said I care nothing about people's interpretations or taking scriptures out of context to prove their beliefs. It's going to stay that way and what other people think of me, that doesn't matter. Jesus said that because you follow him people will say the most evil things about you just as they did him, so think whatever you want about me.

 

[justbyfaith]

Like I said I care nothing about people's interpretations or taking scriptures out of context to prove their beliefs. It's going to stay that way and what other people think of me, that doesn't matter. Jesus said that because you follow him people will say the most evil things about you just as they did him, so think whatever you want about me.

What evil have I spoken about you?

I suggest that you take the scriptures that I have given to you at face value; and if you believe that the context of these scriptures nullifies their actual meaning, then please point out how it does so. Otherwise you ought to believe their testimony.

 

[Renniks]

Why do people so want to believe Jesus wasn't God? I don't get it.

 

[justbyfaith]

Why do people so want to believe Jesus wasn't God? I don't get it.

Neither do I.

I asked this question of them recently and all I got back was reviling.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Why do people so want to believe Jesus wasn't God? I don't get it.

Because we honestly believe that people who say Jesus is God are denying that it was The Only Begotten Son who became flesh(human)

 

[Renniks]

Because we honestly believe that people who say Jesus is God are denying that it was The Only Begotten Son who became flesh(human)

You are also assuming your interpretation is correct up against thousands of years of Christian thought saying otherwise. That alone should make you doubt your interpretation.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

You are also assuming your interpretation is correct up against thousands of years of Christian thought saying otherwise. That alone should make you doubt your interpretation.

You know that the majority of people in the past thought the world was flat and also in the past the people especially the church, thought the earth was the center of the universe, so much so, the church excommunicated an astronomer from the church, for disagreeing with the church, saying planet Earth was a planet with other planets orbiting the sun. Guess what, the church was wrong, and the astronomer was right. The majority of people certainly have their right to believe what they choose, but like me, just because the majority choose to believe a certain way concerning the scriptures, doesn't necessarily mean what they believe concerning the scriptures is true.
People don't have to agree with me, but as long as I honestly believe what people believe concerning the way they interpret Scripture isn't accurate then I'm going to exercise my right to disagree and express that.