!Bekah Ferguson said:Jessedance - I must quote me good friend Jewell here, she said, "God said, 'I Am that I Am", not "We is what We is".
"we is"....now that is a definate LOL How you get that laughing face?
Upvote
0
!Bekah Ferguson said:Jessedance - I must quote me good friend Jewell here, she said, "God said, 'I Am that I Am", not "We is what We is".
Thx 4 the replyjessedance said:GJG; Can you agree that isaiah 9:6 does not say that Jesus IS the almighty but that it says that Jesus (a child) has a name that shall be called the almighty? And therefore is not proof that Jesus is the almighty, but merely proof that jesus shall have a name that shall be called the almighty? You wrote much to respond to and I dont have time to write a book to answer all your assertions. In this forum it is better to stay focused don't you think?
I'll take one of the scriptures you quoted heb 1:8 which is a quote of ps. 45:6 in the OT. if you examine that chapter of Psalms you will see that "Thou art fairer than the sons of men; grace is poured into thy lips: therefore God hath blessed thee for ever. "
Psalms 45:2 (Darby). God is the God of the son not the son is God of the son. So to interpret vs. 6 or heb1:8 to mean that Jesus is God contradicts all the surrounding verses in psalms 45 which plainly state that God is the God of the son . not the son.
Actually what I believe is going on here in vrse 6 of psalms , or heb1:8, is that the son is being used as a metonymy for God. Like when we say "drink this cup". WE dont mean to drink the ceramic cup but what is in the cup. Jesus is often used in scritpure as a metonymy for God because he is so closely identified with the one who indwells him so fully, col.2:9."For in Christ the fullness of God lives in a human body ."
Col 2:9 (NLT)
Bekah Ferguson said:Genesis 1:26 - God said, "Let US make man in OUR image".
There is no reason NOT to believe that God didn't include the angels when He created the world. After verse 26, we see that GOD made man in HIS image. So, to say that the angels didn't help God create the world - you are right. But, there's no biblical reason to say that God did not share his plans with the angels. It's safe to say that the angels were his friends. So, when he decided to create the world, He shared His plans with them.
There is also no Biblical reason to say that the angels weren't also made in God's image. Neither you nor I have seen God in all His majesty.
Bekah Ferguson said:DER ALTER
--
You claim that the We and Us form of monarchian language IS NOT FOUND IN THE OLD TESTAMENT . . .
Au contraire! Here are some Biblical examples of the *majestic plural* that are just like the ones I illustrated using the Queen of England and John F. Kennedy.
This is what Daniel said to King Nebuchadnezzar:
"WE will tell the interpretation thereof before the king"
Daniel said "We" and yet it was just Daniel who went on to give the interpretation to Nebuchadnezzar. (Daniel 2:36)
Then there was King Artaxerxes. He referred to himself singularly and then in plural within the same letter. In Ezra 4:18, he wrote:
"The letter which ye sent unto US hath been plainly read before ME"
See also Ezra 7:13 & 24 where the very same thing occurs!
I just gave you two examples from the Old Testament even though you said that this form of monarchism language did not exit in the Old Testament!
Bekah Ferguson said:God uses angels ALL the time. The earth is filled with angels - helping God rescue people from car crashes, fires, assaults, hurricanes, etc. etc. God uses Angels to help Him accomplish things on earth. To deny that God used the angels to help Him in the Old Testament, is very foolish indeed. Aside from your OPINION Der Alter, there is no reason not to believe that God included the angels in his plans to make the earth. Yes, He made us in his image. But, we don't know what the angels look like. He made them first. The Bible doesn't say yay, or ney, but it's possible that the angels were also created in God's image.
Bekah Ferguson said:There is no way of proving that God DIDN'T use the angels when confusing the languages at the tower of Babel, and so on and so forth.
Bekah Ferguson said:As for Genesis 3:22, I've mentioned this before: God said, "Behold, the man [Adam] has become as one of US, to know good and evil." If you say that God was NOT talking to the angels, then He would indeed be saying in this verse that Adam had become a god, and we know this isn't true. So, He had to be talking to the angels. And, since He likely was talking to the angels, it's logical to believe that in the other verses, He was talking to angels too.
Bekah Fergusion said:You can hum and hah all ya want Der Alter, your methods of proving that Us meant two is pretty absurd. You say you believe in One God but such as statement as this: "There are three Persons in the Godhead who can talk to one another and makes plans together while remaining One God" - this has got to be the weirdest thing I have ever heard of. You teach three gods! And don't tell me to "Go and learn what the Trinity is and then come back". I know what the Trinity is - it's a crazy way to depict our God! God says over and over and over that He is "one God" and that "there is NONE BESIDE ME". That's proof enough that there is no Trinity. God is One - He is the Holy Spirit. And two thousand years ago, He came to earth as a man and gave His life as a ransom for many. That is what the Bible teaches.
jessedance said:Bekah: You said"our precious God, who humbled Himself and came to earth as a man". but "God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? "
Num 23:19 (KJV). So to interpret those scriptures, which dont say Jesus is God, to mean that Jesus is God, contradicts this scripture.
you say "The Bible states very clearly that Jesus is "Emmanuel: God With Us"," I assume you mean isaiah 9:6 which doesnt say that it says his name shall be called immanuel. big difference
i have my fathers name too that dont make me my father. You say"In 1 John - John makes it clear that blasphemy is denying the Diety of Jesus " but it doesnt say that thats your interpretation.
It's really quite simple there is only one god . god the father 1 cor 8:6 and Jesus is his son.if Jesus is his son that precludes him from being the God he is a son of.
you really have the same problem trinitarians have , namely that you have 2 gods that you say is one god. they have 3 gods they say is one god.
Your doctrine that jesus is god is not based on any clear cut scripture that says Jesus is god but rather on enigmatic verses, that have vield meaninigs. My doctrine that Jesus is the son of god is based on clear cut scritpure that says Jesus is the son of god. all of your doctrine that jesus is god is not based on even one scritpure that says jesus is god. all you have are interpretations of scritpures whereby you come up with the contradictory belief that jesus is god and jesus is the son of god. thats as much a contradiction as anything trinitarians have.