Who believes Jesus is God??

Status
Not open for further replies.

2ducklow

angel duck
Jul 29, 2005
8,631
125
✟9,570.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
to prove Jesus is God read john 1

This expression is the keynote and theme of the entire gospel. Λόγος is from the root λεγ, appearing in λεγω, the primitive meaning of which is to lay: then, to pick out, gather, pick up: hence to gather or put words together, and so, to speak. Hence λόγος is, first of all, a collecting or collection both of things in the mind, and of words by which they are expressed. It therefore signifies both the outward form by which the inward thought is expressed, and the inward thought itself, the Latin oratio and ratio: compare the Italian ragionare, "to think" and "to speak."
As signifying the outward form it is never used in the merely grammatical sense, as simply the name of a thing or act (επος, ονομα, ρημα), but means a word as the thing referred to: the material, not the formal part: a word as embodying a conception or idea. See, for instance, Matthew 22:46; 1 Corinthians 14:9, 19. Hence it signifies a saying, of God, or of man (Matthew 19:21, 22; Mark 5:35, 36): a decree, a precept (Romans 9:28; Mark 7:13). The ten commandments are called in the Septuagint, οἱ δέκα λόγοι, "the ten words" (Exodus 34:28), and hence the familiar term decalogue. It is further used of discourse: either of the act of speaking (Acts 14:12), of skill and practice in speaking (Ephesians 6:19), or of continuous speaking (Luke 4:32, 36). Also of doctrine (Acts 18:15; 2 Timothy 4:15), specifically the doctrine of salvation through Christ (Matthew 13:20-23; Philippians 1:14); of narrative, both the relation and the thing related (Acts 1:1; John 21:23; Mark 1:45); of matter under discussion, an affair, a case in law (Acts 15:6; 19:38).
As signifying the inward thought, it denotes the faculty of thinking and reasoning (Hebrews 4:12); regard or consideration (Acts 20:24); reckoning, account (Philippians 4:15, 17; Hebrews 4:13); cause or reason (Acts 10:29).
John uses the word in a peculiar sense, here, and in ver. 14; and, in this sense, in these two passages only. The nearest approach to it is in Revelation 19:13, where the conqueror is called the Word of God; and it is recalled in the phrases Word of Life, and the Life was manifested (1 John 1:1, 2). Compare Hebrews 4:12. It was a familiar and current theological term when John wrote, and therefore he uses it without explanation.
The Meaning of 'Logos' in the Prologue of John's Gospel

the word logos doesn't mean preincarnate christ. it means word, and Jesus wasn't formerly a word or words. So john 1.1 cannot possibly mean Jesus was literally the word of God. You guys have to invent a false meaning for the greek word logos to achieve that. And you do. Jesus is figuratively the word of god not literally because Jesus isn't a bunch of words. Get real.
 
Upvote 0

he-man

he-man
Oct 28, 2010
8,891
301
usa
✟90,748.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I wish I could give the author reputation for his post (but I cannot since the post is too old).
Notice not old enough, the word God is missing in the MSS.
και ομολογουμενως μεγα εστιν το της ευσεβειας μυστηριον εφανερωθη εν σαρκι εδικαιωθη εν πνευματι ωφθη αγγελοις εκηρυχθη εν εθνεσιν επιστευθη εν κοσμω ανελημφθη εν δοξη

16 And confessedly great is the mystery of godliness: he who was manifested in flesh, he who was justified in spirit, seen by angels, he who was preached among the Gentiles, he who was believed on in the world, taken up in glory.

One of the words Trinitarians use to support the concept of "three in one" in the Old Testament is "echad." Echad (eh-'ghahd) is the Hebrew word translated one, only, and alone in the Old Testament. It occurs 962 times in the Bible (Gesenius, pp. 28, 29) and is translated 903 times (by my count) as the word one, five times as the word alone, and one time as the word only.

The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament has the following information on the word echad: This word occurs 960 times [there exists a discrepancy on the number of occurrences between authors] as a noun, adjective, or adverb, as a cardinal or ordinal number, often used in a distributive sense. It is closely identified with yahad "to be united" and with ro'sh "first, head," especially in connection with the "first day" of the month (Gen 8:13). It stresses unity while recognizing diversity within that Oneness. Sometimes the phrase " as one man" can mean "all at once" (Num 14:15), but when Gideon was told he would defeat Midian " as one man" it probably meant " as easily as a single man" (Jud 6:16)

The phrase can also refer to a nation aroused to take united action against gross injustice (Jud 20:8; I Sam 11:7). Zephaniah's mention of people serving God "with one shoulder" (3:9) likely means "shoulder to shoulder," solidly united. Likewise in Ex 24:3 "with one voice" expresses that all Israel was involved in entering into the Covenant with Yahweh. The concept of unity is related to the tabernacle, whose curtains are fastened together to form one unit (Ex 26:6, 11; 36:13). Adam and Eve are described as "one flesh" (Gen 2:24), which includes more than sexual unity. In Gen 34:16 the men of Shechem suggest intermarriage with Jacob's children in order to become "one people."

Later, Ezekiel predicted that the fragmented nation of Israel would someday be reunited, as he symbolically joined two sticks (37:17). Once again Judah and Ephraim would be one nation with one king (37:22). Abraham was viewed as "the one" from whom all the people descended (Isa 51:2; Mal 2:15), the one father of the nation. Diversity within unity is also seen from the fact that `echad has a plural form, `ahadim. It is translated "a few days" in Gen 27:44; 29:20, and Dan 11:20. In Gen 11:1 the plural modifies "words": "the whole earth used the same language and the same words." Apparently it refers to the same vocabulary, the same set of words spoken by everyone at the tower of Babel.

The first "same" in Gen 11:1 is singular , analogous to "the same laws" of the Passover applying to native-born and foreigner (Ex 12:49; cf. Num 15:16), or to the "one law" of sure death for approaching the Persian king without invitation (Est 4:11). In the famous Shema of Deut 6:4, "Hear, O Israel....the LORD is one," the question of diversity within unity has theological implications. Some scholars have felt that, though "one" is singular, the usage of the word allows for the doctrine of the Trinity.

While it is true that this doctrine is foreshadowed in the OT, the verse concentrates on the fact that there is but one God and that Israel owes it exclusive loyalty to him (Deut 5:9; 6:5)" (Harris, Archer, Waltke, Volume 1, p.30).

A second reference on echad states: A numeral having the power of an adjective. 1. The same, Genesis 40:5, Job 31:15. 2. First, but only so used in counting the days of the months, Ezra 10:16, 17; in counting years, Daniel 9:1,2, Ezra 1:1. In other places as Genesis 1:5, one does not lose the common idea of a cardinal, and the numbers follow one another as in Latin unus, alter, tertius. 3. some one, "some one of the people;" "no one." 4. it acts the part of an indefinite article, especially in the later Hebrew, 1 Kings 20:13, "a certain prophet;" Daniel 8:3, "a ram," 1 Kings 19:4.

So also when one precedes, e.g. "a certain holy one," i.e. angel Daniel 8:13. Sometimes also by a genitive "one of the cisterns," i.e. some cistern, Genesis 37:20; Job 2:10. 5. one only of its kind, Job 23:13; Ezekiel 7:5, Canticles 6:9. 6. When repeated it is one...another, Exodus 17:12; 18:3. It even occurs three times repeated, 1 Samuel 10:3; 13:17, 18. Also distributively of individuals, Number. 13:2, "ye shall send one man to a tribe;" Numbers 34:18. 7. As one man, i.e. together. Ezra 2:64, "the whole congregation together;" Ezra 3:9; 6:20; Ecclesiastes 11:6, "both alike." Also i.q. "together, unitedly,"

Isaiah 65:25; in the same sense is said Judges 20:8; 1 Samuel 11:7. 8. For one time, once, 2 Kings 6:10; Psalms 62:12. 9. (a) i.q. No. 8, Num. 10:4. (b) Suddenly, Pro. 28:18. (c) i.q. altogether, Jer. 10:8. 10. One after another, one by one, Isa 27:12, and Ecc. 7:27, one after another..." (Gesenius, pp.28-29).

The chief application of this interpretation by Trinitarians is in the Shema found in Deuteronomy 6:4: Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one (echad) LORD. Hebrew: Shema Israel, Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai echad.


They believe that since elohim is a uniplural noun describing the three members of the Trinity as the one God, and echad is a uniplural adjective describing several items in one unit or group, that the Shema is a perfect description of the triune God. The Trinitarian interpretaition results in Deuteronomy 6:4 ceasing to be a verse supporting the onliness of God; it becomes a verse portraying the characteristics of their triune God. They interpret it to say: Hear O Israel, our three separate Jehovahs, is one unit of Jehovah.

Trinitarian application: Genesis 2:24: Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one (echad) flesh.

Oneness reply: The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (TWOT) states: "Adam and Eve are described as "one flesh"(Genesis 2:24), which includes more than sexual unity" but when we use 1 Corinthians 6:16 as a cross reference, it appears that it means exactly sexual unity causing them to be "one flesh." What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.

Trinitarian application: Exodus 24:3 And Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one (echad) voice .

Oneness reply: One what? One person's reply? No! One voice. Does "one voice" being heard mean that of "all the people" there was only one individual speaking? Of course not! It is simply understood to be the voice of many people speaking in unison so that you heard one sound. In this text using the word echad, does "one" really mean "one" in the context that it is meant to be used?

Trinitarian application: Numbers 13:23 And they came unto the brook of Eshcol, and cut down from thence a branch with one (echad) cluster of grapes, and they bare it between two upon a staff.

Oneness reply: Again, you must ask yourself the question: One what? One grape? No. One cluster of grapes. Is one cluster of grapes the same as one grape? Absolutely not! In addition to that, the word here is grapes (plural). If echad was used in reference to the word grapes, the phrase would be nonsensical. In the phrase, "one cluster," does one sufficiently describe what the numeral "one" is supposed to describe? Without a doubt! The majority of texts are similar:

Genesis 2:21 And LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one (echad) of his ribs. How many ribs? Maybe God took a single rack of ribs (As you would receive a rack of barbecue ribs in a restaraunt).

Genesis 22:2 And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one (echad)of the mountains which I will tell thee of. How many mountains did Abraham go to?

Exodus 25:19 And make one (echad) cherub on the one (different word) end and the other cherub on the other end. How many cherubs on one side?

Leviticus 16:5 And he shall take of the congregation of the children of Israel two kids of the goats for sin offering, and one (echad) ram for a burnt offering. How many rams? Maybe God meant a "whole herd"?

He said one; Trinitarians claim that one is supposed to mean a group. Numbers 10:4 And if they blow but with one (echad) trumpet, then the princes, which are heads of the thousands of Israel, shall gather themselves unto thee. Were they supposed to blow with an orchestra of trumpets in unison? Of the 943 times (by my count) echad is translated "one," it is translated to indicate a single character 901 times. In the remaining instances when it is involved in describing a group effort, it still means one.


In reference to the Shema, the claim that the linking of the word Elohim and echad in the same statementindicate plurality of God is totally unfounded. So much bias has been infused into that statement that the accuracy of it is negligible. It becomes a Trinitarian doctrinal statement instead of a Biblical description of God.

Deuteronomy 6:4 is speaking of ONE WHAT? ONE GOD! This is made clear by the scribe's reply to Jesus' statement that the Shema was the most important commandment in Mark 12:32, "Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he."


If elohim or echad are referring to more than one of anything, they are referring to more than one GOD, which would make Trinitarians polytheists, or at least tritheists. Remember, for elohim to indicate any plurality, it would indicate a plurality of gods; not one God in three but three gods. If the Bible could be quoted as saying one gods, Trinitarians may have a legitimate argument, but that very statement would be contradictory. It would have to declare "one Trinity."

Keith G. Morehead, Fictional Foundations of Trinitarian Thought, Oneness Ministries, 1988.
 
Upvote 0

Erth

The last(?!) unapologetic Christian
Oct 28, 2011
871
47
Sverige
✟16,294.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

he-man

he-man
Oct 28, 2010
8,891
301
usa
✟90,748.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
That is not a problem to me, who happens to think that the Church has written and put together the books of the New Testament.

What about you? What is your religion? Does it have any holy books?
Notice not old enough, the word God is missing in the MSS.
και ομολογουμενως μεγα εστιν το της ευσεβειας μυστηριον εφανερωθη εν σαρκι εδικαιωθη εν πνευματι ωφθη αγγελοις εκηρυχθη εν εθνεσιν επιστευθη εν κοσμω ανελημφθη εν δοξη

16 And confessedly great is the mystery of godliness: he who was manifested in flesh, he who was justified in spirit, seen by angels, he who was preached among the Gentiles, he who was believed on in the world, taken up in glory.

 
Upvote 0

Erth

The last(?!) unapologetic Christian
Oct 28, 2011
871
47
Sverige
✟16,294.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Notice not old enough, the word God is missing in the MSS.
και ομολογουμενως μεγα εστιν το της ευσεβειας μυστηριον εφανερωθη εν σαρκι εδικαιωθη εν πνευματι ωφθη αγγελοις εκηρυχθη εν εθνεσιν επιστευθη εν κοσμω ανελημφθη εν δοξη

16 And confessedly great is the mystery of godliness: he who was manifested in flesh, he who was justified in spirit, seen by angels, he who was preached among the Gentiles, he who was believed on in the world, taken up in glory.


Why do you not answer my question then? Does your religion have a Scripture, or holy books?
 
Upvote 0

2ducklow

angel duck
Jul 29, 2005
8,631
125
✟9,570.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
That is not a problem to me, who happens to think that the Church has written and put together the books of the New Testament.
So it's not a problem for you that no Greek manuscript prior to the development of the trinity doctrine in the 5th century contains "God " in 1 tim 3.16 because, according to you, the chruch wrote and put together the New testament. well the church that wrote and put together the bible didn't put "god' in 1 tim 3.16 prior to the development of the trinity doctrine in the 5th century. So based on your reasoing you would have to reject God as the correct reading in 1 tim. 3.16. casue the early chruch didn't write, a latter church wrote it. Or do you mean that you think the latter day church worte and put the bible together and not the early church? .
Erth said:
What about you? What is your religion? Does it have any holy books?
. What my religon is is irrelevant to the discussion. Truth is truth regardless of who says it.the early church didn't have god in 1 tim 3.16 and the latter day church doesn't have god in 1 tim 3.16 so you're stuck back in the middle ages church, or dark ages.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Erth

The last(?!) unapologetic Christian
Oct 28, 2011
871
47
Sverige
✟16,294.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I think it is clear what 1 Tim means: Jesus Christ is God.

Now you can explain your point of view, if you want to, or not, if that pleases you more. I do have to wonder how your religions have come about seeing as you think that such major falsifications should have been carried out back in the days. I also have to wonder why you think they did it. Not to mention, I have to wonder what you think of all the world's Christians - trinitarian Christians (as if there existed other kinds) - who according to your theory are so wrong.
 
Upvote 0

2ducklow

angel duck
Jul 29, 2005
8,631
125
✟9,570.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
I think it is clear what 1 Tim means: Jesus Christ is God.
and it's clear to me that it means that Jesus was manifest in the flesh, seen of angels, taken up to glory, not God.
Erth said:
Now you can explain your point of view, if you want to, or not, if that pleases you more. [
I just did.
Erth said:
I do have to wonder how your religions have come about seeing as you think that such major falsifications should have been carried out back in the days.
Huh?
Erth said:
I also have to wonder why you think they did it. Not to mention,
how 'who" was changed to "god' in 1 tim 3.16 was explained in the article i posted for you.

Erth said:
I have to wonder what you think of all the world's Christians - trinitarian Christians (as if there existed other kinds) - who according to your theory are so wrong.
Trinitarians are wrong about who Jesus is when they claim he is God. Jesus is the son of God, and believing that , according to the scripture that you say the church wrote and put together, is what a christian is. No scripture says anything about believing the trinity doctrine to become a christian, that exists only in triniatarian dogma, not the bible.

1 John 5:4 4 For whatsoever is born of God [SIZE=+1]overcometh[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]the[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]world[/SIZE]: and this is [SIZE=+1]the[/SIZE] victory that [SIZE=+1]overcometh[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]the[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]world[/SIZE], even our faith.
1 John 5:5 5 Who is he that [SIZE=+1]overcometh[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]the[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]world[/SIZE], but he that believeth that Jesus is [SIZE=+1]the[/SIZE] Son of God?


Now show me the scripture that says belive the trinity and you shall be saved..
 
Upvote 0

he-man

he-man
Oct 28, 2010
8,891
301
usa
✟90,748.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Why do you not answer my question then? Does your religion have a Scripture, or holy books?
Where do you think that came from a comic book? Codex Sinaiticus

Sinaiticus codex
usually designated by the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet, is one of the most valuable of ancient MSS. of the Greek New Testament. The MS. was wrapped up in a piece of cloth, and on its being unrolled, to the surprise and delight of the critic the very document presented itself which he had given up all hope of seeing. His object had been to complete the fragmentary LXX. of 1844, which he had declared to be the most ancient of all Greek codices on vellum that are extant; but he found not only that, but a copy of the Greek New Testament attached, of the same age, and perfectly complete, not wanting a single page or paragraph."

The entire codex consists of 346 1/2 folios. Of these 199 belong to the Old Testament and 147 1/2 to the New, along with two ancient documents called the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The books of the New Testament stand thus: the four Gospels, the epistles of Paul, the Acts of the Apostles, the Catholic Epistles, the Apocalypse of John.

It is shown by Tischendorf that this codex was written in the fourth century, and is thus of about the same age as the Vatican codex; but while the latter wants the greater part of Matthew and sundry leaves here and there besides, the Sinaiticus is the only copy of the New Testament in uncial characters which is complete. Thus it is the oldest extant MS. copy of the New Testament. Easton's Bible Dictionary
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Frenchfrye

spreading the bible
May 17, 2012
528
7
27
✟8,232.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Republican
Interesting you brought forth Jn.1 as I use Jn.1:1, etc. to also prove Jesus = God-man due to not only contextually rings true but grammatically ... excellent sir

its pretty clear if you read the whole chapter its Jesus and hes also God
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
May 25, 2012
74
2
✟15,206.00
Faith
Christian
Simple. We follow Jesus as God because it is Biblical.

Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.” Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
(John 20:26-29 ESV)
 
Upvote 0

2ducklow

angel duck
Jul 29, 2005
8,631
125
✟9,570.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
PERFECT! Made my evening ... John chapter 1, Jesus = God, excellent
Jesus doesn't equal God., John chapter 1, and all the rest of the bible.

so Godd=man . that's like some dude who is a man -elephant. 100 percent man and 100 percent elephant, 100percent god and 100 percent man. perfect illogic.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

2ducklow

angel duck
Jul 29, 2005
8,631
125
✟9,570.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Simple. We follow Jesus as God because it is Biblical.
Jesus is not God is biblical, not what yousay.
SilentShadow said:
Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.” Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
(John 20:26-29 ESV)
TThomas didn't say My lord and my God." he said "the lord of me and the God of me". It's in the nominative case not the vocative. and no one is addressed with the definite article the.or in the nominative case. so your argument sinks.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Jack Terrence

Fighting the good fight
Feb 15, 2013
2,851
194
✟27,525.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Jesus is not God is biblical, not what yousay.
TThomas didn't say My lord and my God." he said "the lord of me and the God of me". It's in the nominative case not the vocative. and no one is addressed with the definite article the.or in the nominative case. so your argument sinks.
First, "the Lord of me and the God of me" means "My Lord and my God."

Second, it is written in the nominative of address which functions as a vocative. Jesus' statement from the cross, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me" is written both in the vocative (Matthew 27:45-16) and in the nominative of address (Mark 15:33-34).

What are your Greek credentials?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.