- Nov 28, 2003
- 21,596
- 12,122
- 58
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
It'll be interesting to see what sort of sophistry nothead comes up with to deny this
Upvote
0
The Greatest Command Proves Jesus is not God
- Thread starter nothead
- Start date
You are speaking of the resurrected man, who was the firstborn from the dead.
Col 1
18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
To say this same ELOHIM was appearing in the OT every time the FATHER is not specified is streeeetchhhhing things unduly. Why? Why because he was not anything but a plan before he was born.
Jacob did not know what he wrestled with, or he wouldn't have asked his name. This is obvious. To figure out later he was GOD is from his own POV speculation. What was it, that his hip was put out? Angels can do. His name was changed? Angels also carry a message from God. That he was sto...stro...STRONG?? And wrestled all night? Errrrrp?
Slight possibility he was God. No possibility he was Jesus. Jesus was not made until Jn 1:14.
And asks his name, yeah right.
Elohim, Son of Elohim. Not YHWH Elohim. Never said one time. That is the only WHO allowed to be the One True God by the Jew. NAMED, YHWH Elohim. Not even said by Thomas.
Upvote
0
Oooo, Der you got me that time, 'cept er, He would say to Jacob, "I am El Shaddai" and no one even me would argue He the Wrestler is the One True God.
Or He could say the "God of Abraham," or "El, the God of Abraham."
Think so? God had a lesser name before YHWH Elohim was his KNOWN name.
By the way, JEHOVAH is a hinky way to say YHWH Elohim. No 'j' in the Hebrew language, sir.
Upvote
0
- Aug 21, 2003
- 28,578
- 6,064
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Only YHWH was His name forever and a memorial to all generations.
Upvote
0
- Nov 28, 2003
- 21,596
- 12,122
- 58
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
Until Moses Abraham knew Him as "El Shaddai." Get your names straight. Or, "El."
"El Shaddai" was an inferior name. Judaism does evolve within certain fundmental parameters.
Upvote
0
Maybe ol' Jack too smart for me. I can't always get what he says, sorry.
Yeah, I'm sorry all right. Sorry for having to post this.
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
It's actually simple. God told Abraham His name as "El Shaddai." This is the name known according to wiki as
According to Exodus 6:2, 3, Shaddai (שַׁדַּי
is the name by which God was known to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The name Shaddai is again used as a name of God later in the Book of Job....so then He changes His name to Moses and says this name is for all generations.
So then this means 'El Shaddai' is NO LONGER His definitive name. You can use it, as being a lesser name, POSSIBLY.
But when speaking to God, why risk it?
Upvote
0
Apparently, you've failed to comprehend the scope of what I've written, and you've failed to connect the dots.
I believe earlier you made yourself out to be, some sort of scholarary person who found out some "truth" after studying the bible. However, once again, I have merely encountered another pretender who's so called "victories" are nothing more than the result of either self-delusion, or blind ignorance to the facts set down before him.
You've merely displayed a few things, mockery, and a lack of seriousness, and that you do not know God. Instead of wasting your time, read the scriptures without your pressuppositions, your vain attempts to find some way to reject the diety of Christ.
My old posts are still up, and merely pointing back to them, I have already made my case.
What you ought to be able to do, if your position was correct, is refute every single point of disagreement, and show why Jesus cannot possibly be God, showing an illogical incosistency, and in place of demolishing all of my arguements, construct new arguements supporting your heretical view that Jesus is not God.
Unless you can do that, your time here, denying Christ, is utterly in vain.
You have spend your time in vain.
My response, somewhat similar to what I had said before, God the Father, is the one mentioned first, this does not negate the trinitarian view.
We can see from the latter statement, "the Father, he hath declared him", is refering to the truth that Jesus, has explained/declared the Father who was not seen.
Futhermore, you have already lost according to the NASB.
Another thing,
You said the NASB was "corrupted", is that accurate?
You like the KJV right?
When was the Father manifested in the flesh?
Modalism, why not, although wrong as well.
Trinitarian monotheism provides the answer, Jesus, who is God, the Word, was manifest in the flesh.
Samson's parents didn't know that The Angel of The Lord, was God until after they gave an offering, and The Angel of the Lord was revealed to be God, and then they knew they saw him and lived. Joshua did not know who he was speaking to, when he saw a man, and Joshua asked that man who's side he was on, but it was revealed that that man was the Commander of the Army of the Lord, who said just as to Moses, take off your sandals, for the place in which you stand is holy. The Father who was not seen, according to the verse you posted, John 1:18, is not the one who was ever seen in the OT. The God who is seen in the OT, is Jesus Christ, as the pre-incarnate, YHWH, the great "I AM", the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last.
Next:
Who created the heavens and the earth and man?
The Triune God, made the heavens and the earth. Jesus, as the preincarnate Word, made the heavens and the earth.
Jesus, is the Word, Mighty God.
Later in the text, it's clear, he named the place Penial for a reason. It wasnt off some guess.
Thomas called him God.
John 20:28 Interlinear: And Thomas answered and said to him, 'My Lord and my God;'
Lastly,
I believe earlier you made yourself out to be, some sort of scholarary person who found out some "truth" after studying the bible. However, once again, I have merely encountered another pretender who's so called "victories" are nothing more than the result of either self-delusion, or blind ignorance to the facts set down before him.
You've merely displayed a few things, mockery, and a lack of seriousness, and that you do not know God. Instead of wasting your time, read the scriptures without your pressuppositions, your vain attempts to find some way to reject the diety of Christ.
My old posts are still up, and merely pointing back to them, I have already made my case.
What you ought to be able to do, if your position was correct, is refute every single point of disagreement, and show why Jesus cannot possibly be God, showing an illogical incosistency, and in place of demolishing all of my arguements, construct new arguements supporting your heretical view that Jesus is not God.
Unless you can do that, your time here, denying Christ, is utterly in vain.
You have spend your time in vain.
Apparently you dont even recall something you posted:
My response, somewhat similar to what I had said before, God the Father, is the one mentioned first, this does not negate the trinitarian view.
We can see from the latter statement, "the Father, he hath declared him", is refering to the truth that Jesus, has explained/declared the Father who was not seen.
Futhermore, you have already lost according to the NASB.
Bible said:
Another thing,
You said the NASB was "corrupted", is that accurate?
You like the KJV right?
When was the Father manifested in the flesh?
Modalism, why not, although wrong as well.
Trinitarian monotheism provides the answer, Jesus, who is God, the Word, was manifest in the flesh.
Bible said:
Mary thought the resurrected Jesus was some gardener. Two men who knew Jesus thought he was just some guy, they even spoke and walked with him. The Disciples on the boat fishing didn't know it was the resurrected Jesus who was speaking to them until they caught a load of fish.
Samson's parents didn't know that The Angel of The Lord, was God until after they gave an offering, and The Angel of the Lord was revealed to be God, and then they knew they saw him and lived. Joshua did not know who he was speaking to, when he saw a man, and Joshua asked that man who's side he was on, but it was revealed that that man was the Commander of the Army of the Lord, who said just as to Moses, take off your sandals, for the place in which you stand is holy. The Father who was not seen, according to the verse you posted, John 1:18, is not the one who was ever seen in the OT. The God who is seen in the OT, is Jesus Christ, as the pre-incarnate, YHWH, the great "I AM", the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last.
John 1:18, if you admit it was possible the Father was seen, you go against that verse. Jesus' human body was made, the flesh was made, however, as the pre-incarnate Word of God, he always existed,
The Word was with the Father always.Nicene Creed said:
Next:
Who created the heavens and the earth and man?
The Lord God alone.
The Triune God, made the heavens and the earth. Jesus, as the preincarnate Word, made the heavens and the earth.
Jesus, is the Word, Mighty God.
He asked his name, sure. Your point?
Later in the text, it's clear, he named the place Penial for a reason. It wasnt off some guess.
Your point is null. As said before, many times in the bible God is not first revealed to be God, until a later time, as seen with Samson's parents, and Joshua. The reason why he named the place Peniel, was becuase that was where he saw God. Peniel, means face of God.Bible said:
BetaChristian said:
Thomas called him God.
John 20:28 Interlinear: And Thomas answered and said to him, 'My Lord and my God;'
Lastly,
Jesus said:
Upvote
0
Hey I've not even gotten over your LAST plethora of verbissitudes. This one will take a WEEK to refute. Or at least to READ.
Sorry nothead can type 20 words a minute. He can't READ that fast unless he skims. Your logic is not skimmable, just saying.
It is convoluted and I will say why. Thanks for giving me more homework, I mean thanks for keeping my OP alive alive EVER ALIVE!!
Like a good bump, You BUMP me boy, I mean Beta.
Can we make a song of it? Maybe. I get half.
Upvote
0
It seems you're merely rushing in a response most of the time, not taking care to really back up your position. The truth that Jesus is God, is still true.
Do not respond to my post unless you are really going to address the points
Furthermore, it should not take too long to read my post.
I took the time to type it, and obtain the verses, which is no big deal, but reading my post should take less than 20 minutes.
Lastly, not only do I believe that Jesus is God, he also wants us to repent of all sin, because OSAS is false, one must endure to the end in a living faith, proven by deeds, not living in sin.
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
I agree with the highlighted words above. But you keep giving me more to read and your convoluted logic is not easy to pick apart. Indication of normal trin confusion, from my POV. For instance, every time God comes to earth by representation of His angels, you are saying this is Jesus, apparently. No one ever assumed such things until trins came along.
Then they thought it wise to go on speculating with aplomb and debonair. Good luck, speculations are hard to read for me, is all.
Upvote
0
Mikaeri
Junior Member
- Oct 15, 2013
- 115
- 7
- Faith
- Pentecostal
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
I have been following this thread and am really pleased you are sticking to Gods word..
May I suggest though that you change the colour a little darker as it's really too light, making it harder to read
Upvote
0
Yeah, tell um to make it shorter too. Short and sweet for nothead. He likes em short n sweet.
Not no lonnng draaawn out plethorandums of plenitudinous mush.
Upvote
0
THE WORD "GOD" IS NOT IN 1 TIM 3:16
A TEXTUAL COMMENTARY ON THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Second Edition
A Companion Volume to the
UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
(Fourth Revised Edition)
by
BRUCE M. METZGER
on behalf of and in cooperation with the Editorial Committee of the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament.
1 Timothy 3.16 ὅς {A}
The reading which, on the basis of external evidence and transcriptional probability, best explains the rise of the others is ὅς. It is supported by the earliest and best uncials (א* A* C* G) as well as by 33 365 442 2127 syr, goth eth Origen Epiphanius Jerome Theodore Eutherius Cyril Cyril Liberatus. Furthermore, since the neuter relative pronoun ὅ must have arisen as a scribal correction of ὅς (to bring the relative into concord with μυστήριον
, the witnesses that read ὅ (D* it, , , vg Ambrosiaster Marius Victorinus Hilary Pelagius Augustine) also indirectly presuppose ὅς as the earlier reading. The Textus Receptus reads θεός, with אe (this corrector is of the twelfth century) A C D K L P Ψ 81 330 614 1739 Byz Lect Gregory-Nyssa Didymus Chrysostom Theodoret Euthalius and later Fathers. Thus, no uncial (in the first hand) earlier than the eighth or ninth century (Ψ supports θεός; all ancient versions presuppose ὅς or ὅ; and no patristic writer prior to the last third of the fourth century testifies to the reading θεός. The reading θεός arose either (a) accidentally, through the misreading of ος as ΘΣ, or (b) deliberately, either to supply a substantive for the following six verbs, or, with less probability, to provide greater dogmatic precision.barry
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
Similar threads
