Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Trinitarians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the "I am" (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God.
This is just not the case. Saying "I am" does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said "I am the man," and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., "I am."
Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as "I am" (Acts 26:29).
Thus, Christians conclude that saying "I am" did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God.
The first problem in your post is that you present an "apparent contradiction" in the Word of God with no attempt to explain of rectify it. The Word does not nor ever will contradict Itself. Everything fits like a hand in a glove, thus if we actually take the time to study, as in 2 Timothy 2:15, we can come an accurate understanding of each of these passages.
The key to this is context. James 1:13 specifically says that God cannot be tempted with evil. "With evil" is the key. Jesus Christ was most assuredly tempted with evil as in Matthew 4:1, "Then was Jesus led up of the spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil." Being tempted of the devil is definitely tempted by evil. Thus a more accurate statement would be, "How could Jesus be God if God cannot be tempted with evil by Jesus Christ was tempted by evil. God cannot be tempted to sin because He is not a man as it says in Numbers 23:19. The devil was trying to tempt Jesus Christ to sin in disobeying God. Of course Jesus Christ was victorious.
Let's look at a couple of places where God was "tempted" in the Old Testament. The first verse I would like to show would be Exodus 17:1-2, "And all the congregation of the children of Israel journeyed from the wilderness of Sin, after their journeys, according to the commandment of the LORD, and pitched in Rephidim: and there was no water for the people to drink. Wherefore the people did chide with Moses, and said, Give us water that we may drink. And Moses said unto them, Why chide ye with me? wherefore do ye tempt the LORD?" Here we see Moses asking the children of Israel why they tempt the Lord. Well a quick glance would have someone say, Oh God was tempted here, but looking deeper into this passage God is not being tempted to sin. They were more like testing God here because they did not believe on Him and thus He had to show another sign of His power. In Exodus 17:7, it explains exactly how they were tempting God. "And he called the name of the place Massah, and Meribah, because of the chiding of the children of Israel, and because they tempted the LORD, saying, Is the LORD among us, or not?" Thus God was not tempted by evil because He was not tempted to sin.
Another passage in the Old Testament where God was tempted would be Numbers 44:20-22, "And the LORD said, I have pardoned according to thy word: But as truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the LORD. Because all those men which have seen my glory, and my miracles, which I did in Egypt and in the wilderness, and have tempted me now these ten times, and have not hearkened to my voice;" Again they are not trying to cause God to sin, they are testing in the fact that God had said the land of Canaan is theirs, but they have decided they were no match for the Canaanites. They had seen the wonderful works of God so many times and still they test His power in not believing in what God could do.
The ISBE vol. 4, pg. 3012 under trinity says,Handle what? You proved NOTHING.
Is not the trinity made up of three persons, this is the foundation of whole false doctrine?
Oh sure you used scripture to back up what you believe is the trinity; but you did not prove the doctrine of the trinity because you did not show me one verse that said anything about God is made up of "three persons". Until you can prove using scripture God is three persons you have no trinity. So stop spinning and show me using God's Word that God is made up of three person; if you can't you're verses have proven "NOTHING".
The ISBE vol. 4, pg. 3012 under trinity says,
"THe word Trinity is not a Bib. term, and we are not using Bib. language when we define what is expressed by it as the doctrine that there is only one true God, but in the unity of the Godhead there are three coeternal and coequal Persons, the same in substance but distinct in subsistance. A doctrine so define can be spoken of as a Bib. doctrine only on the principle that the sense of Scripture is Scripture. And the definition of a Bib. doctrine in such un-Bib. language can be justified only on the principle that it is better to preserve the truth of Scripture than the words of Scripture"
In other words they are saying that one doesen't have to have words that are in the bible to define a doctrine which isn't stated in the bible because Trinity is preserving the truth of Scripture, which , according to the ISBE is better than the words of scripture.
this is the only trinitarian response that I am aware of that deals with the issue you raised. Although some say things like 'you don't have to have a word in the bible to use it to define what is in the bible." But that would be a more simplistic explanation.
Elohim can be either singular or plural, just like some words in English such as fish, or desk. No word in any language is plural singular. Either the meaning is plural or the meaning is singular, not both. The only reason for the existance of this concept that elohim is plural singular is because the trinity doctrine needs such a concept.2ducklow, I recall hearing that Elohim is pluralized....
ok.I really do not care about someone opinion (ISBE), religion is full of opinions. if a belief is not based on God's Word then that doctrine is not divine.
Elohim can be either singular or plural, just like some words in English such as fish, or desk. No word in any language is plural singular. Either the meaning is plural or the meaning is singular, not both. The only reason for the existance of this concept that elohim is plural singular is because the trinity doctrine needs such a concept.
Trinitarians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the "I am" (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God.
This is just not the case. Saying "I am" does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said "I am the man," and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus statement, i.e., "I am."
Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as "I am" (Acts 26:29).
Thus, Christians conclude that saying "I am" did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God.
Obviously you either didn't feel like reading my long post or you just don't get the point. My first point is that these two verses cannot contradict themselves or the Word will be for naught. Me second point is that tempting God as it appears in the Old Testament is not tempting God to sin as its meaning in James. In those passages, God indeed answered the murmurings of the children of Israel and gave them water and meat respectively. So, I guess in your world God giving the children of Israel things is a sin. I did the research to answer your post. Maybe you should open a Bible yourself and do a little reading before you post things that were made irrelevant by my first post.So, why don't you tempt, er, test God in some sort of manner and then try to tell me that essentially that you are not evil for doing so? Or anybody else for that matter that would test/tempt God?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?