by snowbird 328 Replies latest watchtower bible
Almighty God and the Son of God are not the same.
Not the same Person, no.
However, the way I see it is that both the Father and the Son are Almighty God - The Almighty God who became the Son only coming under subjection at His putting on of human flesh.
"Let us make Man in Our image ..."
Who was speaking to Whom?
Syl
The NT does not address Christ's nature. It hints. Depending on your inclinatoin, those hints can lead in diverse direction. Good faith Christians did go in every direction. Show me where Jesus definitively says I am YHWH. The tradition of the orthodox church is that Christ was not created but begotten. He is said to have existed before the creation of the universe. In fact, there is a scripture that says individual humans existed before Adam. Since no other scriptures seem to back it up, it may be a modern take.
Scriptures, scriptures, scriptures. Does anyone believe that we are the first humans to debate Christ's nature. I have a strong feeling the Trniterian view emerged from the Greek world and not YHWH but a more amorphous, less raging God of all the universe is used.
I could find my Book of Common Prayer online and cut and paste the text of the Nicene Creed. Making assertions without reasoning or proof is very easy. Posting the Nicene or Apostle's Creed would beg the questions of whose legitimacy is at work. What are divergent views.
I believe in the Trinity as an explanation of the various ways we experience God. I don't believe there is a God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Trinity. It is defining for what God is claimed to be. Rather, for me it is a crude attempt to make meaning of God in actual human lives. God can't be pigeonholed.,IMO.
Band- 'God can't be pigeonholed', and of course there is no Testing mechanism either. In reading a recent debate between some JWs and a Catholic with the endless circles they both run with their Logic none produce the minimum that Science begs.
I simply believe that if Jesus was Almighty God himself.... he and the Bible writers would have said so!
In the absence of that statement we are left pussyfooting with koine Greek, searching for justification of a Theoretical Triune god that does not exist.
Jesus is THE SON of God, begotten of his Father... made of the same stuff.
Any Greeks around here? Paragalo
Podobear said: "I simply believe that if Jesus was Almighty God Himself... he and the Bible writers would have said so!"
Well, obviously, many Trinitarians feel that he and they did so clearly enough. But I take your point in that you are looking for massively explicit and repeated statements of this, rather than 'hints' and 'suggestions' or what you call 'pussyfooting around'.
However, I'm not sure that the belief that you base your position on is entirely legitimate, Scripturally speaking. It's a reasonable position - but is it Scriptural?
What I mean is, you have decided to believe that for something to be true, it must be explicitly stated in Scripture. But is that a valid belief? Is it really a valid basis for rejecting something? As a Christian, you must have a Scriptural basis for your belief, rather than your own human reasoning, so where is the Scriptural basis for the belief that something must be explicitly stated for it to be true, and could not merely be 'hinted' at or 'suggested' (however strongly)?
What is the Scriptural basis for rejecting the idea that there would be things that would in time be clarified and revealed by the spirit to individual Christians which would confirm what were perhaps left at slightly veiled hints, indications and suggestions in Scripture itself?
Galatians 1:8
Good ol Paul and his Threats, nothing quite exposes the real psychosis of Christian thinking like the Threats that always appear from Jesus or one of his underlings.
Podo, we just established - and you agreed, by referring to 'pussyfooting' - that there are indeed suggestions in Scripture that Jesus could be God. If think you are honest enough to acknowledge that. There are many Scriptures which certainly could be seen as suggesting that Jesus is God (the repeated application to Jesus of OT Scriptures applied explicitly to Jehovah etc). I think you realize that. However, you just don't think they are strong enough - it's too much like 'pussyfooting' for you.
So, we are not talking about 'another gospel', we are talking about the possibility of spirit confirming and clarifying what was already suggested (even if in a veiled and indirect way) in Scripture. It's the same gospel, clarified by Spirit.
The application of Galations 1:8 wouldn't really be fair in that case, because the supposed difference would not actually be with Scripture, but with your present interpretation of Scripture. There's a big difference.
Do you see what I mean? Remember, w e're not yet even talking about the Trinity, we are just talking about possibilities, specifically the possibility that what is 'suggested' and 'hinted' at in a veiled way Scripture may be clarified and confirmed by Spirit with individual Christians, and that this may be what God intended. There are Scriptures which support this idea, as I'm sure you know.
Essan- Of course you are going to see 'suggestions' of Jesus being referenced as God in the NT, that's exactly what the Catholic Church wanted to teach.
Designs, I believe Podo - whom I'm addressing - believes that the Bible is God's word, not a Catholic fabrication. But s/he can tell me if I'm wrong.
