Posts by herk

93

Is the man Jesus Christ also the LORD?

by hooberus in

on several earlier threads i posted scriptures showing that jesus christ is now a man, and is not an angel:

o give thanks to the lord of lords: for his mercy endureth for ever.

(note: this must be the lord alone see isaiah 44:24)

herk

ellderwho,

Your seriousness has to be in question

you ... with blinders on. And fail to look at the the context

your slant

my appologies given for the description of your answers

Maybe we can continue when you make up your mind.

herk

93

Is the man Jesus Christ also the LORD?

by hooberus in

on several earlier threads i posted scriptures showing that jesus christ is now a man, and is not an angel:

o give thanks to the lord of lords: for his mercy endureth for ever.

(note: this must be the lord alone see isaiah 44:24)

herk

Kenneson,

I think St. Paul in 1 Cor. 8:4-6 sums it up best: "there is no God but one."

It's easy to disregard what other parts of the Bible say by deciding on one verse as the complete summary of all there is to know on a certain topic. The complete Bible for some people is a mere page or two.

However, the Bible itself states that "ALL Scripture is inspired of God," not just a verse or two. You seem intent on rejecting the fact that the Bible gives at least two definitions to the subject of God. There should be no doubt that there is one almighty supreme God. Jesus set the example in rendering worship to him. However, the Bible also calls Jesus and others "God," but in another sense. It is an original Jewish sense that you choose not to accept. But your denial does not change the ultimate truth.

herk

93

Is the man Jesus Christ also the LORD?

by hooberus in

on several earlier threads i posted scriptures showing that jesus christ is now a man, and is not an angel:

o give thanks to the lord of lords: for his mercy endureth for ever.

(note: this must be the lord alone see isaiah 44:24)

herk

ellderwho,

Most of the contributing writers are Professors of Bible Exposition Dallas Seminary.

You are probably not aware of the fact that thousands of scholarly books have been written that prove the Trinity is unscriptural and of pagan origin.

Are you serious?

After all I've written in sincerity, you question whether I'm serious.

This ridiculous play on words.

I made no play on words, and you label what I wrote as ridiculous. If this is all the respect you have for another contributor in this debate, there's no point in my going any further with you.

herk

93

Is the man Jesus Christ also the LORD?

by hooberus in

on several earlier threads i posted scriptures showing that jesus christ is now a man, and is not an angel:

o give thanks to the lord of lords: for his mercy endureth for ever.

(note: this must be the lord alone see isaiah 44:24)

herk

Kenneson,

If we are just like the Father and the Son, how are they unique?

And what does uniqueness have to do with oneness? How did you manage to find a way to break off into another topic?

I have read your posts and in them I see henotheism, ...

According to your interpretation, the Bible is henotheistic. Or don't you believe that the Bible describes Moses, etc., as God. You must also view Bible scholars as henotheistic, scholars such as the translators of the NIV, who assert that David and his descendants who sat upon the throne of Israel and Judah were properly called "God" (with a capital "G") by the people, just as Jesus the ultimate King of Israel was addressed as "God" by Thomas.

herk

93

Is the man Jesus Christ also the LORD?

by hooberus in

on several earlier threads i posted scriptures showing that jesus christ is now a man, and is not an angel:

o give thanks to the lord of lords: for his mercy endureth for ever.

(note: this must be the lord alone see isaiah 44:24)

herk

Kenneson,

The oneness in John 17 is indeed unity and likemindedness based on mutual love (vs. 24) and is not refering to the oneness that extends beyond that which only he and his father possess.

How do you come up with this kind of thinking? I'm starting to think you and I live on different planets. Where I come from, when a person says others are 'just like us,' he means 'just like us.' If Jesus said that he wanted oneness for his disciples such as the oneness he had with his Father, I believe his every word. I don't believe he meant one kind of oneness in one breath and another kind of oneness in another breath. And I have no idea why you seem to be having such a problem with what he said.

So do you have 1 God and 1 god?

Apparently you haven't been reading my posts. Angels, Moses, the judges and kings of Israel, as well as Jesus, are all called "God" due to being the agents of the Almighty. According to your reasoning, the Bible and I teach that there are many Gods. What you fail to see is that the Bible calls others "God" and "the Lord" because they speak and act in behalf of the only One in all existence who truly is the God and Father of us all. Even Jesus spoke of him as "my God."

Matthew 27:46 - "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"
Mark 15:34 - "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"
John 20:17 - "I ascend to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God."
Revelation 3:2 - "I have not found your deeds completed in the sight of my God."
Revelation 3:12 - "I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from my God."

herk

93

Is the man Jesus Christ also the LORD?

by hooberus in

on several earlier threads i posted scriptures showing that jesus christ is now a man, and is not an angel:

o give thanks to the lord of lords: for his mercy endureth for ever.

(note: this must be the lord alone see isaiah 44:24)

herk

elderwho,

You present what Paul states and leave out key verses such as verse 6 and 7 which explictly states; did not regard equality with God something to be grasped" Nas/ Niv I cannot explain the Triune nature of Jesus, but Paul tells me I will not be able to "grasp" this idea.

If you will re-read my post, you will notice that I did comment on 6 and 7 in connection with Adam. And if a person is really using his mind when reading Philippians, he won't come to the conclusion that Jesus is God because he "did not regard equality with God something to be grasped." If he already was God, what would be the point of mentioning that he did not grasp for equality with God??? Persons grasp for something they do not possess, not something they already have.

Where, pray tell, does Paul tell you that you will not be able to "grasp" the idea of the Trinity? Please give chapter and verse.

v7 "but made himself nothing" Niv "but emptied himself" Nas. The text does not say Yahweh did this to him (Jesus) that Jesus did this "himself."

So, what is your point?

Because Paul wrote this letter from prison, the main highlight is the fact that Paul still finds joy. Joy in who? Christ, not Yahweh.

I get the impression that you have not yet actually read the epistle when you say that the most important lesson of Philippians is "that Paul still finds joy."

The Jw has a hard time with this as well, in the NWT the end of v24 asks the retorical question "who was with me"

You seem to be the one having a hard time. If you would consider context and the testimony of other passages, you would not conclude that God was all alone at the time of creation. When he asked "Who was with me?," he was addressing the people of Israel and pointing out to them that no other God was present at the time of creation. You might fail to see this if you don't read a good portion of Isaiah and you merely zero in on 44:24 and some surrounding verses.

herk

93

Is the man Jesus Christ also the LORD?

by hooberus in

on several earlier threads i posted scriptures showing that jesus christ is now a man, and is not an angel:

o give thanks to the lord of lords: for his mercy endureth for ever.

(note: this must be the lord alone see isaiah 44:24)

herk

Kenneson,

So the oneness that he speaks of in John 17 is not one that raises us to equality with Jesus and the Father, is it?

Would you mind explaining how you translate "oneness" into "equality"? It seems to me you are complicating something that is very simple. Jesus said he and his Father are one. He prayed that his followers might be made one with him and his Father. This has nothing to do with equality, but it has to do with unity and likemindedness.

It is the New World Translation in John 1:18 that makes Jesus the only begotten god and ergo posits the two Gods concept.

Amplified Bible - the only begotten God
Hendriksen - The only begotten God
NASB - the only begotten God

It baffles me that you see "god" but not "God" as establishing "the two Gods concept."

Thus we don't have two Gods, but two persons who are God.

I suppose that only a trinitarian has this unique and fascinating ability to see two persons as not really two but merely one. Only a trinitarian can comprehend three individuals with separate minds, wills, souls, spirits and hearts as three persons but not as three separate entities. Quite a miraculous achievement, I must say!

On Rev. 21:22 Trinitarians make a distinction between the two persons here. The point is that both the Father and the Lamb constitute the one temple.

More than one individual can constitute a temple. This is shown at 1 Corinthians 3:16: "Do you [plural in Greek] not know that you [plural] are a temple of God ...?" Also, Ephesians 2:19-22: "You are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the corner stone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit."

Yes, there is unity between Jesus and his followers, but it is not the same oneness that he and the Father possess.

And yet, the words of Jesus are "that they may be one even as We are" and "that they may be one, just as We are one." (John 17:11, 22)

herk

93

Is the man Jesus Christ also the LORD?

by hooberus in

on several earlier threads i posted scriptures showing that jesus christ is now a man, and is not an angel:

o give thanks to the lord of lords: for his mercy endureth for ever.

(note: this must be the lord alone see isaiah 44:24)

herk

LittleToe,

I'm interested in your viewpoint, and have no desire for us to batter each other senseless:

I think you are taking the wrong approach to serious Bible study. I have no intention of battering someone senseless, even if, as you suggest, that is the purpose of some. I take from your analysis of the discussion that your view is that it would be best to simply ignore the Bible on this topic.

In conjunction with your exposition of "the first and the last", how does that differ from "the Alpha and the Omega"?

Some people get hung up on titles, whereas the context should be given preference. Unless a person has a pre-conceived view of such titles or designations, the verse itself or the surrounding ones show how or in what sense either God or Jesus is "the first and the last."

Who do you say the angel of Judges 6 is?

The Bible often speaks of angels, but it gives the names of only two, Gabriel and Michael. When addressing humans, they served as spokespersons for God. Judges 6 does not give the angel's name. "The Lord" is not his name, but as in the case of Jesus, it is his functional status as God's agent.

are you saying that any old messenger, sent form God, may bear the name YHWH?

What is the point of your expression "any old"? God sometimes chooses the weak and beggerly to carry out his assignments. Jesus himself was a humble carpenter, not a Pharisee educated by the wise and intellectual: "At that time Jesus said, 'I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure.' 'All things have been committed to me by my Father.'" (Matthew 11:25, 26) God is free to choose any angel he prefers to represent him as "the Lord" in any situation.

How would you express your understanding of the Trinitarian and Binatarian doctrine of God?

I think your question is superfluous. My unerstanding ought to be quite clear from my posts in this and several other threads. I see no point in reviewing here everything I've said.

In your opininon, who is the "creator"?

God alone is the Creator of the universe. Others were his associates in the work, as several Bible texts make clear. However, when others he employs bring things into existence, it is from what has already existed. We, for example, can be "new creatures" in Christ. But the raw material Christ uses in making us such is the persons we formally were while alienated from God.

My point
is that you are declaring what God can or cannot do.. Further, are you stating that God at all time behaves using the rules of human logic??

I still fail to see how you find this position reasonable or scriptural. I've shown how the trinitarian position is incompatible with the Bible, and you seem intent on picturing me as telling God what he can or cannot do. Perhaps you need to try a bit harder to make yourself clear as to the motive and reason for your question.

herk

93

Is the man Jesus Christ also the LORD?

by hooberus in

on several earlier threads i posted scriptures showing that jesus christ is now a man, and is not an angel:

o give thanks to the lord of lords: for his mercy endureth for ever.

(note: this must be the lord alone see isaiah 44:24)

herk

Kenneson,

It's interesting to note that some would make Jesus God in the sense of Moses, David and others. Yet Hebrews chapter 3 shows that Jesus is superior to Moses. See also John 5:45-47. In regards to David, see Matt. 25:41-46.

I haven't suggested that Moses, David and others were equal to Christ. The Bible makes clear that Jesus is God's only-begotten son. He was a man, but no ordinary man nor simply the greatest man among great men.

But we have a choice in our understanding of how it was that he was "God" and "the Lord," even as other men were so entitled. Either, as trinitarians assert, he was "God" in the truest sense, or he was God in the sense that other men were ranked in the Bible by God himself as "God." The Bible itself makes the choice easy: It says that the Father is "the only true God" and that the God of Jesus is the same as our God. I don't know any way that the Bible could make the matter simpler than that.

It's also interesting that Jesus the Rock is compared to Peter, a rock. Yet Christ is greater than Peter for he is the chief cornerstone (Eph. 2:20)

Again, I haven't said that Peter is equal to Christ. A problem arises when trinitarians insist that Christ is equal to God simply because both are called the Rock.

And the unity of the Father and the Son is said to be the same as the unity between the believer and Jesus. Yet that is not what Rev. 21:22 and John 1:14, 18 indicates.

What could be your reason for disputing with Jesus? He's the one who said "just as we are." Why do you doubt he meant what he said? As for Revelation 21:22, where is the denial that the oneness between God and Jesus is the same as the oneness between them and Jesus' disciples? The text says: "I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb are its temple." Why is it so difficult to see from that text that "the Lord God the Almighty" and "the Lamb" are two separate entities, just as two men standing side-by-side would be? Your use of the text for the purpose given is an illustration of how trinitarians strain and strain to find evidence in the Bible for their theory.

As for John 1:14, 18, how can you find a contradiction of what Jesus said in these words? The passage says that no person has ever seen God but that "the only begotten God" has explained him. There is no way of escaping the having of two Gods if you want to insist that God and the only begotten God are equals. However, there is no problem when one realizes that the only begotten God is God in the sense that he speaks for the God for whom he serves as chief agent. That idea is not the invention of some uninspired unitarian. Instead, it comes straight from the Bible, even as the NIV Study Bible footnote for Psalm 45:6 shows.

Perhaps those who consistently try to minimize Jesus will explain to us how Jehovah is Savior (Isaiah 43:11) and Jesus is Savior (Titus 1:3-4). How is Jehovah the Creator (Gen. 1:26-27 and Isaiah 44:24)) and Jesus the Creator (Heb. 1:8, 10)? How can Jesus give things that only God can give? (John 1:12-13 )

A man can be anything God wants him to be. Certainly God the Father is the ultimate Savior, but he has from time to time raised up Saviors to perform deliverance for his people. The Hebrew word for Saviour is applied to Joshua, Ehud and others. Jesus also was such a Savior, but, needless to say, a Savior far greater than any other man appointed by God. Jesus can do anything God authorizes him to do. In the first century, the crowds were awestruck by the miracles he performed "and they glorified God who had given such authority to men." (Matthew 9:8) And Jesus said, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth." (Matthew 28:18)

herk

93

Is the man Jesus Christ also the LORD?

by hooberus in

on several earlier threads i posted scriptures showing that jesus christ is now a man, and is not an angel:

o give thanks to the lord of lords: for his mercy endureth for ever.

(note: this must be the lord alone see isaiah 44:24)

herk

elderwho,

What then did Jesus empty himself of ?

The answer becomes clear when a person reads the letter to the Philippians in its entirety. Trinitarians take texts out of context just as JWs do, and then they build a case based upon that text without considering what the original writer had in mind.

If I had the time, I'd love to illustrate for you what Paul's design was in each chapter, but let's focus on chapter 2.

In the first chapter he told the Philippians that his prayer for them was that their love may abound more and more, that they may be "filled with righteousness that comes through Christ Jesus--to the glory and praise of God." (1:9-11) He contrasted persons of envy, rivalry, selfish ambition and false motives with those of goodwill, love, sincerity and true motives. (1:15-18) He made it clear that it's a struggle to live as Christians should. (19-30)

In chapter 2, Paul urged the Philippians to be humble as Jesus was. He described the exalted status of the man Jesus. As the reflection of God his Father, he was in the "form of God." Note that the text does not say he was God. As God's chief agent on earth, Jesus had been invested with a functional equality with God and was destined to sit at God's right hand. But instead of taking advantage of his royal position as God's legal representative, he humbled himself by being the servant of mankind, even to the point of submitting to a criminal's death on the cross. The transition is from the rank of God's "right hand man" to the rank of a servant. The contrast is not between being God and becoming man. What Paul had in mind is the career of the man Christ Jesus, not the incarnation of someone from heaven. Jesus' humility is the exact opposite of the arrogance of Adam. Adam, under the Devil's influence, tried to grasp at an equality with God to which he was not entitled. Jesus, on the other hand, did not abuse his God-given status as the agent of God his Father.

While urging the Philippians to be like Jesus, Paul wrote of his own 'emptying of himself' as Jesus had done. He wrote: "But even if I am being poured out as a drink offering upon the sacrifice and service of your faith, I rejoice." (2:17)

Then he gave the examples of Timothy and Epaphroditus. Concerning Timothy: "For I have no one else of kindred spirit who will genuinely be concerned for your welfare. For they all seek after their own interests, not those of Christ Jesus." (2:20, 21) And concerning Epaphroditus: "Receive him then in the Lord with all joy, and hold men like him in high regard; because he came close to death for the work of Christ, risking his life to complete what was deficient in your service to me." (2:29, 30)

In chapter 3, Paul further mentioned how he had "emptied himself." He wrote: "But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ. More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ, and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith, that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death; in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead." (3:7-11)

I think that, if you will read the letter to the Philippians in one sitting with the above thoughts in mind, you will conclude that Jesus emptied himself, not of being God, but of living as he had every right to live, as the royal heir to the throne of David and as God's chief agent upon earth.

herk