Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
An Open Debate on the Trinity with JLB
- Thread starter theMadJW
- Start date
Butch5
Member
That's not the case. Jesus said He could do nothing of Himself, but that it was the Father in Him that did the works. Jesus could forgive sins because God gave Him that authority. You keep makimg arguments without addressing their problems. If Jesus is the ultimate God who gave Him His authority. The ultimate authority doesn't receive it from another.If Jesus had called upon the Father when forgave sins the religious leaders would have been much less enraged & thirsty for His blood .
This was the difference .
His apostles were required to call upon God, Jesus, to forgive sins , Jesus, being God, never called upon another, but forgave sins of His own power .
For this blasphemy they sought to kill Him.
The details still remain illusive for you I see but you are getting closer .
Keep up the effort .
Mar 2:7
Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?
I believe every word that Jesus speaks represents the Father’s will; expressing His thoughts.
To me this is how the Godhead operates.
It’s the Fathers will that is expressed by the Word.
Example:
Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.
Genesis 1:3
It was the Father‘s will that there would be light.
Jesus spoke light into existence, expressing the Father’s will for there to be light.
The Word “light” came into manifestation by the power of the Holy Spirit.
JLB
Consecrated Life
Member
He never called upon the Father when forgiving sins .
And you can't quote Him doing that.
You were making good progress but you may want to write that down.
Mar 2:7
Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?
Butch5
Member
Again, you can't prove a point with a question. However, He did tell us that it was the Father. He said the words that He spoke weren't His they were the Father's. That means when He said sins were forgiven, they were the Father's words.
Last edited:
Consecrated Life
Member
He said that He and His Father are "One"
You and your father are not " one ".
Me and my father are not " one ".
No created person has ever been able to say they are " one" with their father .
Save the eternal Son of God Jesus Christ.
Your knowledge of what Jesus is saying when He claims Oneness with the Father is very feeble & lacking any foundation that you can speak to .
Therefore you remain silent & lacking the confidence to address this most critical point.
I and my Father are one.
Butch5
Member
One in unity. He said, 'not my will, but thine be done'. You're just blowing smoke. If you can come with a real argument let me know.He said that He and His Father are "One"
You and your father are not " one ".
Me and my father are not " one ".
No created person has ever been able to say they are " one" with their father .
Save the eternal Son of God Jesus Christ.
Your knowledge of what Jesus is saying when He claims Oneness with the Father is very feeble & lacking any foundation that you can speak to .
Therefore you remain silent & lacking the confidence to address this most critical point.
Jhn 10:30
I and my Father are one.
Consecrated Life
Member
He said " not my will , but Thine " one time only in reference to His sacrifice upon Calvary .
The fact that you think this one time reference to His Father concerning His own sacrifice upon the cross has application to his forgiving the sins of individuals only further displays your lack of spiritual discernment .
Jhn 10:30
I and my Father are one.
Butch5
Member
Like I said, you're blowing smoke. The amount of evidence presented would convince a blind man. When you have an argument let me know.He said " not my will , but Thine " one time only in reference to His sacrifice upon Calvary .
The fact that you think this one time reference to His Father concerning His own sacrifice upon the cross has application to his forgiving the sins of individuals only further displays your lack of spiritual discernment .
Jhn 10:30
I and my Father are one.
As the Son Jesus can speak how He feels at any given moment, (not the Father), such as
"My God My God why have you forsaken me"
And He is the judge not the Father.
Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son
So the judgment is coming from Him.
When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralyzed man, "Son, your sins are forgiven."
Jesus is a being with His own spirit, mind and will. So while the Father's Deity is living in Him He can also speak on His own and make judgments on His own.
"Father into your hands I commit My spirit"
For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it
"My God My God why have you forsaken me"
And He is the judge not the Father.
Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son
So the judgment is coming from Him.
When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralyzed man, "Son, your sins are forgiven."
Jesus is a being with His own spirit, mind and will. So while the Father's Deity is living in Him He can also speak on His own and make judgments on His own.
"Father into your hands I commit My spirit"
For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it
Sorry if I've misunderstood you.
The Nicene Creed is the correct creed to believe.
I thought you said that you believe a creed from the 5th century more.
My bad.
I just fell upon this.
Are you saying Jesus had a beginning?
Do you mean THE SON or do you mean Jesus, the man and God (the hypostatic union).
See John 5:30
30“I can do nothing on My own initiative. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is just, because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.
Jesus only speaks what He hears the Father speak.
John 12:49
49For I have not spoken on my own authority, but the Father who sent me has himself given me a commandment—what to say and what to speak.
Jesus is God.
And there is only one.
Jesus was born 2,000 years ago.
He is God incarnate.
BUT, the SON, or THE LOGOS, (the 2nd person of the Trinity) has existed forever.
I see you won't expound on this, so I guess the conversation is over.
Here's a question:
Was Jesus with God Father from the beginning?
tigger 2
Member
1 Tim. 3:16 God "manifest in the flesh" KJV
As this is translated in the KJV it makes Paul say that Jesus is God “manifest in the flesh.”
Although the KJV translates 1 Tim. 3:16 with “God” as above, nearly all other translations today use a word which refers, not to God, but to Jesus: “he” (NIV; RSV; NRSV; JB; NJB; REB; NAB [‘70]; AT; GNB; CBW; and Beck’s translation), “he who” (ASV; NASB; NEB; MLB; BBE; Phillips; and Moffatt), “who,” or “which.” Even the equally old Douay version has “which was manifested in the flesh.” All the very best modern NT texts by trinitarian scholars (including Westcott and Hort, Nestle, and the text by the United Bible Societies) have the NT Greek word ὃς (“who”) here instead of θεὸς (“God”).Why do the very best trinitarian scholars support this NON-trinitarian translation of 1 Tim. 3:16?
Noted Bible scholar Dr. Frederick C. Grant writes:
“A capital example [of NT manuscript changes] is found in 1 Timothy 3:16, where ‘OS’ (OC or ὃς, ‘who’) was later taken for theta sigma with a bar above, which stood for theos (θεὸς, ‘god’). Since the new reading suited …. the orthodox doctrine of the church [trinitarian, at this later date], it got into many of the later manuscripts .....” – p. 656, Encyclopedia Americana, vol. 3, 1957 ed. (This same statement by Dr. Grant was still to be found in the latest Encyclopedia Americana that I examined – the 1990 ed., pp.696-698, vol. 3.)
A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament by the United Bible Societies (1971 ed.) tells why the trinitarian UBS Committee chose ὃς [‘who’ or ‘he who’] as the original reading in their NT text for this verse:
“it is supported by the earliest and best uncials.” And, “Thus, no uncial (in the first hand [by the ORIGINAL writer]) earlier than the eighth or ninth century supports θεὸς [“God”]; all ancient versions presuppose ὃς [or OC, “who” - masc.] or ὅ [“which” - neut.]; and no patristic writer prior to the last third of the fourth century [370 A.D.] testifies to the reading θεὸς. The reading θεὸς arose either (a) accidentally, through the misreading of OC as ΘC, or (b) deliberately....” - p. 641.
In actuality it appears to be a combination of both (with the emphasis on the latter). You see, the word ὃς was written in the most ancient manuscripts as OC (“C” being a common form for the ancient Greek letter “S” at that time). Most often at this time the word for God (θεὸς) was written in abbreviated form as ΘC. However, to show that it was an abbreviated form a straight line, or bar, was always drawn above ΘC. So no copyist should have mistaken ὃς (or OC) for ΘC, in spite of their similarities, simply because of the prominent bar which appeared over the one and not over the other.
What may have happened was discovered by John J. Wetstein in 1714. As he was carefully examining one of the oldest NT manuscripts then known (the Alexandrine Manuscript in London) he noticed at 1 Tim. 3:16 that the word originally written there was OC but that a horizontal stroke from one of the words written on the other side of the manuscript showed through very faintly in the middle of the O. This still would not qualify as an abbreviation for θεὸς, of course, but Wetstein discovered that some person at a much later date and in a different style from the original writer had deliberately added a bar above the original word! Anyone copying from this manuscript after it had been deliberately changed would be likely to incorporate the counterfeit ΘC [with bar above it] into his new copy (especially since it reflected his own trinitarian views)!
Of course, since Wetstein’s day many more ancient NT manuscripts have been discovered and none of them before the eighth century A.D. have been found with ΘC (“God”) at this verse!
Trinitarian scholar Murray J. Harris also concludes: “The strength of the external evidence favoring OC [‘who’], along with considerations of transcriptional and intrinsic probability, have prompted textual critics virtually unanimously to regard OC as the original text, a judgment reflected in NA(26) [Nestle-Aland text] and UBS (1,2,3) [United Bible Societies text] (with a ‘B’ rating) [also the Westcott and Hort text]. Accordingly, 1 Tim 3:16 is not an instance of the Christological [‘Jesus is God’] use of θεὸς.” - Jesus as God, p. 268, Baker Book House, 1992.
And very trinitarian (Southern Baptist) NT Greek scholar A. T. Robertson wrote about this scripture:
“He who (hos [or OC in the original text]). The correct text, not theos (God) the reading of the Textus Receptus ... nor ho (neuter relative [pronoun]), agreeing with [the neuter] musterion [‘mystery’] the reading of Western documents.” - p. 577, Vol. 4, Word Pictures in the New Testament, Broadman Press.
Butch5
Member
Yes, and the Nicene Creed states that Jesus came out of God.