-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
The Father calls Jesus God with an eternal throne. So in some context Jesus is God. I have given you that context. The Father stated no God was formed before Him nor will there be one after Him. Therefore, Jesus cannot be another God. He and the Father are one. Col 1:19 therefore must be the Father's Deity gifted by His will not formed.
Jesus is the only like to like begotten Son from the Father. Such a being would be the Son and would be God.
Your God.
Psalm 45.
6 Your throne, (O God / God of the living ones,) will last forever and ever; a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.
7 You love righteousness and hate wickedness;
therefore (God / God of the living ones,) your (God / God of the living ones,) has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy.
Not correct
Hebrews 1:8.
But about the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, will last forever and ever; a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.
Hebrews 1:8.
It should read.
your (God / God of the living ones,) has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy.
I suspect someone is putting words in Paul’s mouth.
The Spirit was sent in Jesus's name.
He should know.
I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23I in them and you in me.
Well 2 Timothy 2:13
if we are faithless, he remains faithful, for he cannot disown himself.
If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.
What is your evidence that "it should read" how you say it should? Look what the Father says of the Son starting in verse 10:
Heb 1:10 And, “You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands;
Heb 1:11 they will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment,
Heb 1:12 like a robe you will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will have no end.” (ESV)
Again, that is what the Father is saying of the Son (v. 8), but that is a quote from Psalm 102 which is a Psalm about Yahweh:
Psa 102:25 Of old you laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands.
Psa 102:26 They will perish, but you will remain; they will all wear out like a garment. You will change them like a robe, and they will pass away,
Psa 102:27 but you are the same, and your years have no end. (ESV)
I suspect rather you are the one led astray not the Apostle Paul nor the writer of Hebrews.
Hebrews 1:8 - Bible Gateway
Who is (Elohiym / God of the living ones?)
I suspect rather you are the one led astray not the Apostle Paul nor the writer of Hebrews.
Hebrews 1:8 - Bible Gateway
www.biblegateway.com
If Yahwah is Yahshua's God, and Yahshua is a servant of Yahwah; then how is it that he is part of a Trinity?
And what do you guys do when you use a study bible that shows a Trinity proof text is a forgery?
And what do you guys do when you use a study bible that shows a Trinity proof text is a forgery?
Hey, don't blame me. The apostle John wrote it. I didn't. And I'd say as a personal disciple of Jesus that gives him 100% credibility.
We acknowledge it and we're honest about it. I assume you're referring to the Johnannine Comma interpolation in 1 John 5.7-8. "Forgery" is taking it too far and makes a moral judgment that can't be sustained. But yes, the verses themselves seem to be an interpolation that is not original to the New Testament, and that is why most modern Bible translations omit it.
See, we can have a fair and honest discussion and acknowledge the strengths and weaknesses of views. But it goes both ways. While there are good grounds for excluding the Johnannine Comma, there is no basis for excluding John 1:1 . A fair and honest discussion would acknowledge that.
How am I not looking at things correctly when Heb 1:10-12 clearly states that the Father says that Psalms 102:25-27 applies to the Son, as creator? That is in full agreement with John 1:1-3.
Remember, that goes back to John 1:1-14 and Phil 2:6-8. There is the ontological Trinity, how the Trinity exists in and of itself, and the economic Trinity, how the persons of the Trinity relate to each other and to humans in the plan of salvation of humans and the redemption of all creation. John 1:1-3 and Phil 2:6 show us the ontological Trinity, how God exists in and of himself, which is in agreement with Heb 1:10-12.
John 1:14 and Phil 2:7-8 show us that the Son, as the second person of the Trinity, chose to take on human flesh and die so that humans can be reconciled to God. In the economic Trinity, then, the Son chose to subordinate himself to the Father, as God incarnate so he could be the spotless Lamb for the propitiation of our sins. However, that in no way means he is not God nor not equal to the Father.
I think so too. It's a good, well reasoned response.
Westcott and Hort omitted it.
Modern day translations derive from their Revisionist Greek text.
They used Alexandrian texts from Alexandria (Egypt) when that location was notorious for corrupt Greek texts.
Jesus sure did claim to be God:
3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. Jn 17:3.
Jesus is the man.
Christ is God.
Jesus Christ is the God-man as was prophesied in Genesis:
15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. Gen. 3:14–15.
The religious leaders knew they were condemning to death their Messiah. They understood the prophesy of Genesis 3:15, that it spoke of a God-man that would come.
A man of which his heel shall be bruised (death), and God who would bruise the serpents head (death.)
The doctrine of the person of Christ is basic to the entire revelation of Bible Christianity. Error in this department is so serious as to make the one who holds it a heretic. To go wrong here is to go wrong everywhere, for every other doctrine of grace is inextricably bound up with the doctrine of Christ's person. The distinguishing mark of most false cults is their denial of the essential and eternal deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. No wonder, then, the fundamental statement of the Christian faith, given by the inspired Apostle Paul in 1 Timothy 3:16, commenced with, "God was manifest in the flesh."
The deity of the Lord Jesus Christ can easily be proved from Scripture by showing first, that the name of God is given to Him; second, that the attributes of God are ascribed to Him; third, that the works of God are ascribed to Him; and fourth, that religious worship is commanded to be given to Him.
There is also the understanding of His Title: the LORD JESUS CHRIST:
LORD: Yahweh/Father
JESUS: Son
CHRIST: Holy Spirit.
Trinity. God is a Trinity as He always is, and was, and is to come.
The deity of the Lord Jesus Christ can easily be proved from Scripture by showing first, that the name of God is given to Him; second, that the attributes of God are ascribed to Him; third, that the works of God are ascribed to Him; and fourth, that religious worship is commanded to be given to Him.
There is also the understanding of His Title: the LORD JESUS CHRIST:
LORD: Yahweh/Father
JESUS: Son
CHRIST: Holy Spirit.
Trinity. God is a Trinity as He always is, and was, and is to come.
Well, it is historical fact.
Westcott and Hort were not exactly open Catholics, but they did hold to the Marian theology of Rome.
There is enough documentary evidence upon which to make a judgment. Even the son of Westcott provided letters Westcott Sr. wrote to his wife. He exalts Mary and he did not believe in the inerrancy and inspiration of the Scripture. His method of translation was 'natural' in which he saw the Bible on the same level as any other literature. And this was how he translated the Greek texts to make his Revision. The Greek texts he used couldn't even find agreement among themselves. He had just over 200 Greek texts. The Textus Receptus were in excess of 5,200 manuscripts and in them was the texts of the original autographs. And the texts that were used to make the Textus Receptus agreed with each other 90-95% among themselves.