Is Jesus considered to be God?

[Free]

You are constantly claiming a status for humanity as mere creatures, equating them to the lambs sacrificed in the OT.
This smells of Gnosticism by saying that nothing of this lower realm could have value.

And yet, I have not said any such thing.

however if one sacrifices the very fulfillment of that creation and purpose for it then that is something else all together. The highest point of God’s creation and the purpose for it sacrificed for the rest. Greater love has no man but that he lay his life down for his fellow man. No man had greater love and was willingly sacrificed. That is a precious cost.

But you still have failed to address the thrust of my argument. Regardless that man is the pinnacle of creation and created in God's image, you still have to show how the sacrifice of a creature can atone for all sins, everywhere, at all times.

Really, this is a side argument since Scripture clearly shows that Jesus is God.

You have presupposed that because of the fall all of humanity is born cursed and therefore nothing good could come from humanity. This is basing one doctrine on another one not yet in evidence or proven.

Scripture shows, from beginning to end, that everyone is fallen, that everyone sins. Human nature, by default, is sinful and and fallen. Do you really need me to post Scripture to support that?

Assuming pure humanity for Christ and you have a magnificent accomplishment. One of great value to God. One that fulfills the purposes for His creation.

The best you can argue with that is that it fulfills the purposes for his creating Jesus. And now we, following his example, are to do the same, hoping that we can live perfectly so as to be able to atone for our own sins.

Assuming divinity or an advantage through preexistence for Christ and you lessen or eliminate any accomplishment at all. “Ain’t no big deal for a God to do what Christ did.â€

Again, this is not an argument against the deity of Jesus or the Trinity. There is no assumption of divinity since Scripture shows that Jesus is God.

The primary goal of Christ life was not the redemptive work on the cross. The primary goal was to fulfill the purposes of God’s creation. To have perfected humanity. A temple in which God can dwell and flow from.
Christ redemptive work made it legally possible for the rest of humanity to again be part of that purpose. His redemptive work was only a part of his total goal.

Your view of Jesus' redemptive work is far too narrow but that actually flows from your view of him being too narrow. Although there are many reasons for Jesus' coming, his death and resurrection are primary. Out of that everything else flows.

Christ primary purpose was to complete Adam’s mandate. To become a perfected temple himself. After accomplishing this for himself his second purpose was to open the door through the cross for us to also complete Adam’s mandate for ourselves.

Adam's mandate? The only mandate Adam had was to be fruitful and multiply. He already had perfect communion with God, it was not to become a perfected temple.

 

[follower of Christ]

I will no longer debate scripture with anyone that will not first engage me in establishing a set of rules by which we will both interpret scripture. If all were going to do is bat about opinions then it is not profitable or even entertaining.

Ive seen this hundreds of times, gent.
What youre saying in truth is that if you cannot control the conversation by limiting the evidence in whatever way then you dont want to play the game anymore.

Thats fine. Pack your marbles and leave. We'll do fine here as always.

.

Not at all what I am saying but thank you for assuming my motives. --- Funny I thought that was something only God can do. --- Tell me do you often usurp God's position or is this something new?

You said what you said.
You dont want to debate unless you can set forth rules for that debate....ie you want to control the outcome of the discussion.
I for one am not interested.
Either you CAN prove your views or you CANNOT.
So far Ive seen nothing but dancing and dodging around and a LOT of words put forth, yet nothing that actually refutes the idea that Jesus IS God.
THAT is all that is relevant.

.

.

 

[follower of Christ]

Great!!!! Whose interpretation of God's word would you like to turn to?

.

The interpretation that is consistent with the WHOLE, harmonious word of God...the word that PROVES that Jesus Christ IS God.

 

[follower of Christ]

Your view of Jesus' redemptive work is far too narrow but that actually flows from your view of him being too narrow. Although there are many reasons for Jesus' coming, his death and resurrection are primary. Out of that everything else flows.

AMEN on all points.

 

[follower of Christ]

Jesus as a simple human is distinctive from the rest of God’s created creatures. He is also distinctive among his brothers.

And your problem is that Jesus ISNT a simple human.
Scriptures prove conclusively that Jesus Christ IS God.

 

[Constitutionalist]

Free wrote:
Isaiah shows us exactly who Jesus is.
Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

[quote:3mb7ywj6]?????? ??????? ?? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ?? ???? ????? ????????
Paleo hebrew

?????????? ???????????? ???? ???????????? ???????? ??????????? ???????????? ?????????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ??? ???????? ???????? ?????????????? WLC

?? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?? ???? ????? ??? ??? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? ?????
Hebrew Bible

?????????? ???????????? ???? ???????????? ???????? ??????????? ???????????? ?????????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ??? ???????? ???????? ?????????????? Masoretic

??? ??????? ???????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ???? ?? ? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ???? ????? ??? ???????? ?? ????? ????? ??????? ?????? ??????? ??? ??? ??? ??????? ??? ???? ???????? ??????? ??? ??????? ???? LXX

parvulus enim natus est nobis filius datus est nobis et factus est principatus super umerum eius et vocabitur nomen eius Admirabilis consiliarius Deus fortis Pater futuri saeculi Princeps pacis VUL

NAS Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible with Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries, Copyright © 1981, 1998 by The Lockman Foundation, All rights reserved Lockman.org:

For [Ki-3588-????]: That, for, when (Short Definition: inasmuch).

A Child [Yeled-3206-?????]: Child, son, boy, youth (Short Definition: boy). Strongs Exhaustive Concordance: Boy, child, fruit, son, young man one. From yalad; something born, i.e. A lad or offspring -- boy, child, fruit, son, young man (one). TWOT Reference: 867B.

Will Be Born, Is Born [Yalad-3205-?????]: To bear, bring forth, beget (Short Definition: bear). Strongs Exhaustive Concordance: bear, beget, birthday, born, make to bring forth children, young, bring up, calve. A primitive root; to bear young; causatively, to beget; medically, to act as midwife; specifically, to show lineage -- bear, beget, birth((-day)), born, (make to) bring forth (children, young), bring up, calve, child, come, be delivered (of a child), time of delivery, gender, hatch, labour, (do the office of a) midwife, declare pedigrees, be the son of, (woman in, woman that) travail(-eth, -ing woman). TWOT Reference: 867.

A Son, Unto Us A Son [Ben-1121-????]: Son (Short Definition: afflicted). Strongs Exhaustive Concordance: afflicted, age, anointed one, appointed to, arrow. From banah; a son (as a builder of the family name), in the widest sense (of literal and figurative relationship, including grandson, subject, nation, quality or condition, etc., (like 'ab, 'ach, etc.)) -- + afflicted, age, (Ahoh-) (Ammon-) (Hachmon-) (Lev-)ite, (anoint-)ed one, appointed to, (+) arrow, (Assyr-) (Babylon-) (Egypt-) (Grec-)ian, one born, bough, branch, breed, + (young) bullock, + (young) calf, X came up in, child, colt, X common, X corn, daughter, X of first, + firstborn, foal, + very fruitful, + postage, X in, + kid, + lamb, (+) man, meet, + mighty, + nephew, old, (+) people, + rebel, + robber, X servant born, X soldier, son, + spark, + steward, + stranger, X surely, them of, + tumultuous one, + valiant(-est), whelp, worthy, young (one), youth. see HEBREW banah, see HEBREW 'ab, see HEBREW 'ach. TWOT Reference: 254.

Will Be Given, is given [Nathan-5414-Nathan]: To give, put, set (Short Definition: add). Strongs Exhaustive Concordance: Add, apply, appoint, ascribe, assign, avenge, be healed, bestow. A primitive root; to give, used with greatest latitude of application (put, make, etc.) -- add, apply, appoint, ascribe, assign, X avenge, X be ((healed)), bestow, bring (forth, hither), cast, cause, charge, come, commit, consider, count, + cry, deliver (up), direct, distribute, do, X doubtless, X without fail, fasten, frame, X get, give (forth, over, up), grant, hang (up), X have, X indeed, lay (unto charge, up), (give) leave, lend, let (out), + lie, lift up, make, + O that, occupy, offer, ordain, pay, perform, place, pour, print, X pull, put (forth), recompense, render, requite, restore, send (out), set (forth), shew, shoot forth (up), + sing, + slander, strike, (sub-)mit, suffer, X surely, X take, thrust, trade, turn, utter, + weep, + willingly, + withdraw, + would (to) God, yield. TWOT Reference: 1443.

So far there is nothing to prove or disprove a trinitarian view. So far, all it states is a person will be born and he will be someone's son.

I will break these up as to not use up to much space, and so others may jump in and discuss what we have so far.

Blessings

AAAHHH you stopped at a crucial point. The term "name" in the hebrew is "shem" this term literally means character or reputation. this term is not an identifier. We carry this meaning into English by saying of someone that they have a good name. Not that jones is better then thomas. It is about the persons character or reputation.
Now this verse reads that this child that is born and given with have the character or reputation of the mighty God and ever lasting father ect. This is describing Christ character not his identity.[/quote:3mb7ywj6]

Im sorry but I did state I would break these down for space and dialogue, I also went out with the wife for the day. So please excuse me. And yes you are correct that this verse describes the character of this child to be born, and has nothing to with deity. Divinity is not an absolute for Deity, but Diety is an absolute for Divinity.

Isa 9:6 Cont. . .

Will Rest [Hayah-1961-?????] To fall out, come to pass, become, be (Short Definition: become). Strongs Exhaustive Concordance: Become, altogether, accomplished, committed, like, break, cause. A primitive root (compare hava'); to exist, i.e. Be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary) -- beacon, X altogether, be(-come), accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-)self, require, X use. see HEBREW hava'

And The Government [Misrah-4951-????????]: Rule, dominion (Short Definition: government). Strongs Exhaustive Concordance: government. From sarah; empire -- government. see HEBREW sarah

On On [Al-5921-???]: Upon, above, over (Short Definition: above, from alah). Strongs Exhaustive Concordance: above, according to, after, as against, among, and, as, at. Properly, the same as al used as a preposition (in the singular or plural often with prefix, or as conjunction with a particle following); above, over, upon, or against (yet always in this last relation with a downward aspect) in a great variety of applications (as follow) -- above, according to(-ly), after, (as) against, among, and, X as, at, because of, beside (the rest of), between, beyond the time, X both and, by (reason of), X had the charge of, concerning for, in (that), (forth, out) of, (from) (off), (up-)on, over, than, through(-out), to, touching, X with. see HEBREW al

His shoulders [Shekem-7026-??????]: Shoulder (Short Definition: shoulder). Strongs Exhaustive Concordance: place of burdens. From shakam; the neck (between the shoulders) as the place of burdens; figuratively, the spur of a hill -- back, X consent, portion, shoulder. see HEBREW shakam

It appears this child will have a heavy burden of Government placed upon him.

 

[Cornelius]

Christians have a God-part too . We are not fully human anymore, because we are now being born from above through the Word of God. We are a NEW creation. We are part of the Body of Christ. Only Christians can be part of this and this too is part of God.

We too are "son of man" who carry within us the Son of God (which is God) So we have a human (son of man) part and we have our God-part (Son of God, the Word ). Christians do not just pray about things, we also command through the Word. We are able to activate our God-part (The Word/Christ in us) through what we SAY. When we are in agreement with the Word, we are in agreement with God. We are then able to walk with Him. God wants us to rule over the curse and we do this when we agree with the Word.We bring the Kingdom into this world, through the Word of God.

God chose this way: to have Christians rule through His Word. We must SPEAK in agreement with Him.

We enter into miracles through the method of faith, which is the route that God chose for us. When we enter into faith, we then speak and walk according to that faith until we see the manifestation of it in THIS life. That means we share in the creative ability of our Father. Jesus came so that we could move back into this inheritance, that Adam and Eve traded away.Jesus restored our authority. We are now IN Him (if we are in agreement with the Word ) and He (God) is then IN us too and continuously coming in our flesh . The Bible likens this coming as the coming of the morning. As the rising of the sun (Son) in us, until the perfect day.
Pro 4:18 But the path of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day. Christ Jesus manifests in the Christian to the level that we are submitted to the Word. This is suppose to increase in us until the "perfect day" where Christ shines through us.Joh 3:30 He must increase, but I must decrease.

 

[Cornelius]

Mat 17:20 And he saith unto them, Because of your little faith: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.

This scripture is only true because God now lives in us and through us. There is nothing that God cannot do, and His chosen way now is to rule through Christians. We only do not see this, because most Christians have lost the faith that this is indeed true and possible, so they live in a lesser state, because of their lack of faith. This following statement of Jesus does not just apply to the person spoken to in the Scripture, but it also applies in general to all who have (or do not have) faith.Mat 9:29 ...... According to your faith be it done unto you. So your walk today is a direct reflection of your faith, or lack of it.

 

[Cornelius]

Here is the final result , when we have been fully born from above:1Jn 3:2 ................ we shall be like him;............

Awesome

 

[Yahoshea]

Great!!!! Whose interpretation of God's word would you like to turn to?

.

The interpretation that is consistent with the WHOLE, harmonious word of God...the word that PROVES that Jesus Christ IS God.

Thanks for admitting that you would use whatever translation supports your doctrine regardless of if it is accurate or not.

 

[Yahoshea]

A Son, Unto Us A Son [Ben-1121-????]: Son (Short Definition: afflicted). Strongs Exhaustive Concordance: afflicted, age, anointed one, appointed to, arrow. From banah; a son (as a builder of the family name), in the widest sense (of literal and figurative relationship, including grandson, subject, nation, quality or condition, etc., (like 'ab, 'ach, etc.)) -- + afflicted, age, (Ahoh-) (Ammon-) (Hachmon-) (Lev-)ite, (anoint-)ed one, appointed to, (+) arrow, (Assyr-) (Babylon-) (Egypt-) (Grec-)ian, one born, bough, branch, breed, + (young) bullock, + (young) calf, X came up in, child, colt, X common, X corn, daughter, X of first, + firstborn, foal, + very fruitful, + postage, X in, + kid, + lamb, (+) man, meet, + mighty, + nephew, old, (+) people, + rebel, + robber, X servant born, X soldier, son, + spark, + steward, + stranger, X surely, them of, + tumultuous one, + valiant(-est), whelp, worthy, young (one), youth. see HEBREW banah, see HEBREW 'ab, see HEBREW 'ach. TWOT Reference: 254.

Will Be Given, is given [Nathan-5414-Nathan]: To give, put, set (Short Definition: add). Strongs Exhaustive Concordance: Add, apply, appoint, ascribe, assign, avenge, be healed, bestow. A primitive root; to give, used with greatest latitude of application (put, make, etc.) -- add, apply, appoint, ascribe, assign, X avenge, X be ((healed)), bestow, bring (forth, hither), cast, cause, charge, come, commit, consider, count, + cry, deliver (up), direct, distribute, do, X doubtless, X without fail, fasten, frame, X get, give (forth, over, up), grant, hang (up), X have, X indeed, lay (unto charge, up), (give) leave, lend, let (out), + lie, lift up, make, + O that, occupy, offer, ordain, pay, perform, place, pour, print, X pull, put (forth), recompense, render, requite, restore, send (out), set (forth), shew, shoot forth (up), + sing, + slander, strike, (sub-)mit, suffer, X surely, X take, thrust, trade, turn, utter, + weep, + willingly, + withdraw, + would (to) God, yield. TWOT Reference: 1443.

So far there is nothing to prove or disprove a trinitarian view. So far, all it states is a person will be born and he will be someone's son.

I will break these up as to not use up to much space, and so others may jump in and discuss what we have so far.

Blessings[/quote]

AAAHHH you stopped at a crucial point. The term "name" in the hebrew is "shem" this term literally means character or reputation. this term is not an identifier. We carry this meaning into English by saying of someone that they have a good name. Not that jones is better then thomas. It is about the persons character or reputation.
Now this verse reads that this child that is born and given with have the character or reputation of the mighty God and ever lasting father ect. This is describing Christ character not his identity.[/quote]

Im sorry but I did state I would break these down for space and dialogue, I also went out with the wife for the day. So please excuse me. And yes you are correct that this verse describes the character of this child to be born, and has nothing to with deity. Divinity is not an absolute for Deity, but Diety is an absolute for Divinity.

Isa 9:6 Cont. . .

Will Rest [Hayah-1961-?????] To fall out, come to pass, become, be (Short Definition: become). Strongs Exhaustive Concordance: Become, altogether, accomplished, committed, like, break, cause. A primitive root (compare hava'); to exist, i.e. Be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary) -- beacon, X altogether, be(-come), accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-)self, require, X use. see HEBREW hava'

And The Government [Misrah-4951-????????]: Rule, dominion (Short Definition: government). Strongs Exhaustive Concordance: government. From sarah; empire -- government. see HEBREW sarah

On On [Al-5921-???]: Upon, above, over (Short Definition: above, from alah). Strongs Exhaustive Concordance: above, according to, after, as against, among, and, as, at. Properly, the same as al used as a preposition (in the singular or plural often with prefix, or as conjunction with a particle following); above, over, upon, or against (yet always in this last relation with a downward aspect) in a great variety of applications (as follow) -- above, according to(-ly), after, (as) against, among, and, X as, at, because of, beside (the rest of), between, beyond the time, X both and, by (reason of), X had the charge of, concerning for, in (that), (forth, out) of, (from) (off), (up-)on, over, than, through(-out), to, touching, X with. see HEBREW al

His shoulders [Shekem-7026-??????]: Shoulder (Short Definition: shoulder). Strongs Exhaustive Concordance: place of burdens. From shakam; the neck (between the shoulders) as the place of burdens; figuratively, the spur of a hill -- back, X consent, portion, shoulder. see HEBREW shakam

It appears this child will have a heavy burden of Government placed upon him.[/quote]

Yes the child will have (sometime in the future) the government on his shoulders.

Thank you for leaving room for dialog.

 

[follower of Christ]

All that wasted time and effort and nothing you provided refutes the very simple beginning of John ;)

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.
(John 1:1-4 MKJV)

The Word was WITH God and the word WAS God.
The Trinity as far as the Father and the Son are absolutely and conclusively proven by this one tiny verse, chap....like it or not.

Was God - In the previous phrase John had said that the Word was “with God.†Lest it should be supposed that he was a different and inferior being, here John states that “he was God.†There is no more unequivocal declaration in the Bible than this, and there could be no stronger proof that the sacred writer meant to affirm that the Son of God was equal with the Father; because:
Albert Barnes


And the Word was God - Or, God was the Logos: therefore no subordinate being, no second to the Most High, but the supreme eternal Jehovah.
Adam Clarke


and the word was God;
not made a God, as he is said here after to be made flesh; nor constituted or appointed a God, or a God by office; but truly and properly God, in the highest sense of the word, as appears from the names by which he is called; as Jehovah, God, our, your, their, and my God, God with us, the mighty God, God over all, the great God, the living God, the true God, and eternal life; and from his perfections, and the whole fulness of the Godhead that dwells in him, as independence, eternity, immutability, omnipresence, omniscience, and omnipotence; and from his works of creation and providence, his miracles, the work of redemption, his forgiving sins, the resurrection of himself and others from the dead, and the administration of the last judgment; and from the worship given him, as prayer to him, faith in him, and the performance of baptism in his name: nor is it any objection to the proper deity of Christ, that the article is here wanting; since when the word is applied to the Father, it is not always used, and even in this chapter, Joh_1:6 and which shows, that the word "God", is not the subject, but the predicate of this proposition, as we render it: so the Jews often use the word of the Lord for Jehovah, and call him God. Thus the words in Gen_28:20 are paraphrased by Onkelos,
John Gill

The Isaiah passage is ONE piece of evidence, gent, it isnt the whole of it.
John tells us very plainly that Jesus Christ, the Word, IS God.

Im sorry that you seem incapable of accepting facts in this matter.

.

 

[follower of Christ]

Great!!!! Whose interpretation of God's word would you like to turn to?

.

The interpretation that is consistent with the WHOLE, harmonious word of God...the word that PROVES that Jesus Christ IS God.

Thanks for admitting that you would use whatever translation supports your doctrine regardless of if it is accurate or not.

Thanks for showing us that you either completely misunderstand or intentionally pervert the intent of everything you read.
Read what I said again and this time maybe pay attention ;)

 

[Yahoshea]

.[/quote]
The interpretation that is consistent with the WHOLE, harmonious word of God...the word that PROVES that Jesus Christ IS God.
[/quote]


I have been posting for weeks the interpretation that is consistent with the whole harmonius word of God and you have refused to believe it. again it is my word against yours. Opinion against opinion
I can say I am right because it lines up with my doctrine and you can too. I can say it lines up with my interpretation and so can you. there is no point unless we agree on a method of interpretation or choose to compare them by virtue of the fruits they produce.

 

[follower of Christ]

I have been posting for weeks the interpretation that is consistent with the whole harmonius word of God and you have refused to believe it.

Sorry but you havent done any such thing.
I just gave scripture that blows your nonsense out of the water.
Jesus, the Word, was WITH God and WAS God....end of debate.

again it is my word against yours. Opinion against opinion

Wrong chap. READ John 1 again.

I can say I am right because it lines up with my doctrine and you can too.

No gent, ya cant because John 1 destroys your fallacy entirely.

I can say it lines up with my interpretation and so can you. there is no point unless we agree on a method of interpretation or choose to compare them by virtue of the fruits they produce.

Sorry but Im not going to allow you to control this discussion.
As stated before either you CAN prove you case or you CANNOT.
Very clearly you CANNOT and thus this discussion is pretty much come to a conclusion.

 

[follower of Christ]

For those who may have missed it the first time...


All that wasted time and effort and nothing you provided refutes the very simple beginning of John ;)

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.
(John 1:1-4 MKJV)

The Word was WITH God and the word WAS God.
The Trinity as far as the Father and the Son are absolutely and conclusively proven by this one tiny verse, chap....like it or not.

Was God - In the previous phrase John had said that the Word was “with God.†Lest it should be supposed that he was a different and inferior being, here John states that “he was God.†There is no more unequivocal declaration in the Bible than this, and there could be no stronger proof that the sacred writer meant to affirm that the Son of God was equal with the Father; because:
Albert Barnes


And the Word was God - Or, God was the Logos: therefore no subordinate being, no second to the Most High, but the supreme eternal Jehovah.
Adam Clarke


and the word was God;
not made a God, as he is said here after to be made flesh; nor constituted or appointed a God, or a God by office; but truly and properly God, in the highest sense of the word, as appears from the names by which he is called; as Jehovah, God, our, your, their, and my God, God with us, the mighty God, God over all, the great God, the living God, the true God, and eternal life; and from his perfections, and the whole fulness of the Godhead that dwells in him, as independence, eternity, immutability, omnipresence, omniscience, and omnipotence; and from his works of creation and providence, his miracles, the work of redemption, his forgiving sins, the resurrection of himself and others from the dead, and the administration of the last judgment; and from the worship given him, as prayer to him, faith in him, and the performance of baptism in his name: nor is it any objection to the proper deity of Christ, that the article is here wanting; since when the word is applied to the Father, it is not always used, and even in this chapter, Joh_1:6 and which shows, that the word "God", is not the subject, but the predicate of this proposition, as we render it: so the Jews often use the word of the Lord for Jehovah, and call him God. Thus the words in Gen_28:20 are paraphrased by Onkelos,
John Gill

The Isaiah passage is ONE piece of evidence, gent, it isnt the whole of it.
John tells us very plainly that Jesus Christ, the Word, IS God.

Im sorry that you seem incapable of accepting facts in this matter.

.

 

[Yahoshea]

I have been posting for weeks the interpretation that is consistent with the whole harmonius word of God and you have refused to believe it.

Sorry but you havent done any such thing.
I just gave scripture that blows your nonsense out of the water.
Jesus, the Word, was WITH God and WAS God....end of debate.

again it is my word against yours. Opinion against opinion

Wrong chap. READ John 1 again.

[quote:1tui70yx]I can say I am right because it lines up with my doctrine and you can too.

Ne gent, ya cant because John 1 destroys your fallacy entirely.

I can say it lines up with my interpretation and so can you. there is no point unless we agree on a method of interpretation or choose to compare them by virtue of the fruits they produce.

Sorry but Im not going to allow you to control this discussion.
As stated before either you CAN prove you case or you CANNOT.
Very clearly you CANNOT and thus this discussion is pretty much come to a conclusion.[/quote:1tui70yx]

All of your argument is based on the assumption that "word" (logos) can be interpreted as Jesus. Prove it --
How is it defined in other places in scripture? Harmonious with the rest of the word???? Your words not mine.
What is the primary definition found in Bible dictionaries?
How does the author use the verse in other places?
Harmonious with the rest of scripture???? your words not mine.
How does the culture of the time effect the use of "word"?

Have you looked at any of these or are you just reading the English assuming because it fits your preconceived doctrine that it is correct as it appears?

 

[Yahoshea]

Free ---
You say --
But you still have failed to address the thrust of my argument. Regardless that man is the pinnacle of creation and created in God's image, you still have to show how the sacrifice of a creature can atone for all sins, everywhere, at all times.

Reply -
And yet, you have failed to show that a God was required to be sacrificed for all sin everywhere all the time.

Who judges the world – a God or a man?
Acts 17:31?because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead."
What is the proof that God uses? That He raised a man from the dead.


1 cor 15
20But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep.
21For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead.
22For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.

What other Gods are asleep? Is Jesus the first fruits of other Gods or of man?
What was won at the cross? Our resurrection from the dead. From who came the resurrection of the dead, God or man?
Another direct comparison between Adam and Christ. One human compared to another.

If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection. ( Roman 6:5, NIV)

This is how Jesus can pay for the sins of others. We can be united to Jesus, so that his death is our death and his life our life. None of it requires that Christ be anything other then human.

Rom 6 in context --
3Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death?
4Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.
5For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection,
6knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin;
7for he who has died is freed from sin.
8Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him,
9knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, is never to die again; death no longer is master over Him.
10For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God.
11Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus.

Nothing in the above context demands that Christ be anything other then human.
We are alive to God in Christ Jesus, not God who is Christ Jesus. God in Christ which is my contention.

Christ was made of a woman –Gal 4/4
What does a human woman produce other then another human?

Please explain to me what it means to come in the flesh?
By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God;

For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh This is the deceiver and the
antichrist.

For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit;

Over 90 times in the NT Christ is called the son of man. Is this indicating deity or humanity?

Daniel prophesized about the son of man coming.
Dan 7/13
13"I kept looking in the night visions,
And behold, with the clouds of heaven
One like a Son of Man was coming,
And He came up to the Ancient of Days
And was presented before Him.

2 Tim 2
7Consider what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything.
8Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, descendant of David, according to my gospel,

Can a descendant of David be anything other then human?

Jer 23
5"Behold, the days are coming," declares the LORD,?"When I will raise up for David a righteous Branch;? And He will reign as king and act wisely? And do justice and righteousness in the land. ?
6"In His days Judah will be saved, And Israel will dwell securely;?And this is His name (shem Hb. = Character or character trait) by which He will be called, 'The LORD our righteousness.

 

[Apostolic Soldier]

Well, this is my lucky day because I LOVE to debate this with people. The fun that is in it for me, is that those of us who see the Oneness have the entire Bible to support us. Those who support the Trinity have but one verse which they incorrectly use. Now, I didn't read every post in this forum so if I've repeated some things, please excuse me. But, as an Apostolic Minister allow me to delve into this large debate. First of all, I would love to use the verse that I have seen used all ready. St. John Chapter 1. Now, I use two verses from this Chapter in order to prove this to nonbelievers in preaching.

St John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God
St John 1:14 - And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

These two verses tell us that this "Word" was God. This "Word" was also made felsh and dwelt on Earth. Whom from the Bible fits this description? Let's delve further into John.

St. John 10:30 - I and my Father are one.
St. John 17:11 - And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou has given me, that they may be one, as we are.

This expresses the "ONENESS" of the supposed Trinity. See, what people do not understand is that there are three Offices of ONE GOD. Think about this, the Trinity is completely a New Testament concept. All throughout the Old Testament God talks about being one God. Jesus even quotes this in the book of Mark.

Mark 12:29 - The first of all commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord.

See, there was never thought to be Three Gods in some sort of Godhead. Christianity is supposed to be a monotheistic religion. Meaning belief in ONE God, not three. Next of all, let's make sure that we understand that there was no change in the Godhead from Old to New Testament. See, as I said we always read about one God in the Old Testament. And the God of the Old Testament is Jesus Christ of the New Testament. God knew he was going to come to Earth all the way from the beginning.

1 Peter 1:20 - Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you.

See, this idea of a triune Godhead comes from Matthew 28:19. This is where the triune baptismal formula supposedly comes from. However, as I'm sure has been brought up, there is the word "name" there. Father, Son, And Holy Ghost are titles or Offices of the Godhead. Those are not names. Take for example a man who has a child. He is a Father, a Son, and Has A Soul. But, his name is Bob (for example). Although those three things make up who he is, he is still Bob. He is all of those things at once. Just as Jesus Christ is all three offices at once.

Colossians 1:19 - For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell.
Colossians 2:9 - For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

And there is the word that people have trouble accepting. That GOD had a body in the form of a man Jesus Christ. It's hard for people to accept that God took on a mortal body. However, we know that he was in the body yet ruling the heavens simultaneously. And this is not the first time that God took on the form of man. Jacob literally wrestled throughout the night with God in the flesh in the book of Genesis. Let me leave you with two verses to think on.

Luke 24:46,47 - And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: (47) And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

John 14:6 - I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me. (7) If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

 

[Cornelius]

St. John 10:30 - I and my Father are one.
St. John 17:11 - And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou has given me, that they may be one, as we are.

How does the Oneness doctrine view this verse. How will we be one as they are one? Its talking of the whole body of Christ here.

By the way, I do not believe in the Oneness, neither in the Trinity doctrines. Oneness does not make Biblical sense and neither does the Trinity doctrine. Not even Trinitarians understand their doctrine ! I know, because I use to be one myself. :yes