Jesus Christ Claims to be Yahweh - John 8:23-25

[skidootech]

Let me help you out here

Matthew 3:3

For this is he who was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah, saying: “The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord; Make His paths straight.’ ”

Nothing can be more clear in what we read in the Four Gospels, that the FULFILMENT of the Prophecy in the Prophet Isaiah of the Coming of YHWH, in 40.3, is 100% FULFILLED In the Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

It is because Jesus Christ is YHWH that this is in the Gospels!

Any honest person will agree that Jesus Christ is YHWH

you are trying to use a verse you clearly do not understand but by doing this you are calling God a liar in luke 1:32, now that is dangerous so let me help you out here before you do something God will make you regret.

the truth is God says that his father is DAVID end of discussion this is clear language, we can go from here and clear up your other massive misunderstandings.

 

[Free]

The only God mentioned in what you wrote is the Father and Paul said the Father is their one singular God. 1 Cor. 8:6

It would logically follow that Jesus isn't God, then.

Your reasoning is poor as you have completely divorced that from the context, which my argument is based on. My argument is sound.

To say that Jesus isn’t God means that Paul lies when he says all things are through Jesus (the Son). And, as I stated, it also means the Father is excluded from being Lord. That means Paul and other NT writers lie when they say God (the Father as far as your understanding is concerned) is Lord.

 

[Runningman]

Your reasoning is poor as you have completely divorced that from the context, which my argument is based on. My argument is sound.

To say that Jesus isn’t God means that Paul lies when he says all things are through Jesus (the Son). And, as I stated, it also means the Father is excluded from being Lord. That means Paul and other NT writers lie when they say God (the Father as far as your understanding is concerned) is Lord.

I believe all encompassing terms like "all things" apply to specific contexts, not universally every single thing in the universe past, present, and future.

We should look at how this is used in the Bible. I like John 14:26 because it's easy to demonstrate that "all things" doesn't mean all things.

John 14
26But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have told you.

I believe we need to apply measure and balance to these things. The Advocate didn't literally teach the disciples "all things" in the most general sense, but as far all of the things the disciples needed to know about, yes, they were surely taught all things.

So let's see what they wrote about after being taught all things. Well, they didn't write anything about the Trinity in any clear or explicit terms for starters.

So I believe Colossians 1:15-20 applies to a specific context, specifically the church. In the Bible the only thing there is an example of God creating through Jesus would be the church.

Check on Ephesians 2. It refers to the church being created. It's a parallel of Colossians 1:15-20.

14For He Himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has torn down the dividing wall of hostility 15by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees. He did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace 16and reconciling both of them to God in one body through the cross, by which He extinguished their hostility.

 

[Free]

I believe all encompassing terms like "all things" apply to specific contexts, not universally every single thing in the universe past, present, and future.

We should look at how this is used in the Bible. I like John 14:26 because it's easy to demonstrate that "all things" doesn't mean all things.

John 14
26But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have told you.

I believe we need to apply measure and balance to these things. The Advocate didn't literally teach the disciples "all things" in the most general sense, but as far all of the things the disciples needed to know about, yes, they were surely taught all things.

Of course.

So let's see what they wrote about after being taught all things. Well, they didn't write anything about the Trinity in any clear or explicit terms for starters.

Which is not relevant since they did write all the foundations of the Trinity: 1) monotheism, 2) three distinct, divine persons, and 3) all three persons are coequal and coeternal.

So I believe Colossians 1:15-20 applies to a specific context, specifically the church. In the Bible the only thing there is an example of God creating through Jesus would be the church.

Check on Ephesians 2. It refers to the church being created. It's a parallel of Colossians 1:15-20.

14For He Himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has torn down the dividing wall of hostility 15by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees. He did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace 16and reconciling both of them to God in one body through the cross, by which He extinguished their hostility.

That's not at all the context of Col 1:15-16, just as it isn't the context of John 1:1-3 or 1 Cor 8:6. You want to argue against the meaning of "all things" in 1 Cor 8:6, but if it doesn't literally mean everything that has come into existence, then what does that say about the Father and what is Paul's point? Paul is clearly arguing against the existence of any other actual living God, stating that it is the Father "from whom are all things" and the Son "through whom are all things." So, "all things" means the same in regards to both the Father and the Son, and it means everything that ever came into existence at creation. That absolutely precludes the Son from being something that came into existence, which is an attribute of God alone. Again, my argument is sound.

And John clearly states the exact same thing in John 1:3:

Joh 1:3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. (ESV)

He even explains what he means by the Word having made "all things"--"without him was not any thing made that was made." That is absolutely everything that has came into existence at creation. Therefore, the Word, as a distinct person in intimate communion and interpersonal relationship "with God," was in existence when the beginning began. So, when 1:1c states that the Word was God in nature, that is the logical outcome of 1:1a and b. That is repeated in 1:2 and fully supported by 1:3.

As for Col 1:16-17, it has nothing to do with God creating the Church through Jesus. There is simply no way to come to such a conclusion.

Col 1:13 He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son,
Col 1:14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.
Col 1:16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.
Col 1:17 And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.
Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent.
Col 1:19 For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell,
Col 1:20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross. (ESV)

First, in verses 13-14, Paul points out that believers now belong to "the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins." Then Paul states why the Son is King of this kingdom--because "he is the image of the invisible God" and preeminent over creation. Paul then shows what it means that Jesus is "the image of the invisible God" and why he is preeminent: 1) "by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him," 2) "he is before all things," and 3) "in him all things hold together."

There is simply no way to understand this as speaking of the creation of the Church. The statements are exhaustive and can only refer to, as in John 1:3, everything that came into being at creation. Notice that verse 16 begins with "For" and those that follow with "And." Those are conjunctions which link thoughts together. That is, Paul is continuing his thought from verse 15. There is simply no way to then take verse 18, which simply states that Jesus "is the head of . . . the church," as showing that the passage is about God creating the Church through Jesus. That has nothing to do with the context.

 

[SolaScriptura]

you are trying to use a verse you clearly do not understand but by doing this you are calling God a liar in luke 1:32, now that is dangerous so let me help you out here before you do something God will make you regret.

the truth is God says that his father is DAVID end of discussion this is clear language, we can go from here and clear up your other massive misunderstandings.

You guys cannot deal with FACTS that are taught in the Bible!

I have shown very clearly that Jesus Christ is YHWH and you still argue using verses that you simply don't understand

I have also shown from Hebrews chapter 1, where in verse 6 God the Father Commands that Jesus Christ is WORSHIPED. in verses 8 and 9 the Father Addresses Jesus Christ as GOD. in verses 10 to 12 the Father Addresses Jesus Christ as the ACTUAL CREATOR of the ENTIRE UNIVERSE

These and MANY MORE Scriptures show beyond any doubt to any honest person that Jesus Christ is YHWH!

 

[SolaScriptura]

you are trying to use a verse you clearly do not understand but by doing this you are calling God a liar in luke 1:32, now that is dangerous so let me help you out here before you do something God will make you regret.

the truth is God says that his father is DAVID end of discussion this is clear language, we can go from here and clear up your other massive misunderstandings.

I would like to know exactly HOW does Luke 1:32, or any other verse show that Jesus Christ is not YHWH, COEQUAL with God the Father?

Luke 1:32 reads, "He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David"

In verses 14-17 we read of the birth of John the Baptist, and his role as the Herald of The Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ:

"There will be joy and delight for you, and many will rejoice at his birth (John the Baptist). For he (John the Baptist) will be great in the sight of the Lord, and will never drink wine or beer. And he (John the Baptist) will be filled with the Holy Spirit while still in his mother's womb (John the Baptist). He (John the Baptist) will turn many of the sons of Israel to the Lord their God (Jesus Christ). And he will go before Him (Jesus Christ) in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of fathers to their children, and the disobedient to the understanding of the righteous, to make ready for the Lord a prepared people"

Malachi 4:6, is quoted in this passage, "And he will turn the hearts of fathers to [their] children and the hearts of children to their fathers. Otherwise, I will come and strike the land with a curse"

"The Lord their God", is none other than YHWH.

Also in Luke chapter 1, we read in verse 76 about John the Baptist, "And you, child, will be called a prophet of the Most High, for you will go before the Lord to prepare His ways".

Here is that quote from Isaiah 40:3, the Coming of YHWH, which is The Coming of Jesus Christ, as in Prophecy.

In chapter 3 in Luke, we further read about John the Baptist and Jesus Christ;

"as it is written in the book of the words of the prophet Isaiah: A voice of one crying out in the wilderness: "Prepare the Way for the Lord; make His Paths straight! Every valley will be filled, and every mountain and hill will be made low; the crooked will become straight, the rough ways smooth, and everyone will see the salvation of God." (verses 4-6)

More complete quote from Isaiah, which is for YHWH, and, like the other Gospels, is Jesus Christ's Coming

Now, shows from this, that Jesus Christ is not YHWH, Almighty God, The Great I AM , Jehovah!

 

[SolaScriptura]

TrevorL

WHY is it that you leave a SAD face when I present from the Bible, FACTS about Jesus Christ?

Are you really SAD that the Bible Teaches that Jesus Christ is YHWH?

Are you SAD that these FACTS are AGAINST what you believe, and what you don't really want to change?

I have shown MANY times, that Jesus Christ IS Almighty God, YHWH, etc, and YET you and the other DENIERS of these Great TRUTHS, continue to hold to your positions, even though the Bible is 100% AGAINST what you believe!

Very simple passages, like Isaiah 9:6, where Jesus Christ is MIGHTY GOD

John 1:1, where Jesus Christ is EQUALLY GOD as the Father is.

John 1:18, where BOTH the Father and Jesus Christ are EQUALLY called GOD, in the Original text

John 20:28, where Thomas tells Jesus Christ, "my Lord and my God", which Jesus does not rebuke Thomas for!

Matthew 3:3, and the other Gospels, where Jesus Christ is The Coming of YHWH, as Foretold in Isaiah 40:3

In the sermon in Acts 2, where Peter is preaching about the Lord Jesus Christ, and then quotes from the Prophet Joel, "And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved". In Joel this is YHWH! Paul also quotes this for Jesus Christ in Romans 10:13.

in I Corinthians 10:9, Paul quotes from Numbers 21:6, where we read of YHWH sending snakes to bite the people, which Paul says is Jesus Christ!

Paul says in Titus 2:13, that Jesus Christ is "The Great God and Saviour"

In Hebrews 1:6, the Father Commands Jesus is WORSHIPED. In verses 8-9, the Father calls Jesus Christ GOD. In verses 10-12, the Father says Jesus Christ is The ACTUAL CREATOR of the Universe!

In Revelation 1:17; 2:8 and 22:13, Jesus Christ says that He is "The First and The Last", which YHWH says in Isaiah 44:6, that He is!

and MANY other examples I have given over the years, and YET people on here keep on their OBJECTIONS, not because of what the Bible says, but, because The Infallible, Inspired Word of God DISAGREES!!!

 

[Runningman]

Which is not relevant since they did write all the foundations of the Trinity: 1) monotheism, 2) three distinct, divine persons, and 3) all three persons are coequal and coeternal.

I may respond to the rest if I have time, but I wanted to at least comment on this first.

Just because something can be found to have a foundation in the Bible, doesn't mean we should give it life. There are many ways to understand and interpret the Bible so it could be said that the foundation for a great number of heresies actually exist in the Bible, but shouldn't be groomed into a doctrine.

One of the more recent things that I have been considering is that in John 20:28 Thomas said "my Lord and my God" and Trinitarians take that, place it on a pedestal, and say that it's proof for the deity of Jesus, yet there are just as many things to the contrary

However, in Matthew 16:23, Jesus said to Peter "Get behind me Satan!" Therefore, following the same line of thinking applied to John 20:28, Peter is the devil incarnate. If one interprets John 20:28 to mean Jesus is God incarnate then this same line of logic and reason must also apply elsewhere.

Did Jesus called Peter Satan? Yes
Did Peter deny Jesus? Yes
Should we make a doctrine out of this and spread it far and wide across the Internet every day? No.

My point is that just because we can do something doesn't mean we should. There are dozens of examples of Jesus demonstrably not being God and this is important. God is always God, but if someone has a moment where they aren't God then they never were God.

For the deity of Jesus to be true, it needs to always be true. If there are any exceptions to this then the Trinity is logically false.

1 Timothy 2
5For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

 

[Free]

Just because something can be found to have a foundation in the Bible, doesn't mean we should give it life.

As long as it doesn't contradict what is said elsewhere we should.

There are many ways to understand and interpret the Bible

Not really.

so it could be said that the foundation for a great number of heresies actually exist in the Bible, but shouldn't be groomed into a doctrine.

Of course, but you can't have heresy if you don't have orthodoxy to begin with.

One of the more recent things that I have been considering is that in John 20:28 Thomas said "my Lord and my God" and Trinitarians take that, place it on a pedestal, and say that it's proof for the deity of Jesus, yet there are just as many things to the contrary

No anti-Trinitarian has yet posted anything to the contrary. Every single verse used to "disprove" the deity of Jesus by anti-Trinitarians has been taken out of context. Some blatantly so.

However, in Matthew 16:23, Jesus said to Peter "Get behind me Satan!" Therefore, following the same line of thinking applied to John 20:28, Peter is the devil incarnate. If one interprets John 20:28 to mean Jesus is God incarnate then this same line of logic and reason must also apply elsewhere.


Did Jesus called Peter Satan? Yes
Did Peter deny Jesus? Yes
Should we make a doctrine out of this and spread it far and wide across the Internet every day? No.

This is apples and oranges, if that. Peter, along with the rest of the disciples, didn't understand Jesus's true mission and purpose. It is very clear from Jesus's statement to Peter that Peter is just being a mouthpiece for Satan in a vain attempt to dissuade him from his mission.

As for Thomas, that was the first time he saw the risen Christ, who then repeats Thomas's own statements of doubt back to him, despite Jesus not having been present when Thomas stated them. Thomas's response, directly to Jesus and only Jesus, is that he is both his Lord and his God. What does Jesus not respond with? Anything like "Get behind me Satan" or "You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only shall you serve" or "Why do you call me God when the Father alone is God?" or "Why do you blaspheme?". Instead, Jesus responds, "Have you believed because you have seen me?".

My point is that just because we can do something doesn't mean we should. There are dozens of examples of Jesus demonstrably not being God and this is important. God is always God, but if someone has a moment where they aren't God then they never were God.

For the deity of Jesus to be true, it needs to always be true. If there are any exceptions to this then the Trinity is logically false.

1 Timothy 2
5For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

And here is the heart of the matter. I have given numerous verses and passages that unequivocally show that Jesus is also deity, some of which have gone completely unaddressed. And I completely agree that deity can never cease to be deity, which is why as deity Jesus never ceased to be deity, although it was largely veiled by his humanity. What I do not do is to use those verses to override the teaching of other verses that clearly show Jesus's humanity, that he is also truly human. It isn't either or, it's both and.

Anti-Trinitarians, however, take those verses which show Jesus's humanity and override those which clearly show his deity; they get completely reinterpreted to mean something other than what they clearly state. That is precisely one of those things that can be done but should never be done, as there is absolutely no warrant for doing so. Both must always be taken together and made sense of, but that is the one thing anti-Trinitarians refuse to do.

 

[Runningman]

As long as it doesn't contradict what is said elsewhere we should.

Well, then why are you promoting the Trinity? Surely this isn't the time and place to bring up all of the contradictions the Trinity causes as if it would be the first time they've been seen.

Why did Jesus exclude the Holy Spirit as being someone the Father and Son knows?

Matt 11​

27All things have been entrusted to Me by My Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal Him.​

How is God composed of co-equal members when they clearly aren't equal?

Hebrews 1​

8But about the Son He says:​

“Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever,​

and justice is the scepter of Your kingdom.​

9You have loved righteousness​

and hated wickedness;​

therefore God, Your God, has anointed You​

above Your companions with the oil of joy."​

​

There are just too many to list so I'll just post two and see if the outcome is any different than before.

No anti-Trinitarian has yet posted anything to the contrary. Every single verse used to "disprove" the deity of Jesus by anti-Trinitarians has been taken out of context. Some blatantly so.

So even though Jesus never said he's Thomas' God, but rather said the Father is Thomas' God in John 20:17, you don't consider that to be a valid argument against John 20:28? Why is that? Should we follow Thomas' words or Jesus' words?

This is apples and oranges, if that. Peter, along with the rest of the disciples, didn't understand Jesus's true mission and purpose. It is very clear from Jesus's statement to Peter that Peter is just being a mouthpiece for Satan in a vain attempt to dissuade him from his mission.

As for Thomas, that was the first time he saw the risen Christ, who then repeats Thomas's own statements of doubt back to him, despite Jesus not having been present when Thomas stated them. Thomas's response, directly to Jesus and only Jesus, is that he is both his Lord and his God. What does Jesus not respond with? Anything like "Get behind me Satan" or "You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only shall you serve" or "Why do you call me God when the Father alone is God?" or "Why do you blaspheme?". Instead, Jesus responds, "Have you believed because you have seen me?".

Okay, then how about when Jesus directly said one of them (Judas) is a devil?

John 6​

70Jesus answered them, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!”​

And here is the heart of the matter. I have given numerous verses and passages that unequivocally show that Jesus is also deity, some of which have gone completely unaddressed. And I completely agree that deity can never cease to be deity, which is why as deity Jesus never ceased to be deity, although it was largely veiled by his humanity. What I do not do is to use those verses to override the teaching of other verses that clearly show Jesus's humanity, that he is also truly human. It isn't either or, it's both and.

Okay, so you completely agree that deity can never cease to be deity. Why does Jesus demonstrate he doesn't have God powers sometimes and then other times exercises god-like powers? What was something Jesus did that is one of his exclusives that the disciples couldn't do?

Anti-Trinitarians, however, take those verses which show Jesus's humanity and override those which clearly show his deity; they get completely reinterpreted to mean something other than what they clearly state. That is precisely one of those things that can be done but should never be done, as there is absolutely no warrant for doing so. Both must always be taken together and made sense of, but that is the one thing anti-Trinitarians refuse to do.

You quoted Colossians 1:13-20 above, but it says that he isn't the invisible God. It doesn't even call Jesus God. Yes I require Jesus to be called God for him to be God. Yes I am aware of Hebrews 1:8 and other miscellaneous verses, but their context doesn't support Jesus being God Almighty, but rather a god not unlike the same word used for regular people.

John 10​

34Jesus replied, “Is it not written in your Law: ‘I have said you are gods’?​

 

[Free]

Well, then why are you promoting the Trinity? Surely this isn't the time and place to bring up all of the contradictions the Trinity causes as if it would be the first time they've been seen.

Because the Trinity is the best explanation of the nature of God based on what God reveals of himself in Scripture.

Why did Jesus exclude the Holy Spirit as being someone the Father and Son knows?

Matt 11​

27All things have been entrusted to Me by My Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal Him.​

How does excluding the Holy Spirit in this instance prove anything? What about Matt 28:19 where Jesus includes the Holy Spirit, along with himself and the Father, in the one name?

How is God composed of co-equal members when they clearly aren't equal?

Hebrews 1​

8But about the Son He says:​

“Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever,​

and justice is the scepter of Your kingdom.​

9You have loved righteousness​

and hated wickedness;​

therefore God, Your God, has anointed You​

above Your companions with the oil of joy."​

​

There are just too many to list so I'll just post two and see if the outcome is any different than before.

As I have pointed out repeatedly, you're taking things completely out of context by ignoring what other passages of Scripture make clear, particularly Phil 2:6-8. It is also worth noting here that you didn't include Heb 1:10-12, where, as a continuation of verse 8's "But about the Son He says," we see the Father applying Psalm 102:25-27 to the Son. The passage speaks of Yahweh creating the heavens and the earth. That is to say that the Father attributes creation to the Son as Yahweh, and that is within the context of showing the superiority of the Son to angels. The Son is superior because he is creator, not creature. There is no other meaning of this passage.

So even though Jesus never said he's Thomas' God, but rather said the Father is Thomas' God in John 20:17, you don't consider that to be a valid argument against John 20:28? Why is that? Should we follow Thomas' words or Jesus' words?

We follow both. Again, as I pointed out, you are taking the verses which clearly show Jesus's humanity and making them reinterpret (misinterpret) those that speak clearly of his deity, without any basis for doing so.

Okay, then how about when Jesus directly said one of them (Judas) is a devil?

John 6​

70Jesus answered them, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!”​

What about it?

Okay, so you completely agree that deity can never cease to be deity. Why does Jesus demonstrate he doesn't have God powers sometimes and then other times exercises god-like powers? What was something Jesus did that is one of his exclusives that the disciples couldn't do?

Again, read Phil 2:6-8.

You quoted Colossians 1:13-20 above, but it says that he isn't the invisible God. It doesn't even call Jesus God. Yes I require Jesus to be called God for him to be God. Yes I am aware of Hebrews 1:8 and other miscellaneous verses, but their context doesn't support Jesus being God Almighty, but rather a god not unlike the same word used for regular people.

John 10​

34Jesus replied, “Is it not written in your Law: ‘I have said you are gods’?​

Once again, you are ignoring all context. There is no other meaning from Col 1:16-17 than that Jesus was involved in the creation of everything, just as is stated in John 1:3 and Heb 1:10-12. It simply cannot mean anything else. So, there is only one logical conclusion: if the Son was involved in the creation of everything that was ever created, then it necessarily follows that he cannot be something that was created and has always existed But, that is an attribute of God alone. Therefore, the Son shares in the nature of God. And we can affirm that because we know that every single son is of the same nature as his father.

We are to use our God-given reason to think deeply about these things, not that the conclusion I gave requires deep thinking; it's actually pretty basic logic. But it is a sound argument.

God himself said that he is the only God (the only actual deity) that there never has been nor will be another God or god. So, Jesus is not "a god," nor is anyone else, but that requires a proper understanding of the use of theos in Scripture and what it means when it is applied to people as opposed to the three divine persons.

 

[JLB]

The Angel of the LORD isn't YHWH according to Scrpture. YHWH and the Angel of the LORD have a conversation. Therefore they are not the same person.

Zechariah 1
12Then the angel of the LORD said, “How long, O LORD of Hosts, will You withhold mercy from Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, with which You have been angry these seventy years?”

13So the LORD spoke kind and comforting words to the angel who was speaking with me.

14Then the angel who was speaking with me said, “Proclaim this word: This is what the LORD of Hosts says: ‘I am very jealous for Jerusalem and Zion, 15but I am fiercely angry with the nations that are at ease. For I was a little angry, but they have added to the calamity.b’

Clearly the Angel of the LORD is YHWH, the Son, not YHWH the Father.

Here we see that the Angel of the LORD is the LORD.

The Angel of the LORD is God.

Not God the Father, but God the Son; The WORD.

Notice the progression of understanding here in this passage -

The Angel of the LORD
The LORD
God

• And the Angel of the LORD appeared to him...
• So when the LORD saw that he turned aside to look
• God called to him from the midst of the bush

Moses was encountering; both seeing and speaking with the Angel of the LORD in the burning bush.


The result of this was Moses... hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God.

Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian. And he led the flock to the back of the desert, and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. And the Angel of the LORD appeared to him in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush. So he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, but the bush was not consumed. Then Moses said, “I will now turn aside and see this great sight, why the bush does not burn.”
So when the LORD saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, “Moses, Moses!” And he said, “Here I am.”
Then He said, “Do not draw near this place. Take your sandals off your feet, for the place where you stand is holy ground.” Moreover He said, “I am the God of your father—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God. Exodus 3:1-6


Please understand that the Angel of the LORD is not God the Father, but The Word, the Son of God.




JLB

 

[Runningman]

Because the Trinity is the best explanation of the nature of God based on what God reveals of himself in Scripture.

It isn't. John 17:3 says the Father is the only true God. That alone is in complete disharmony with the Trinity doctrine.

How does excluding the Holy Spirit in this instance prove anything? What about Matt 28:19 where Jesus includes the Holy Spirit, along with himself and the Father, in the one name?

Jesus said "no one" knows them aside from those they chose to reveal. Since the Holy Spirit is a distinct person in Trinitarianism then by Jesus' words he did not say the Holy Spirit is someone who knows them.

As I have pointed out repeatedly, you're taking things completely out of context by ignoring what other passages of Scripture make clear, particularly Phil 2:6-8.

Philippians 2:5-8 disprove the deity of Jesus so I have not taken anything out of context. You are taking those verse out of context.

Philippians 2:5 begins with telling them to have the same mind as Jesus. After that, Paul explains for them how to have the mind of Jesus. Paul is not teaching them how to believe they are God.

It is also worth noting here that you didn't include Heb 1:10-12, where, as a continuation of verse 8's "But about the Son He says," we see the Father applying Psalm 102:25-27 to the Son. The passage speaks of Yahweh creating the heavens and the earth. That is to say that the Father attributes creation to the Son as Yahweh, and that is within the context of showing the superiority of the Son to angels. The Son is superior because he is creator, not creature. There is no other meaning of this passage.

Hebrews 1:9 refers to the Son who was anointed by his God. Therefore, the one doing the anointing in Hebrews 1:10 is YHWH, not Jesus. That's why Hebrews 1:10 begins with the word "and" because it's conjoined with Hebrews 1:9. This also disproves the deity of Jesus. There is no way around this.

We follow both. Again, as I pointed out, you are taking the verses which clearly show Jesus's humanity and making them reinterpret (misinterpret) those that speak clearly of his deity, without any basis for doing so.

God isn't a human under any circumstances. The Bible clearly says that a human as God is idolatry and is a sin because humans are creatures. It's all in Romans 1.

Again, read Phil 2:6-8.

Love this passage and I use it as often as I can to explain how Jesus isn't God.

Aside from verse 5 being Paul's premise as to what verses 6-8 are about, verse 6 says Jesus existed in the "form" of God. That word form means the visual outward appearance. It is used in the New Testament and Septuagint to refer to what one can visually see in regards to shape or form. It means Jesus isn't godly, righteous, etc.

Once again, you are ignoring all context. There is no other meaning from Col 1:16-17 than that Jesus was involved in the creation of everything, just as is stated in John 1:3 and Heb 1:10-12. It simply cannot mean anything else.

Colossians 1:15-20 refers to the creation of the church. There is no other possible thing a man could have created. Frist of all, verse 15 makes it clear from the get go that Jesus isn't God, but rather than image of the invisible God. That means Jesus isn't the invisible God. I don't need to explain anymore after I have shown that Jesus isn't God. The correct way to understand the rest is that Jesus isn't the Creator because he isn't God. The passage here talks about what God made "through" Jesus.

So, there is only one logical conclusion: if the Son was involved in the creation of everything that was ever created, then it necessarily follows that he cannot be something that was created and has always existed But, that is an attribute of God alone. Therefore, the Son shares in the nature of God. And we can affirm that because we know that every single son is of the same nature as his father.

Not according to scripture. Matthew 11:25 refers to the Father as the Lord of heaven and earth and Acts 17:24 refers to God as the Lord of heaven and earth who made all things. Since Jesus was never called the Lord of heaven and earth, then he isn't the creator.

In Acts 4:23-27, John and Peter demonstrated their believe that Jesus isn't God or the creator by praying to the Sovereign Lord and Creator while referring to Jesus as His servant.

Isaiah 44:24 makes plain that God created alone.

Not sure how to make this any plainer.

We are to use our God-given reason to think deeply about these things, not that the conclusion I gave requires deep thinking; it's actually pretty basic logic. But it is a sound argument.

They make sense when the context isn't taken into full consideration, but I couldn't in good conscience just snip select verses out of context and say they mean something that completely changes when the verses surrounding them are read with them.

God himself said that he is the only God (the only actual deity) that there never has been nor will be another God or god. So, Jesus is not "a god," nor is anyone else, but that requires a proper understanding of the use of theos in Scripture and what it means when it is applied to people as opposed to the three divine persons.

Indeed. Yet John 17:3 says the Father is the only true God. That word only means only, solitary. That means the Father in your Trinity is the only true God and the others aren't the true God.

 

[Runningman]

Clearly the Angel of the LORD is YHWH, the Son, not YHWH the Father.

Here we see that the Angel of the LORD is the LORD.

The Angel of the LORD is God.

Not God the Father, but God the Son; The WORD.

Notice the progression of understanding here in this passage -

The Angel of the LORD
The LORD
God

• And the Angel of the LORD appeared to him...
• So when the LORD saw that he turned aside to look
• God called to him from the midst of the bush

Moses was encountering; both seeing and speaking with the Angel of the LORD in the burning bush.


The result of this was Moses... hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God.

Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian. And he led the flock to the back of the desert, and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. And the Angel of the LORD appeared to him in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush. So he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, but the bush was not consumed. Then Moses said, “I will now turn aside and see this great sight, why the bush does not burn.”
So when the LORD saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, “Moses, Moses!” And he said, “Here I am.”
Then He said, “Do not draw near this place. Take your sandals off your feet, for the place where you stand is holy ground.” Moreover He said, “I am the God of your father—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God. Exodus 3:1-6


Please understand that the Angel of the LORD is not God the Father, but The Word, the Son of God.




JLB

Clearly the angel of the LORD is not the LORD. That means the angel of the LORD is not YHWH. Therefore, the angel isn't God.

Below, you will see plainly that the angel of the LORD is speaking to the LORD and vice versa. Since two different persons are having a conversation with each other then that means they aren't the same person speaking to themselves.

Zechariah 1
12Then the angel of the LORD said, “How long, O LORD of Hosts, will You withhold mercy from Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, with which You have been angry these seventy years?”

13So the LORD spoke kind and comforting words to the angel who was speaking with me.

14Then the angel who was speaking with me said, “Proclaim this word: This is what the LORD of Hosts says: ‘I am very jealous for Jerusalem and Zion, 15but I am fiercely angry with the nations that are at ease. For I was a little angry, but they have added to the calamity.b’

 

[JLB]

Clearly the angel of the LORD is not the LORD. That means the angel of the LORD is not YHWH. Therefore, the angel isn't God.

Below, you will see plainly that the angel of the LORD is speaking to the LORD and vice versa. Since two different persons are having a conversation with each other then that means they aren't the same person speaking to themselves.

Zechariah 1
12Then the angel of the LORD said, “How long, O LORD of Hosts, will You withhold mercy from Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, with which You have been angry these seventy years?”

13So the LORD spoke kind and comforting words to the angel who was speaking with me.

14Then the angel who was speaking with me said, “Proclaim this word: This is what the LORD of Hosts says: ‘I am very jealous for Jerusalem and Zion, 15but I am fiercely angry with the nations that are at ease. For I was a little angry, but they have added to the calamity.b’

Where in these verses does it say the Angel of the LORD is not the LORD?

The Angel of the LORD is the LORD and God.

Clearly the Angel of the LORD is YHWH, the Son, not YHWH the Father.

Here we see that the Angel of the LORD is the LORD.

The Angel of the LORD is God.

Not God the Father, but God the Son; The WORD.

Notice the progression of understanding here in this passage -

The Angel of the LORD
The LORD
God

• And the Angel of the LORD appeared to him...
• So when the LORD saw that he turned aside to look
• God called to him from the midst of the bush

Moses was encountering; both seeing and speaking with the Angel of the LORD in the burning bush.


The result of this was Moses... hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God.

Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian. And he led the flock to the back of the desert, and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. And the Angel of the LORD appeared to him in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush. So he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, but the bush was not consumed. Then Moses said, “I will now turn aside and see this great sight, why the bush does not burn.”
So when the LORD saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, “Moses, Moses!” And he said, “Here I am.”
Then He said, “Do not draw near this place. Take your sandals off your feet, for the place where you stand is holy ground.” Moreover He said, “I am the God of your father—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God. Exodus 3:1-6


Please understand that the Angel of the LORD is not God the Father, but The Word, the Son of God.

 

[Runningman]

Where in these verses does it say the Angel of the LORD is not the LORD?

The Angel of the LORD is the LORD and God.

Clearly the Angel of the LORD is YHWH, the Son, not YHWH the Father.

Here we see that the Angel of the LORD is the LORD.

The Angel of the LORD is God.

Not God the Father, but God the Son; The WORD.

Notice the progression of understanding here in this passage -

The Angel of the LORD
The LORD
God

• And the Angel of the LORD appeared to him...
• So when the LORD saw that he turned aside to look
• God called to him from the midst of the bush

Moses was encountering; both seeing and speaking with the Angel of the LORD in the burning bush.


The result of this was Moses... hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God.

Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian. And he led the flock to the back of the desert, and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. And the Angel of the LORD appeared to him in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush. So he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, but the bush was not consumed. Then Moses said, “I will now turn aside and see this great sight, why the bush does not burn.”
So when the LORD saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, “Moses, Moses!” And he said, “Here I am.”
Then He said, “Do not draw near this place. Take your sandals off your feet, for the place where you stand is holy ground.” Moreover He said, “I am the God of your father—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God. Exodus 3:1-6


Please understand that the Angel of the LORD is not God the Father, but The Word, the Son of God.

Well, the angel of the LORD isn't the LORD in Zechariah 1:12-14 beyond any doubt. So the angel of the LORD isn't suddenly God in one place and then completely stripped of all deity in the next place. That would mean the angel isn't YHWH or Jesus.

You seem to be doing the same thing the JWs do when they find similarities between angels and Jesus and then say that Jesus is Michael the archangel who would fit the qualification for being the LORD's angel. The Trinitarians take a different turn and find similarities between Jesus and God and then say Jesus is God. Same thing happening here it seems.

I believe the error you're making is one of eisegesis which would be a kind of reading into or making a presupposition about what the text says. The unwritten/unspoken assertion you seem to be making is that if the angel of the LORD is present and then the LORD speaks then the angel is the LORD. For starters, that isn't what the Bible says. For two, angels are actually literally messengers, meaning they speak for God. For three, an angel of the LORD and the LORD can be in close proximity without being the same person. It happened in Zechariah 1:12-14 and the angel of the LORD is in the presence of the LORD (see Isaiah 63:9.)

The LORD speaks through angels (His messengers) not that angels are the LORD. Acts 7:53, Hebrews 2:2

 

[JLB]

Well, the angel of the LORD isn't the LORD in Zechariah 1:12-14 beyond any doubt.

I have plainly shown where the Angel of the LORD is YHWH and God, in Exodus 3:1-14

As i asked, please show me in the passages you quote where it says the Angel of the LORD, is not YHWH, the LORD.


The same Angel of the LORD in Zechariah 1 says these words...


Then the Angel of the LORD admonished Joshua, saying, “Thus says the LORD of hosts:
‘If you will walk in My ways,
And if you will keep My command,
Then you shall also judge My house,
And likewise have charge of My courts;
I will give you places to walk
Among these who stand here. Zechariah 3:6-7

 

[Runningman]

I have plainly shown where the Angel of the LORD is YHWH and God, in Exodus 3:1-14

As i asked, please show me in the passages you quote where it says the Angel of the LORD, is not YHWH, the LORD.


The same Angel of the LORD in Zechariah 1 says these words...


Then the Angel of the LORD admonished Joshua, saying, “Thus says the LORD of hosts:
‘If you will walk in My ways,
And if you will keep My command,
Then you shall also judge My house,
And likewise have charge of My courts;
I will give you places to walk
Among these who stand here. Zechariah 3:6-7

What is unclear about this for you? In Zechariah 1, the angel of the LORD and the LORD are talking to each other. The angel of the LORD and the LORD are not the same person. It says the angel of the LORD is repeating what the LORD said.

That means the angel of the LORD isn't God. No way around it.

11And the riders answered the angel of the LORD who was standing among the myrtle trees, “We have patrolled the earth, and behold, all the earth is at rest and tranquil.”

12Then the angel of the LORD said, “How long, O LORD of Hosts, will You withhold mercy from Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, with which You have been angry these seventy years?”

13So the LORD spoke kind and comforting words to the angel who was speaking with me.

14Then the angel who was speaking with me said, “Proclaim this word: This is what the LORD of Hosts says: ‘I am very jealous for Jerusalem and Zion, 15but I am fiercely angry with the nations that are at ease. For I was a little angry, but they have added to the calamity.b’

16Therefore this is what the LORD says: ‘I will return to Jerusalem with mercy, and there My house will be rebuilt, declares the LORD of Hosts, and a measuring line will be stretched out over Jerusalem.’

 

[JLB]

That means the angel of the LORD isn't God. No way around it.

No it doesn't.

It means the Angel of the LORD is not God the Father, as I have said, and as I have shown, clearly.

The same Angel of the LORD in Zechariah 1 says these words...


Then the Angel of the LORD admonished Joshua, saying, “Thus says the LORD of hosts:
‘If you will walk in My ways,
And if you will keep My command,
Then you shall also judge My house,
And likewise have charge of My courts;
I will give you places to walk
Among these who stand here. Zechariah 3:6-7


Plainly and without any doubt, the Angel of the LORD is the LORD, and GOD.


1 Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian. And he led the flock to the back of the desert, and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. 2 And the Angel of the LORD appeared to him in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush. So he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, but the bush was not consumed. 3 Then Moses said, “I will now turn aside and see this great sight, why the bush does not burn.”
4 So when the LORD saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, “Moses, Moses! ”And he said, “Here I am.” 5 Then He said, “Do not draw near this place. Take your sandals off your feet, for the place where you stand is holy ground.” 6 Moreover He said, “I am the God of your father—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God. Exodus 3:1-6



And the Angel of the LORD appeared to him in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush.

So when the LORD saw that he turned aside to look...

God called to him from the midst of the bush


Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God.






JLB

 

[Runningman]

It means the Angel of the LORD is not God the Father, as I have said, and as I have shown, clearly.

Think about what you said though. This is exactly what I am saying as well. The angel of the LORD is not the Father. Then what are we debating about? That means the angel of the LORD isn’t God like I have been saying.

The Father is the only true God.

John 17
1When Jesus had spoken these things, He lifted up His eyes to heaven and said, “Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son may glorify You. 2For You granted Him authority over all people,aso that He may give eternal life to all those You have given Him. 3Now this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent.