We can know not before Rev 11. We can't know that date. When those signs are fulfilled then the saints who are wise and know their Lord can know the Lords return is imminent.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
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/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
Jesus Is God: Part 1
- Thread starter Hidden In Him
- Start date
Sister
CF Ambassador
I was thinking about this, but thought I'd tag you WalterandDebbie . I know you think a bit differently. I wasn't sure if you liked participating in discussions like this or not.
Sister
CF Ambassador
Doing much better this week I have to say.
Thank you for asking! I hope you are well also.I know you said before you do not believe in the deity of Christ. I have thought about that since then, because definitely theology colors how you think and live out the Bible. I had even questioned if not believing Jesus as God was a salvation issue, but you definitely believe in what Jesus Christ did and the power of His blood/that He is the Son of God. And you confess Jesus as Lord and definitely show the fruits of a Christian.
I wondered what you thought of the verses that do point to Jesus being God.
Hi Sister, I'm happy to hear that you are well, The scriptures can not be broken rightly divided of course, but the best way is when the words of Christ brings revelation to what He is saying in John 4:24, that GOD is a spirit, and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth.Doing much better this week I have to say.
I know you said before you do not believe in the deity of Christ. I have thought about that since then, because definitely theology colors how you think and live out the Bible. I had even questioned if not believing Jesus as God was a salvation issue, but you definitely believe in what Jesus Christ did and the power of His blood/that He is the Son of God. And you confess Jesus as Lord and definitely show the fruits of a Christian.
I wondered what you thought of the verses that do point to Jesus being God.
I ponder about this for years, however, with that kind of statement, I truly believe that He is the spoken word of GOD, the Logos, because GOD was in Him reconciling the world unto himself. 2 Cor. 5:19.
“God was Manifest in the flesh” (I Tim. 3:16 KJV) “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory”
Love, Walter
Last edited:
Fascinating question. I've pondered upon the same question.
We are saved by faith.
Faith must include content.
Everyone's content is incorrect to a degree, it being incorrect is missing.
So, how many errors in the content of faith make it a faith that does not save?
Aside: There are so many varying answers.
Sister
CF Ambassador
Amen Jesus is the Spoken Word of God.
"1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
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.
1 John 1:1,14
Sister
CF Ambassador
I guess I think as a child to an extent. A child is not like a pharisee or thinks about all these deep theological things. It is simple. This is what God's Word says:
"8But what does it say? “The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,”d that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming: 9that if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For with your heart you believe and are justified, and with your mouth you confess and are saved."
Romans 10:8-10
But then at the same time we have to be like 2 Corinthians 10:5 and have an answer ready for anyone who asks us.
"We are destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God and we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ."
It can be confusing listening to different interpretations of scripture and I want to rightly divide truth.
Agreed.
Aside: we all strive for truth; we all come short to varying degrees.
Sister
CF Ambassador
For sure. There is clear battle for every one of our souls (our minds) as well as our spirits. But constantly reading the Word of God brings more and more revelation. Holy Spirit will guide us into all Truth.
I asked my sister to watch my church service on tv and she did.
She called me and said, for forty years i saw Jesus as my master, never as my savior.
Now after this program, I see the light and for the first time I am really filled with the Spirit of God.
She called me and said, for forty years i saw Jesus as my master, never as my savior.
Now after this program, I see the light and for the first time I am really filled with the Spirit of God.
Sister
CF Ambassador
WalterandDebbie so when you say you believe Jesus is the logos, do you believe like this? What do you think about this?
I know our true selves are spirits within fleshly bodies. But I do believe Jesus Spirit is different then Holy Spirit, because He ascended in His glorified body in order to send down the Holy Spirit to us. But Jesus was also the only begotten of the Father, so while we are all sons and daughters of God and heirs to His kingdom, I believe that Jesus is God (deity) as the only begotten of God.
I think you are getting too complicated.
Keep it simple, much better.
Sister
CF Ambassador
I guess it sounds simple to me, but it is just my reasoning. That is just wonderful about your sister.
Logos
Logos is a term in Western philosophy, psychology, rhetoric, and religion derived from a Greek word variously meaning "ground", "plea", "opinion", "expectation", "word", "speech", "account", "reason", "proportion", and "discourse". It became a technical term in Western philosophy beginning with Heraclitus, who used the term for a principle of order and knowledge.
Logos
Logos is a term in Western philosophy, psychology, rhetoric, and religion derived from a Greek word variously meaning "ground", "plea", "opinion", "expectation", "word", "speech", "account", "reason", "proportion", and "discourse". It became a technical term in Western philosophy beginning with Heraclitus, who used the term for a principle of order and knowledge.
John 17:1-5
17 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
I can tell you this: As said in the OP, this thread was created after recognizing another forum was now being theologically dominated by Jehovahs Witnesses and Unitarians, both of whom reject the belief in Jesus as God. I have other arguments I can use and plan to down the road, but I can assure you from getting more heavily into this now that there is no way an orthodox Christian could effectively win a debate on this particular subject without having knowledge of the original texts and how Greek operates. Very heady debate unlike anything I've encountered before.
(On a side note, I was watching a teaching on tithing today, and realized what a piece of cake that debate is compared to this one, and I once thought it was a hard one to argue - pro or con - as well).
At the same time, however, I do think those who don't necessarily have the hermeneutical skills necessary to cipher through this entire discussion can still be able to discern truth from falsehood. All it really requires is asking the Holy Spirit to guide you into all truth, and then resting in the peace of knowing that He will; that He will lead you to those who teach and preach the truth. I mention the peace of God because one cannot hear the Holy Spirit's voice and leading very well if they get into anxieties and fear, so remaining childlike in the sense of trusting Him is a very good way to put it.
As for what is necessary in order to be saved, I think the way things come into play as far as what we know and what we do is in the following: Those who stand up as authoritative teachers of the word of God will be held to a higher standard (James 3:1). Those who are doing their best to understand the word and simply don't understand certain truths accurately are in a different place than those who publicly profess to be teaching the true oracles of God but are not. And, in the case of those who strongly advocate large amounts of false teaching like the Jehovahs Witnesses do, they are placing themselves in danger spiritually by causing division, confusion and uncertainty in the minds of God's children. Understand, I don't like thinking of anyone going to Hell over such matters, but as Paul said in Corinthians, "whoever destroys the temple of God, him the Lord will destroy," and I have to believe the same thing still applies today just as it did back then.
tigger 2
Member
W&D #65 above:
“God was Manifest in the flesh” (I Tim. 3:16 KJV) “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory”
............
Noted Bible scholar Dr. Frederick C. Grant writes:
“A capital example [of NT manuscript changes] is found in 1 Timothy 3:16, where ‘OS’ (OC or ὃς, ‘who’) was later taken for theta sigma with a bar above, which stood for theos (θεὸς, ‘god’). Since the new reading suited …. the orthodox doctrine of the church [trinitarian, at this later date], it got into many of the later manuscripts ….” – p. 656, Encyclopedia Americana, vol. 3, 1957 ed. (This same statement by Dr. Grant was still to be found in the latest Encyclopedia Americana that I examined – the 1990 ed., pp. 696-698, vol. 3.)
A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament by the United Bible Societies (1971 ed.) tells why the trinitarian UBS Committee chose ὃς [‘who’ or ‘he who’] as the original reading in their NT text for this verse:
“it is supported by the earliest and best uncials.” And, “Thus, no uncial (in the first hand [by the ORIGINAL writer]) earlier than the eighth or ninth century supports θεὸς [“God”]; all ancient versions presuppose ὃς [or OC, “who” - masc.] or ὅ [“which” - neut.]; and no patristic writer prior to the last third of the fourth century [ca. 370 A.D.] testifies to the reading θεὸς. The reading θεὸς arose either (a) accidentally, through the misreading of OC as ΘC, or (b) deliberately....” - p. 641.
In actuality it appears to be a combination of both (with the emphasis on the latter). You see, the word ὃς was written in the most ancient manuscripts as OC (“C” being a common form for the ancient Greek letter “S” at that time). Most often at this time the word for God (θεὸς) was written in abbreviated form as ΘC. However, to show that it was an abbreviated form, a straight line, or bar, was always drawn above ΘC. So no copyist should have mistaken ὃς (or OC) for ΘC, in spite of their similarities, simply because of the prominent bar which appeared over the one and not over the other.
What may have happened was discovered by John J. Wetstein in 1714. As he was carefully examining one of the oldest NT manuscripts then known (the Alexandrine Manuscript in London) he noticed at 1 Tim. 3:16 that the word originally written there was OC but that a horizontal stroke from one of the words written on the other side of the manuscript showed through very faintly in the middle of the O. This still would not qualify as an abbreviation for θεὸς, of course, but Wetstein discovered that some person at a much later date and in a different style from the original writer had deliberately added a bar above the original word! Anyone copying from this manuscript after it had been deliberately changed would be likely to incorporate the counterfeit ΘC [with bar above it] into his new copy (especially since it reflected his own trinitarian views)!
Of course, since Wetstein’s day many more ancient NT manuscripts have been discovered and none of them before the eighth century A.D. have been found with ΘC (“God”) at this verse!
Trinitarian scholar Murray J. Harris also concludes:
“The strength of the external evidence favoring OC [‘who’], along with considerations of transcriptional and intrinsic probability, have prompted textual critics virtually unanimously to regard OC as the original text, a judgment reflected in NA(26) [Nestle-Aland text] and UBS (1,2,3) [United Bible Societies text] (with a ‘B’ rating) [also the Westcott & Hort text]. Accordingly, 1 Tim 3:16 is not an instance of the Christological [‘Jesus is God’] use of θεὸς.” - Jesus as God, p. 268, Baker Book House, 1992.
And very trinitarian (Southern Baptist) NT Greek scholar A. T. Robertson wrote about this scripture:
“He who (hos [or OC in the original text]). The correct text, not theos (God) the reading of the Textus Receptus ... nor ho (neuter relative [pronoun]), agreeing with [the neuter] musterion [‘mystery’] the reading of Western documents.” - p. 577, Vol. 4, Word Pictures in the New Testament, Broadman Press.
And even hyper-trinitarian NT Greek scholar, Daniel B. Wallace uses the relative pronoun ὃς (‘who’) in this scripture and tells us:
“The textual variant θεὸς [‘god’] in the place of ὃς [‘who’ or ‘he who’] has been adamantly defended by some scholars, particularly those of the ‘majority text’ school. Not only is such a reading poorly attested, but the syntactical argument that ‘mystery’ (μυστήριον) being a neuter noun, cannot be followed by the masculine pronoun (ὃς) is entirely without weight. As attractive theologically [for trinitarians, of course] as the reading θεὸς may be, it is spurious. To reject it is not to deny the deity of Christ, of course; it is just to deny any explicit reference in this text.” [italicized emphasis is by Wallace]. - pp. 341-342, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Zondervan, 1996.
The correct rendering of 1 Tim. 3:16, then, is: “He who was revealed in the flesh ….” - NASB. Cf. ASV; RSV; NRSV; NAB; JB; NJB; NIV; NEB; REB; ESV; Douay-Rheims; TEV; CEV; BBE; NLV; God’s Word; New Century Version; Holman NT; ISV NT; Lexham English Bible; The Message; Weymouth; Moffatt; etc.
Even if we were to insist that those later manuscripts that used theos were, somehow, correct, we would have to recognize that it is the anarthrous (without the definite article) theos which we find. This is rarely, if ever, the form used for the only true God (when the known exceptions are taken into account - see MARTIN study). Instead, it either points to the probability that it is a corrupted OC (which of course would not have the article in the first place), or, less probable, but still possible, that Christ is being called “a god”
“God was Manifest in the flesh” (I Tim. 3:16 KJV) “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory”
............
Noted Bible scholar Dr. Frederick C. Grant writes:
“A capital example [of NT manuscript changes] is found in 1 Timothy 3:16, where ‘OS’ (OC or ὃς, ‘who’) was later taken for theta sigma with a bar above, which stood for theos (θεὸς, ‘god’). Since the new reading suited …. the orthodox doctrine of the church [trinitarian, at this later date], it got into many of the later manuscripts ….” – p. 656, Encyclopedia Americana, vol. 3, 1957 ed. (This same statement by Dr. Grant was still to be found in the latest Encyclopedia Americana that I examined – the 1990 ed., pp. 696-698, vol. 3.)
A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament by the United Bible Societies (1971 ed.) tells why the trinitarian UBS Committee chose ὃς [‘who’ or ‘he who’] as the original reading in their NT text for this verse:
“it is supported by the earliest and best uncials.” And, “Thus, no uncial (in the first hand [by the ORIGINAL writer]) earlier than the eighth or ninth century supports θεὸς [“God”]; all ancient versions presuppose ὃς [or OC, “who” - masc.] or ὅ [“which” - neut.]; and no patristic writer prior to the last third of the fourth century [ca. 370 A.D.] testifies to the reading θεὸς. The reading θεὸς arose either (a) accidentally, through the misreading of OC as ΘC, or (b) deliberately....” - p. 641.
In actuality it appears to be a combination of both (with the emphasis on the latter). You see, the word ὃς was written in the most ancient manuscripts as OC (“C” being a common form for the ancient Greek letter “S” at that time). Most often at this time the word for God (θεὸς) was written in abbreviated form as ΘC. However, to show that it was an abbreviated form, a straight line, or bar, was always drawn above ΘC. So no copyist should have mistaken ὃς (or OC) for ΘC, in spite of their similarities, simply because of the prominent bar which appeared over the one and not over the other.
What may have happened was discovered by John J. Wetstein in 1714. As he was carefully examining one of the oldest NT manuscripts then known (the Alexandrine Manuscript in London) he noticed at 1 Tim. 3:16 that the word originally written there was OC but that a horizontal stroke from one of the words written on the other side of the manuscript showed through very faintly in the middle of the O. This still would not qualify as an abbreviation for θεὸς, of course, but Wetstein discovered that some person at a much later date and in a different style from the original writer had deliberately added a bar above the original word! Anyone copying from this manuscript after it had been deliberately changed would be likely to incorporate the counterfeit ΘC [with bar above it] into his new copy (especially since it reflected his own trinitarian views)!
Of course, since Wetstein’s day many more ancient NT manuscripts have been discovered and none of them before the eighth century A.D. have been found with ΘC (“God”) at this verse!
Trinitarian scholar Murray J. Harris also concludes:
“The strength of the external evidence favoring OC [‘who’], along with considerations of transcriptional and intrinsic probability, have prompted textual critics virtually unanimously to regard OC as the original text, a judgment reflected in NA(26) [Nestle-Aland text] and UBS (1,2,3) [United Bible Societies text] (with a ‘B’ rating) [also the Westcott & Hort text]. Accordingly, 1 Tim 3:16 is not an instance of the Christological [‘Jesus is God’] use of θεὸς.” - Jesus as God, p. 268, Baker Book House, 1992.
And very trinitarian (Southern Baptist) NT Greek scholar A. T. Robertson wrote about this scripture:
“He who (hos [or OC in the original text]). The correct text, not theos (God) the reading of the Textus Receptus ... nor ho (neuter relative [pronoun]), agreeing with [the neuter] musterion [‘mystery’] the reading of Western documents.” - p. 577, Vol. 4, Word Pictures in the New Testament, Broadman Press.
And even hyper-trinitarian NT Greek scholar, Daniel B. Wallace uses the relative pronoun ὃς (‘who’) in this scripture and tells us:
“The textual variant θεὸς [‘god’] in the place of ὃς [‘who’ or ‘he who’] has been adamantly defended by some scholars, particularly those of the ‘majority text’ school. Not only is such a reading poorly attested, but the syntactical argument that ‘mystery’ (μυστήριον) being a neuter noun, cannot be followed by the masculine pronoun (ὃς) is entirely without weight. As attractive theologically [for trinitarians, of course] as the reading θεὸς may be, it is spurious. To reject it is not to deny the deity of Christ, of course; it is just to deny any explicit reference in this text.” [italicized emphasis is by Wallace]. - pp. 341-342, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Zondervan, 1996.
The correct rendering of 1 Tim. 3:16, then, is: “He who was revealed in the flesh ….” - NASB. Cf. ASV; RSV; NRSV; NAB; JB; NJB; NIV; NEB; REB; ESV; Douay-Rheims; TEV; CEV; BBE; NLV; God’s Word; New Century Version; Holman NT; ISV NT; Lexham English Bible; The Message; Weymouth; Moffatt; etc.
Even if we were to insist that those later manuscripts that used theos were, somehow, correct, we would have to recognize that it is the anarthrous (without the definite article) theos which we find. This is rarely, if ever, the form used for the only true God (when the known exceptions are taken into account - see MARTIN study). Instead, it either points to the probability that it is a corrupted OC (which of course would not have the article in the first place), or, less probable, but still possible, that Christ is being called “a god”
christian1724
2024 Supporter
I think he lives in a part of the country where you would rarely hear that term. Yes, "amigo (fem. amiga)" is Spanish for friend. In other parts of the state you are more likely to hear "vato" or "ese" which are similar in meaning.
GodsGrace
CF Ambassador
These same persons call themselves Christian.
It does matter.