Mary, the mother of the Lord

[Runningman]

The God the Son and God the Father are one, Jn. 10:30. Like you the person behind the screen and this avatar on this forum are one.

Being one with someone or something doesn't make that person become that thing or person.

So the disciples become the same person? No? Then when you do say Jesus becomes God?

John 17
21that all of them may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I am in You. May they also be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me.

Check out John 15:1-8 where the relationship between Jesus, his disciples, and God is explained.

 

[Rodger]

So we can have the nature of God?

1 Peter 1
16for it is written: “Be holy, because I am holy.”

Check out Acts 4:24-27. Jesus isn't the Sovereign Lord and Creator there.


Yet God commands us to love, but no one is omnipotent except the Father.

The question was not about US. Your questions are irrevelent to the ops question.

 

[Rodger]

Why can't YHWH be present while the men are also present? That's possible. So where you are making the unwarranted leap into a conclusion not supported by the Scripture is that the men themselves are God since they are never called such. When God speaks it doesn't mean that when someone else speaks that the other person speaking is God. You may have circumstantial evidence based on a very narrow set of verses, but when taking into account that God is not a man then we have a better understanding of Genesis 18. See Numbers 23:19 and Hosea 11:9.

No leap foe me. I believe in the Trinity and Because you do not believe in the Trinity, all of your questions are biased and flawed. You will never find the answers to your questions as the questions are actually based in unbelief.

 

[Rodger]

Then Jesus isn't God because most of what you said does not describe Jesus. I will give you that Jesus has always been holy, but not Sovereign. The Bible says the only Sovereign Lord is God, immortal, eternal, invisible. These are things about God that do not apply to Jesus. Also, throughout his life, Jesus changed a lot spiritually. No examples of Jesus being omnipotent either.

Colossians 1
15The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

1 Timothy 1
17Now to the King eternal, immortal, and invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.

Luke 2
52And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man.

In my experiences I have come across several people just like you. You want people to believe that you know what you are talking about, however you are in the end, a "Skeptic" and a person who does not believe that Jesus is God in the flesh.

You have a problem in that you work hard to place words into the mouths of those you talk with to make it appear that you are not what you say you are.

Example, You just ssaid..........
"Then Jesus isn't God because most of what you said does not describe Jesus."

You see my friend, I DO NOT SAY THAT! That is what you wanted me to say so as to support to skepticism.

Now what I will say is this..........
The Bible’s answer to this question is yes, Jesus Christ is omnipotent, the most powerful being in existence. The Bible tells us in many passages that Jesus is God (e.g. John 1:1, 14; John 20:28; Hebrews 1:8; Revelation 1:17). By definition, God is all-powerful. For God to be God, there cannot be anything above him in power, otherwise the more powerful thing would be God. Since the Bible calls Jesus God, this demands, then, that he must be all-powerful.

John 1:1
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. "

 

[Rodger]

So Mary is not the mother of God?

I suggest that you find and read the findings of the Council of Ephesus in AD 431.
You will find that it there that the use of the Greek term Theotókos (literally, “God-bearer” or “the one who gives birth to God”) was use in reference to Mary. That council’s use of Theotokos was meant to counter the heresy of Nestorianism.

The problem here that resulted by The term mother of God could be taken wrongly as implying that Mary was the source or originator of God, similar to how Juno was the mother of Vulcan in Roman mythology which is exactly what the Catholic church did.

Because you are a skeptic you do not seem to understand that Christianity teaches that God is eternal and that Jesus Christ has a pre-existent, with a divine nature. The idea that Mary is the mother of God in the sense that she was the source of God or somehow predated God or is herself part of the Godhead is patently unbiblical.
Theotokos simply implies that Mary carried God in her womb and gave birth to Him. Mary was the human agent through whom the eternal Son of God took on a human body and a human nature and entered the world. The term Theotokos was a succinct expression of the biblical teaching of the Incarnation, and that is how the Council of Ephesus used the word. Mary is the “God-bearer” in that within her body the divine person of God the Son took on human nature in addition to His pre-existing divine nature. Since Jesus is fully God and fully man, it is correct to say that Mary “bore” God.

Does that answer your question?

 

[Rodger]

So we can have the nature of God?

1 Peter 1
16for it is written: “Be holy, because I am holy.”

Check out Acts 4:24-27. Jesus isn't the Sovereign Lord and Creator there.


Yet God commands us to love, but no one is omnipotent except the Father.

Can we have the nature of God?..........In a word NO!

We are sinners and we have a sin nature which never goes away. Death will end the sin nature when we are glorified at the Rapture.

 

[Rodger]

Not according to Scripture.


Compare that to Hebrews 1:13 where it's God speaking to the Son. Where did you get the idea YHWH means "I am?"

Compare Acts 3:13 to Exodus 3:14,15 where Jesus is not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob but rather His servant. Since Jesus is not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob then he isn't YHWH or the I am.

There are examples of adonai not referring to God. See Genesis 18:3, Genesis 19:2, and Ezra 10:3.

For the word adoni it refers to human lords or masters in the Bible. There are 166 examples of this in the Old Testament.



That would be a false conclusion. The LORD speaking to the Lord is not the same person.

You asked ....."Where did you get the idea YHWH means "I am?"

In the text quoted, the Hebrew Yahweh is used. It is A name given by God as His own, and being a third person name form of the verb to be (namely, "I am"). This name refers to God.
Source: https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com

Adonai is the verbal parallel to Yahweh andJehovah. Adonai is plural; the singular is adon. In reference to God the plural Adonai is used. When the singular adon is used, it usually refers to a human lord.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Jesus was plain about his prescription of worshipping the Father in spirit and truth. It has nothing to do with worshipping Jesus in the process. If we are not giving all of our worship to the Father then that would be the sin of idolatry.

Furthermore, we should not conflate bowing to Jesus with deity worship. While it's true that every knee will bow to Jesus in heaven, earth, and under earth the difference is that all of this glory goes to God the Father, not Jesus.

Revelation states otherwise:

Then I looked, and I heard the voice of many angels around the throne, the living creatures, and the elders; and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice:
“Worthy is the Lamb who was slain
To receive power and riches and wisdom,
And strength and honor and glory and blessing!”
And every creature which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, I heard saying:
“Blessing and honor and glory and power
Be to Him who sits on the throne,
And to the Lamb, forever and ever!”
Then the four living creatures said, “Amen!” And the twenty-four elders fell down and worshiped Him who lives forever and ever. (Rev. 5:11-14)

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

How is that crystal clear when YHWH said He isn't a man? Now you're saying YHWH is a man and relying on flimsy evidence to support that conclusion. Case in point, Gen. 17 & 18 doesn't call the men God. I believe you're conflating God and the men with one another because you're beginning with a presupposition that God is a man. You're doing the same thing people do when they try to say Jacob literally wrestled with God or that the angel of the LORD is the LORD. Both of those claims are disproven by the Scriptures.

Then I ask you again, how is YHWH God's name? It was an ANGEL who appeared to Moses and had the ensuing conversation, right? In your logic, YHWH is that angel's name, not God's, calling God YHWH is conflating that angel of God with God. As long as you address God as YHWH, you're guilty of the same thing you accuse me and those "people" who try to say Jacob literally wrestled with God.

When did your spirit die the first time?

Gal. 2:20.

 

[Runningman]

Revelation states otherwise:

Then I looked, and I heard the voice of many angels around the throne, the living creatures, and the elders; and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice:
“Worthy is the Lamb who was slain
To receive power and riches and wisdom,
And strength and honor and glory and blessing!”
And every creature which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, I heard saying:
“Blessing and honor and glory and power
Be to Him who sits on the throne,
And to the Lamb, forever and ever!”
Then the four living creatures said, “Amen!” And the twenty-four elders fell down and worshiped Him who lives forever and ever. (Rev. 5:11-14)

I am seeing something completely different. Let's use the verses you provided. I would like to draw your attention to verse 11 where it says of those who are around the throne "the voice of many angels around the throne, the living creatures, and the elders" and then verse 13 says "Blessing and honor and glory and power Be to Him who sits on the throne," then verse 14 says "And the twenty-four elders fell down and worshiped Him who lives forever and ever."

So based on the verses you provided, the ones who are worshipping are around the throne. The one on the throne is distinct from the Lamb. When they fell down and worshipped then they fell down before the throne. That means the one on the throne is not the Lamb, but God rather. They didn't worship the Lamb. You can confirm this elsewhere.

Revelation 7
10And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb. 11And all the angels stood round about the throne, and about the elders and the four beasts, and fell before the throne on their faces, and worshipped God,

 

[Runningman]

Then I ask you again, how is YHWH God's name? It was an ANGEL who appeared to Moses and had the ensuing conversation, right? In your logic, YHWH is that angel's name, not God's, calling God YHWH is conflating that angel of God with God. As long as you address God as YHWH, you're guilty of the same thing you accuse me and those "people" who try to say Jacob literally wrestled with God.

Gal. 2:20.

God said His name is YHWH. He said He is the only God. Jesus is never identified as such. This is just what the scripture testifieth of.

Exodus 6
2And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the LORD: 3And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.

 

[Runningman]

The question was not about US. Your questions are irrevelent to the ops question.

It relevant because Christ is a brother among brothers. There is relation.

 

[Runningman]

No leap foe me. I believe in the Trinity and Because you do not believe in the Trinity, all of your questions are biased and flawed. You will never find the answers to your questions as the questions are actually based in unbelief.

So what you're showing awareness of is that we both have different perspectives and beliefs and they create a bias. I would beg to differ because I don't believe in digging my hooves in and bullheadedly refusing to change when new information becomes available. Something I have learned early on is that we need to remain open to instruction. If we remain humble we can always be teachable. So I actually used to be a Trinitarian many a year ago before I actually knew what the Bible says. They told me to be a Berean and I never lost that mindset. So why is there no explicit declaration or explanation of the Trinity in the Bible?

 

[Runningman]

In my experiences I have come across several people just like you. You want people to believe that you know what you are talking about, however you are in the end, a "Skeptic" and a person who does not believe that Jesus is God in the flesh.

You have a problem in that you work hard to place words into the mouths of those you talk with to make it appear that you are not what you say you are.

Example, You just ssaid..........
"Then Jesus isn't God because most of what you said does not describe Jesus."

You see my friend, I DO NOT SAY THAT! That is what you wanted me to say so as to support to skepticism.

Now what I will say is this..........
The Bible’s answer to this question is yes, Jesus Christ is omnipotent, the most powerful being in existence. The Bible tells us in many passages that Jesus is God (e.g. John 1:1, 14; John 20:28; Hebrews 1:8; Revelation 1:17). By definition, God is all-powerful. For God to be God, there cannot be anything above him in power, otherwise the more powerful thing would be God. Since the Bible calls Jesus God, this demands, then, that he must be all-powerful.

John 1:1
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. "

I wouldn't be a Christian if I was a skeptic. Would you? So I think you don't have the right idea about people. The reason I say what I do is because I genuinely believe it and don't see this as an exercise in futility, but rather Kingdom work. Why would a skeptic till rocky soil day in and day out for little to no personal return? This isn't for me; this is for God, Jesus, and for people like you. Wouldn't you agree that is what you believe you're doing too?

 

[Runningman]

Can we have the nature of God?..........In a word NO!

We are sinners and we have a sin nature which never goes away. Death will end the sin nature when we are glorified at the Rapture.

You said the nature of God is His holiness then God told us to be holy as He is holy and you say no we can't have the nature of God. You seem to be a skeptic about this.

Are you aware that God has a divine nature and Peter said we can partake of the divine nature?

2 Peter 1
4Through these He has given us His precious and magnificent promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, now that you have escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.

 

[Runningman]

You asked ....."Where did you get the idea YHWH means "I am?"

In the text quoted, the Hebrew Yahweh is used. It is A name given by God as His own, and being a third person name form of the verb to be (namely, "I am"). This name refers to God.
Source: https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com

Adonai is the verbal parallel to Yahweh andJehovah. Adonai is plural; the singular is adon. In reference to God the plural Adonai is used. When the singular adon is used, it usually refers to a human lord.

So would you agree that if someone does not have all of the names and titles of God then they are not God?

 

[Rodger]

So would you agree that if someone does not have all of the names and titles of God then they are not God?

Silly question!

If my aunt had a mustache would she then be my uncle???

 

[Rodger]

You said the nature of God is His holiness then God told us to be holy as He is holy and you say no we can't have the nature of God. You seem to be a skeptic about this.

Are you aware that God has a divine nature and Peter said we can partake of the divine nature?

2 Peter 1
4Through these He has given us His precious and magnificent promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, now that you have escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.

Yes my friend, I am aware of that Scripture. It is through the promises of God that we are made “partakers of the divine nature.”

Then being partakers of the divine nature involves escaping the world’s decay and rising above sinful desires. Simply put, when we are saved, we receive a new nature, by which we do not perish with the world.

However.....that does not mean that the Old Nature of sin is eradicated. We will struggel with that until we are glorified.

 

[Rodger]

I wouldn't be a Christian if I was a skeptic. Would you? So I think you don't have the right idea about people. The reason I say what I do is because I genuinely believe it and don't see this as an exercise in futility, but rather Kingdom work. Why would a skeptic till rocky soil day in and day out for little to no personal return? This isn't for me; this is for God, Jesus, and for people like you. Wouldn't you agree that is what you believe you're doing too?

I agree 100%. So then why do you persist in such skeptical positions and why do you deny the Trinity.

Do you realize that you can not be a Christian and deny the Trinity????

If you don’t believe in the Trinity, then you don’t understand who God is. You may say the word “God” but you don’t understand His nature. Second, you couldn’t possibly understand who Christ is—that He is God in human flesh. The Incarnation of Christ is an essential component of the biblical gospel, as John 1:1-14 and many other biblical passages make clear. To deny the Trinity is to deny the Incarnation. And to deny the Incarnation is to wrongly understand the true gospel.

 

[Rodger]

So what you're showing awareness of is that we both have different perspectives and beliefs and they create a bias. I would beg to differ because I don't believe in digging my hooves in and bullheadedly refusing to change when new information becomes available. Something I have learned early on is that we need to remain open to instruction. If we remain humble we can always be teachable. So I actually used to be a Trinitarian many a year ago before I actually knew what the Bible says. They told me to be a Berean and I never lost that mindset. So why is there no explicit declaration or explanation of the Trinity in the Bible?

100% correct. I am bull headed, stubborn and I dig in with both feet when it comes to the written Word of God.

It has nothing to do with being humble my friend or accepting something new. The Bible says that there is nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:9 ).

My friend, the Bible says that you were never a beliver in the Trinity to begin with.

1 John 2:19.......
"They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us."

You do not believe in the Trinity.....because YOU do not want to!!! The doctrine of the Trinity and illustrations of it are found from Genesis to the Revelation......for those who want to believe!