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!
-
Are you 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
My take on Trinity
- Thread starter TonyChanYT
- Start date
1 John 5 7 and 8
The Spirit is the Father who is a witness to these things, and the water is our Baptism into the New Covenant, and the blood is Christ's sacrifice on the stake. These three are a testimony unto our salvation.
1 John 5:7-8 New International Version (NIV)
7 For there are three that testify: 8 the[a] Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.
Footnotes:
- 1 John 5:8 Late manuscripts of the Vulgate testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. 8 And there are three that testify on earth: the (not found in any Greek manuscript before the fourteenth century)
The Greek word "TON" is translated 1583 times as "the;" And 18 times as "the -one." It is used before nouns to mean a {certain-one-person-s,} or place, or thing. However, different translations of Greek do not always agree. That is the reason for my interpretation of John 1:1 as "the only Divine Eternal." In English the word “one” can also be translated as “only.” TON: The only. THEON: Divine Eternal.
John 1:1
Greek:
en arche eimi ho logos kai ho logos eimi pros ton theon kai theos eimi ho logos
Interlinear:
en (in) arche (beginning) eimi (was) ho (the) logos (word) kai (and) ho (the) logos (word) eimi (was) pos (toward or with) ton (TON is a special definite article "the" meaning the one or only, it appears as TON instead of O in the Greek) theon (Divine Eternal) kai (and) theos (divine) eimi (was) ho (the) logos (word)
In English we have:
In beginning was the word, and the word was with (the one or only) Divine Eternal, and divine was the word.
Why do translators drop off the definite article TON (the one or only) before Divine Eternal?
Johann!@#
Member
5:7 There is some confusion in the English translations as to where 1 John 5:6,7, and 8 begin and end. The portion of 1 John 5:7 that is found in the KJV which says "in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one," is not found in the three major ancient uncial Greek manuscripts of the NT: Alexandrinus (A), Vaticanus (B), or Sinaiticus (א), nor in the Byzantine family of manuscripts. It appears in only four late minuscule manuscripts.
MS 61, dated in the 16th century
MS 88 dated in the 12th century, where the passage is inserted in the margin by a later hand
MS 629, dated in the 14th or 15th century
MS 635, dated in the 11th century, where the passage is inserted in the margin by a later hand
This verse is not quoted by any of the Early Church Fathers, even in their doctrinal debates over the Trinity. It is absent from all ancient versions except one late Latin manuscript family (Sixto-Clementine). It is not in the Old Latin or Jerome's Vulgate. It appears first in a treatise by the Spanish heretic Priscillian, who died in A.D. 385. It was quoted by Latin Fathers in North Africa and Italy in the 5th century. This verse is simply not part of the original inspired words of 1 John.
The biblical doctrine of one God (see Special Topic: Monotheism) but with three personal manifestations (Father, Son, and Spirit) is not affected by the rejection of this verse. Although it is true that the Bible never uses the word "trinity," many biblical passages speak of all three persons of the Godhead acting together:
at Jesus' baptism (Matt. 3:16-17)
the great commission (Matt. 28:19)
the Spirit sent (John 14:26)
Peter's Pentecost sermon (Acts 2:33-34)
Paul's discussion of flesh and spirit (Rom. 8:7-10)
Paul's discussion of spiritual gifts (1 Cor. 12:4-6)
Paul's travel plans (2 Cor. 1:21-22)
Paul's benediction (2 Cor. 13:14)
Paul's discussion of the fullness of time (Gal. 4:4-6)
Paul's prayer of praise to the Father (Eph. 1:3-14)
Paul's discussion of the Gentiles' former alienation (Eph. 2:18)
Paul's discussion of the oneness of God (Eph. 4:4-6)
Paul's discussion of the kindness of God (Titus 3:4-6)
Peter's introduction (1 Pet. 1:2)
Utley.
See this?-a successful rebuttal against your assertion.
Johann.
You've made this argument several times before, and were soundly refuted each time, like in the following post:
https://christianforums.net/threads...ristian-essentials.70904/page-16#post-1804438
It is past the point where this argument needs to be dropped.
The term "Godhead" is an English variant of the word "godhood" and was first introduced by John Wycliffe (1330-1384 C.E.) in English Bible versions as godhede.
The word "Godhead" is a interpretation of three different Greek words, theion (meaning "divinity, deity", # 2304 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament) at Acts 17:29, theiotēs (meaning "divinity, divine nature", # 2305 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament) at Romans 1:20, and theotēs (meaning "deity", # 2320 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament) at Colossians 2:9.
To translate three different Greek words as one word and deviously incorrect at that in the King James Bible, is no different than translating in the King James Bible, the Hebrew word she’ol´ with three different English words of "hell" (10 times), "grave" (31 times), and "pit" (3 times).
This is not unlike having three different names for one street on a map (with the real name hidden), so that when a person used it, he wound up lost. Likewise of those who read Bibles with "Godhead" in it, thereby misleading a person that the trinity is "real".
Hence, the need for an accurate Bible, one that renders Hebrew and Greek words and phrases with a high degree of precision, just as a map that can be counted on to provide exact information. Unfortunately, many Bibles follow the lead of the King James Bible, or is otherwise biased, because the trinity, along with a host of other religious teachings that are not true, that has such a strangle hold on so many.
Johann!@#
Member
John 1:1:
"In the beginning was (en) the Word, and the Word was with (pros) God, and the Word was God."
The term en is the imperfect tense of the verb eimi, and denotes continuous existence or action in the past. Just how continuous depends on the context itself. In this passage, the Word is seen as already existing when the beginning of all things occurred. Not only was he already in existence at the time of the beginning, but was continually existing having no beginning in sight. This implies that the Word is eternal.
The Word is also seen has having eternally coexisted with a specific person called God (Greek, ton theon- the God, with the definite article implying that John has a specific person in mind).
The term pros implies that not only is there a distinction between the Word and God, but that the Word is also personal. The Word is not just an impersonal attribute existing in the mind of God, but is a distinct person who has coexisted with God from eternity:
"John's use of the preposition pros 'with' is significant. It implies that the Father and the Son had an intimate as well as eternal relationship. Lenski explains:
The preposition pros, as distinct from heos, para, and sun, is of the greatest importance... The idea is that of presence and communion with a strong note of reciprocity. The Logos, then, is not an attribute inferring in God, or a power emanating from him, but a person in the presence of God and turned in loving, inseparable communion toward God and God turned equally toward him. He was another and yet not other than God.
"John's use of the preposition pros is also significant in that it shows that he did not view the Logos and the Father as being the same person. They are two distinct persons in an intimate eternal relationship of fellowship and communion." (Robert Morey, Trinity-Evidence &Issues [Word Publishing; Grand Rapids, 1996], pp. 321-322)
"... Here John uses the preposition... (pros). The term has a wide range of meanings, depending on the context in which it is found. In this particular instance, the term speaks to a personal relationship, in fact, to intimacy. It is the same term the apostle Paul uses when he speaks of how we presently have a knowledge comparable to seeing in a dim mirror, but someday, in eternity, we will have clearer knowledge, an intimate knowledge, for we shall see "face to (pros) face" (I Corinthians 13:12). When you are face-to-face with someone, you have nowhere to hide. You have a relationship with that person, whether you like it or not... In John 1:1b, John says the Word was eternally face-to-face with God, that is, the Word has eternally had a relationship with God." (James R. White, The Forgotten Trinity- Recovering the Heart of Christian Belief [Bethany House Publishers; Minneapolis, MN, 1998], p. 52)
John also states that "the Word was God", with the term God implying the nature of the Word. Hence, the Word has eternally existed in the nature of God. John goes on to say:
"The Word became (egeneto) flesh (sarx) and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth." John 1:14
The term egeneto implies a point of origin in time. Hence, whereas the Word eternally existed with the nature of God, he was not always flesh. Rather, he became flesh at a specific point in time. This is precisely what Trinitarianism teaches, namely that the eternal Word of God became man in order to make known more fully the character of God. (cf. John 1:18)
John 8:58:
"Jesus said to them: 'Most truly I say to you, Before Abraham came into existence, I AM (prin Abraam genesthai ego eimi)."
This passage is perhaps one of the strongest affirmations to the Deity of Christ, and yet one of the most controversial as well. The reason for this is that many Trinitarians see echoes of Exodus 3:14 here where we are told:
"God said to Moses, 'I AM WHO I AM (ehyeh asher ehyeh). This is what you are to say to the Israelites: I AM has sent me to you.'" NIV
Hence, Jesus' I AM statements seemingly identify him with the I AM of Exodus, Yahweh God. If this is the case, this would affirm that Jesus explicitly claimed to be Yahweh God.
However, not all agree that Jesus' I AM statements are direct claims to Yahweh. This is based primarily on the fact that the phrase "I AM WHO I AM" can legitimately be translated as "I WILL BE WHAT I WILL BE." This is due to the verb from which the phrase stems.
The Hebrew phrase ehyeh asher ehyeh is derived from the verb hayah, "will be." It is often given the following meanings in standard Hebrew Dictionaries: "was, come to pass, came, has been, has happened, become, pertained, better for thee."
J.
"You've made this argument several times before, and were soundly refuted each time,"
I see you have a sense of humor. LOL
Christ is a created being according to the bible
Proverbs 8:23
I was formed long ages ago, at the very beginning, when the world came to be.
Christ was formed in the beginning of creation by Yahwah.
Christ Pre-existed.
John 6:41
At this the Jews there began to grumble about him because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.”
John 6:42
They said, “Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I came down from heaven’ ?”
John 8:42
Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me.
John 8:58
“Very truly I tell you,” Yahshua answered, “before Abraham was born, I existed!”
John 10:36
what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?
John 17:5
5 And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.
John 17:24
“Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world.
Proverbs 8
I possess knowledge and discretion.
(See Isaiah 11:2.)
22 “The Lord brought me forth as the first of his works,
before his deeds of old;
23 I was formed long ages ago,
at the very beginning, when the world came to be.
35 For those who find me find life
and receive favor from the Lord.
36 But those who fail to find me harm themselves;
all who hate me love death.”
Johann!@#
Member
I do, but that wasn’t it. You have been refuted soundly on that argument. Greek sources were even provided that proved you are incorrect on this, so it would do you well to stop using it.
Lets see your proof?
You keep saying that, but I see no evidence.
You are making up a word (title) and injecting it into the scripture.
Title is not mentioned in Romans 10:13 nor is it mentioned in Joel 2.
Jesus is the name of the LORD.
For “whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved.” Romans 10:13
The only name of the LORD by which people are saved is Jesus.
JLB
Do you believe Jesus is YHWH; the Lord God of the Old Testament Who spoke out of the mouth of the prophets?
I never mention punctuation.
For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. 1 John 5:7
- there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit;
The scripture says three.
You keep referring to two.
The Father and the Word and the Holy Spirit are one.
JLB
Johann!@#
Member
Already addressed this-the Imperfect Tense of eimi/Haya.
Go through my posts.
Thanks.
J.
You’re not following along. I have been saying the whole time that “the LORD” is what English translations use in place of YHWH. Therefore, “the LORD,” or just “LORD,” is the name of God, not the title Lord.
Romans 13, quoting the first part of Joel 2:32, is speaking of the name YHWH, not the title “Lord.”
Here you are conflating a name with a title. The only way you statement works grammatically is if “LORD” is a title for God, but it isn’t. Of course, it would still be biblically incorrect, since Jesus is not the name of God as a whole; it is the name of the Son only.
As I have pointed out several times now, you are saying, “Jesus is the name of YHWH.” That exactly the same as saying “Jesus is the name of the name of God.”
Do you really think it makes sense to say that Jesus is the name of the name of God?
This is what you’re saying, just so that there is no doubt: “The only name of YHWH [God’s name, not a title] by which people are saved is Jesus.” Again, does that really make sense?
Exo 3:15 God also said to Moses, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is my name forever, and thus I am to be remembered throughout all generations. (ESV)
God says that YHWH is his name forever. So how can Jesus be the name of the name of God? The Father is YHWH, the Son is YHWH, and the Holy Spirit is YHWH, in the that they are all God and that is God’s name. Jesus is the name of the Son only.
Last edited:
Johann!@#
Member
Correct-just to add-
The Significance of Names
In Jewish thought, a name is not merely an arbitrary designation, a random combination of sounds. The name conveys the nature and essence of the thing named. It represents the history and reputation of the being named.
This is not as strange or unfamiliar a concept as it may seem at first glance. In English, we often refer to a person's reputation as his "good name." When a company is sold, one thing that may be sold is the company's "good will," that is, the right to use the company's name. The Hebrew concept of a name is very similar to these ideas.
An example of this usage occurs in Ex. 3:13-22: Moses asks God what His "name" is. Moses is not asking "what should I call you;" rather, he is asking "who are you; what are you like; what have you done." That is clear from God's response. God replies that He is eternal, that He is the God of our ancestors, that He has seen our affliction and will redeem us from bondage.
Another example of this usage is the concepts of chillul Ha-Shem and kiddush Ha-Shem. An act that causes God or Judaism to come into disrespect or a commandment to be disobeyed is often referred to as "chillul Ha-Shem," profanation of The Name. Clearly, we are not talking about a harm done to a word; we are talking about harm to a reputation. Likewise, any deed that increases the respect accorded to God or Judaism is referred to as "kiddush Ha-Shem," sanctification of The Name.
Because a name represents the reputation of the thing named, a name should be treated with the same respect as the thing's reputation. For this reason, God's Names, in all of their forms, are treated with enormous respect and reverence in Judaism.
J.
Johann!@#
Member
Was (ēn). Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of eimi to be which conveys no idea of origin for God or for the Logos, simply continuous existence. Quite a different verb (egeneto, became) appears in Joh_1:14 for the beginning of the Incarnation of the Logos. See the distinction sharply drawn in Joh_8:58 “before Abraham came (genesthai) I am” (eimi, timeless existence).
See that?
J.