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!

The Trinity

I thought that was clear enough?

There is One God, the Father.

Second to Him is His Son, Jesus Christ.

The Holy Spirit is the power of God, personified sometimes, and sometimes not.

Clear enough ?

You talk in circles with presumptuous questions that mean nothing in light of clear scriptures!

16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory. 1 Timothy 3:16


God the Father did not become flesh, The WORD became flesh!

Jesus is the WORD!
Jesus is God!


10 "And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn. Zechariah 12:10

Jesus is YHWH! Jesus is Lord!



1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. John 1:1-3


  • the Word was God.
  • All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.
Jesus is creator of the heavens and the earth!


No hypothetical reasoning of the carnal mind here!

No, what if or how could this be if this and that ...


Just pure, plain, clear, indisputable TRUTH!

JLB
 
Was Timothy Paul's Son?


2 Timothy 1:2 (KJV)

2. To Timothy, my dearly beloved son: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.



Did it ever cross your mind that Jesus before and after made flesh was like a son to God in a way Timothy was like a son to Paul?


God is Spirit. The Jesus that was occupied that human body. Even now with the glory returned to Him per Jesus's prayer to God Jesus calls the Father His God. Do you really think One God would call Himself Father and Son? That doesn't make sense. Hence the church can't explain the Trinity without the reason of mystery. What was the question that started this thread?

The Spirit of the Sovereign Lord or Holy Spirit or Spirit of Truth vs Jesus's statement on the cross, (Father into your hands I commit My Spirit) are not the same Spirit. Jesus is a Son with His own Spirit. Without the fullness (Father) Jesus could do nothing. Of course that condition doesn't exist. (Jesus apart from the Father) The Father is in the Son even in the incarnation. (God with us) God the Father came down to us through Jesus. God created through Jesus. God spoke to us by Jesus. Etc. The Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father as Jesus taught. They are One in that manner.

Randy
 
God is Spirit. The Jesus that was occupied that human body. Even now with the glory returned to Him per Jesus's prayer to God Jesus calls the Father His God. Do you really think One God would call Himself Father and Son? That doesn't make sense. Hence the church can't explain the Trinity without the reason of mystery. What was the question that started this thread?

The Spirit of the Sovereign Lord or Holy Spirit or Spirit of Truth vs Jesus's statement on the cross, (Father into your hands I commit My Spirit) are not the same Spirit. Jesus is a Son with His own Spirit. Without the fullness (Father) Jesus could do nothing. Of course that condition doesn't exist. (Jesus apart from the Father) The Father is in the Son even in the incarnation. (God with us) God the Father came down to us through Jesus. God created through Jesus. God spoke to us by Jesus. Etc. The Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father as Jesus taught. They are One in that manner.

Randy

Nice observation, they are one just as Adam and Eve became one flesh...

Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Just as my wife and I are one flesh, yet separate and distinct persons.
 
I have been looking at Rev 3:14 which I didn't take notice of until this thread as "Firstborn of all creation" was quite clear to me as a Son. It makes perfect sense in that Jesus the Firstborn Son would be the First of Gods works. Paul also showed Jesus as First, before all things, except the Father. All that was created was created by Gods command and by His will. The Father is the source of creation not Jesus. Jesus had a hand it what the Father commanded and willed.

"beginning of the creation of God" (Father)

Though I also note the different attempts of translation.

14 “To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:

The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the [k]Beginning of the creation of God, says this:

[k] Origin or Source

Randy
 
John 17
“My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: 23 I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

Again I see the Father defining who Jesus is. I think the words Paul used such as "Fullness" reflect more than Just the Father in The Son as in the "Fullness of the Deity" all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge etc.. (All that the Father is) but its clear the Father chose, from what Jesus taught, to dwell in the Son. That to me strengthens that the Fullness was given to Jesus by His God and Our God.
 
Please excuse the font problem. I have cut and pasted from my own much larger file concerning this scripture.

JLB: You talk in circles with presumptuous questions that mean nothing in light of clear scriptures!

16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in
glory. 1 Timothy 3:16
………………………………............

Few NT Greek scholars agree with such an interpretation of 1 Tim. 3:16. See most Bible translations.

Noted trinitarian 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 – though the majority even of Byzantine manuscripts still preserved the true reading.” – 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 ΘC, “who” - masc.] or [“which” - neut.]; and no patristic writer prior to the last third of the fourth century [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 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.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Please excuse the font problem. I have cut and pasted from my own much larger file concerning this scripture.


………………………………............

Few NT Greek scholars agree with such an interpretation of 1 Tim. 3:16. See most Bible translations.





Noted trinitarian 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 – though the majority even of Byzantine manuscripts still preserved the true reading.” – 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 ΘC, “who” - masc.] or [“which” - neut.]; and no patristic writer prior to the last third of the fourth century [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 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.


What is your point?

Do you have any scripture to quote, or is it more he said she said mumbo jumbo.


JLB
 
You talk in circles with presumptuous questions that mean nothing in light of clear scriptures!

16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:
God was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory. 1 Timothy 3:16


As you've now seen, this definitely doesn't mean what you want it to mean. Too bad.




God the Father did not become flesh, The WORD became flesh!
Quite correct. Therefore, God and Jesus are not the same, and definitely not in nature, since the word became FLESH - and the divine and flesh are decidedly not the same. In fact, as Paul says,

Galatians 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other...


Jesus is the WORD!
Jesus is God!
Jesus is NOT the Word. Jesus is the Word made flesh - and those two things are NOT the same.

Look at how silly you're making John look:


Jn 1.1 In the beginning was Jesus (the word)


v14 and Jesus (=the word) became Jesus (= the word made flesh).


Is that what you think John is trying to say? That Jesus became Jesus? I hope not - because he's just wasted a lot of paper saying that!


As for 'the word was God', let’s go back to the point I made about 1 Tim.3.16 and the absence of the definite article.


Please note, the definite article is again absent here in Jn 1.1.


και
θεος ην ο λογος

transliterated, that becomes


kai
theos en ho logos

Notice the definite article is absent from
theos, or it would have been:

kai
ho theos en ho logos.

Therefore, a QUALITY is being described here, NOT A PERSON.


So Moffat, recognising this, translates:


‘And the word was
divine’ which is the quality derived from the noun 'God'.

10 "And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication;
then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn. Zechariah 12:10

Jesus is YHWH! Jesus is Lord!

You've been shown that there is a serious problem with this translation too. John says 'They shall look upon him whom they pierced'.

I prefer his translation to the AV's any day. So I think you're wrong again, and not careful enough with your expositions.


1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and
the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. John 1:1-3

  • the Word was God.
We've spoken about this before, and you should now know better.

  • All things were made through Him, and without<5565> Him nothing was made<1096> that was made.
Ephesians 2:12 That at that time ye were without <5565> Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

This is clearly referring to people who were ‘made’.


Because Ephesians is clear that without Christ, there is no hope for anyone . John is saying the same thing: without Christ, no one really exists.


Here is the non-literal, spiritual dimension to being made: one aspect of it anyway.


John 5:6 When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had been now a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt thou be made <1096> whole?

John 5:9 And immediately the man was made <1096> whole, and took up his bed, and walked: and on the same day was the sabbath.
John 5:14 Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made <1096> whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come <1096> unto thee.

Similarly in the spiritual realm. Being MADE means being made spiritually whole: not spiritually paralysed, spiritually lame, spiritually blind, or spiritually leprous.

In Christ we are
made whole, made a new man, made a new creation, made clean – all those things are bound up in the word ‘made’. So without Him, there was nothing made, that was made.

The living that were
‘made’ physically were really spiritually dead in trespasses and sins.

So although they were physically
‘made’, they were spiritually ‘not made’ – because they were ‘without Him’.

That’s clear enough, isn’t it?


Jesus is creator of the heavens and the earth!
No hypothetical reasoning of the carnal mind here!

No, what if or how could this be if this and that ...


Just pure, plain, clear, indisputable TRUTH!


As I've said before, this is all to do with the New Creation of God in Christ. He is the Alpha and Omega of our faith!

Because He is called the AUTHOR (the Alpha) and FINISHER (the Omega)
OF OUR FAITH.

But just to remind you:


Remember the words:

.
9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

Explain those 3 words ‘even thy God’ as applied to the relationship between Christ and the Father.

And while you’re at it, try these too, because they are closely related:


Jn 20.17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto
my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.
 
Last edited by a moderator:


As you've now seen, this definitely doesn't mean what you want it to mean. Too bad.



Quite correct. Therefore, God and Jesus are not the same, and definitely not in nature, since the word became FLESH - and the divine and flesh are decidedly not the same. In fact, as Paul says,

Galatians 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other...

Jesus is NOT the Word. Jesus is the Word made flesh - and those two things are NOT the same.

Look at how silly you're making John look:


Jn 1.1 In the beginning was Jesus (the word)


v14 and Jesus (=the word) became Jesus (= the word made flesh).


Is that what you think John is trying to say? That Jesus became Jesus? I hope not - because he's just wasted a lot of paper saying that!


As for 'the word was God', let’s go back to the point I made about 1 Tim.3.16 and the absence of the definite article.


Please note, the definite article is again absent here in Jn 1.1.


και
θεος ην ο λογος

transliterated, that becomes


kai
theos en ho logos

Notice the definite article is absent from
theos, or it would have been:

kai
ho theos en ho logos.

Therefore, a QUALITY is being described here, NOT A PERSON.


So Moffat, recognising this, translates:


‘And the word was
divine’ which is the quality derived from the noun 'God'.

You've been shown that there is a serious problem with this translation too. John says 'They shall look upon him whom they pierced'.

I prefer his translation to the AV's any day. So I think you're wrong again, and not careful enough with your expositions.


1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and
the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. John 1:1-3


  • the Word was God.

We've spoken about this before, and you should now know better.


  • All things were made through Him, and without<5565> Him nothing was made<1096> that was made.

Ephesians 2:12 That at that time ye were without <5565> Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

This is clearly referring to people who were ‘made’.


Because Ephesians is clear that without Christ, there is no hope for anyone . John is saying the same thing: without Christ, no one really exists.


Here is the non-literal, spiritual dimension to being made: one aspect of it anyway.


John 5:6 When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had been now a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt thou be made <1096> whole?

John 5:9 And immediately the man was made <1096> whole, and took up his bed, and walked: and on the same day was the sabbath.
John 5:14 Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made <1096> whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come <1096> unto thee.

Similarly in the spiritual realm. Being MADE means being made spiritually whole: not spiritually paralysed, spiritually lame, spiritually blind, or spiritually leprous.

In Christ we are
made whole, made a new man, made a new creation, made clean – all those things are bound up in the word ‘made’. So without Him, there was nothing made, that was made.

The living that were
‘made’ physically were really spiritually dead in trespasses and sins.

So although they were physically
‘made’, they were spiritually ‘not made’ – because they were ‘without Him’.

That’s clear enough, isn’t it?




As I've said before, this is all to do with the New Creation of God in Christ. He is the Alpha and Omega of our faith!

Because He is called the AUTHOR (the Alpha) and FINISHER (the Omega)
OF OUR FAITH.

But just to remind you:


Remember the words:

.
9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

Explain those 3 words ‘even thy God’ as applied to the relationship between Christ and the Father.

And while you’re at it, try these too, because they are closely related:


Jn 20.17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto
my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.
7 Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen. 8 "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End," says the Lord, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty." Revelation 1:7-8

John is referring to Zechariah.

Since John is NOT YHWH, then he can not quote as in the "first person" as The Lord does in Zechariah.

Look how silly the Word of God is making you look.


Of course, everywhere Jesus as a Man is speaking, He is speaking as a "little lower than the angels" and as subservient to The Father, as Hebrews teaches us -

4 God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will? 5 For He has not put the world to come, of which we speak, in subjection to angels. 6 But one testified in a certain place, saying: "What is man that You are mindful of him, Or the son of man that You take care of him? 7 You have made him a little lower than the angels; You have crowned him with glory and honor, And set him over the works of Your hands. 8 You have put all things in subjection under his feet." For in that He put all in subjection under him, He left nothing that is not put under him. But now we do not yet see all things put under him. 9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone. 10 For it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. Hebrews 2:4-10

For as sin entered the world through man, righteousness must be returned to humanity through a man -

For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man's obedience many will be made righteous.Romans 5:19


Therefore, God gave His only begotten Son, who "became flesh" and paid the price for sin in our place!


1 In the beginning was the Word [Jesus], and the Word [Jesus] was with God, and the Word [Jesus] was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. John 1:1-3

Let's play that back -


In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with God, and Jesus was God.

Wow, look how confused the word of God makes you look!


Sorry Brother, your vain babbling just doesn't stand up to the truth in the light of scripture!


JLB


 
Hey JLB

You missed a bit, didn't you?

But just to remind you:

Remember the words:

.
9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

Explain those 3 words ‘even thy God’ as applied to the relationship between Christ and the Father.

And while you’re at it, try these too, because they are closely related:


Jn 20.17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto
my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Who's babbling vainly? Jesus? Paul? The Psalmist?

I doubt it somehow.
 
Just a little tweak. JLB.

As I've said before, this is all to do with the New Creation of God in Christ.

Remember the words:


.
9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

Explain those 3 words ‘even thy God’ as applied to the relationship between Christ and the Father.

And while you’re at it, try these too:


Jn 20.17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just a little tweak. JLB.

As I've said before, this is all to do with the New Creation of God in Christ.

Remember the words:


.
9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

Explain those 3 words ‘even thy God’ as applied to the relationship between Christ and the Father.

And while you’re at it, try these too:


Jn 20.17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.


Ok, try this one.

You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of gladness more than Your companions."


God the Father speaking to God the Son.


JLB
 


As you've now seen, this definitely doesn't mean what you want it to mean. Too bad.



Quite correct. Therefore, God and Jesus are not the same, and definitely not in nature, since the word became FLESH - and the divine and flesh are decidedly not the same. In fact, as Paul says,

Galatians 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other...

Jesus is NOT the Word. Jesus is the Word made flesh - and those two things are NOT the same.

Look at how silly you're making John look:

Don't even bother with his "QUALITY" rambling, that was not true in Koine Greek, it comes in post Hellenistic, and modern Greek... Make him show you with a reputable book of grammar (one of Biblical Greek)
 
Jesus taught "The Father was in Him" Its going to be difficult to prove Jesus always "was" and always was God be using text that calls Him God. The fullness of the Deity dwells in Him. He is the image of the invisible God and the exact representation of Gods being. Jesus is called God and Son. I even hate to use the word Jesus was elevated by the Fullness as that would suggest a time Jesus was apart from the Father. Since Paul is describing who Jesus is (His Being) my presumption is that the moment Jesus was the fullness was in Him. There never was a moment it was just Jesus. That being said to me Jesus has always been the Son and in that context is not God. The fullness was the Fathers to give and take as Jesus's God. Jesus remains in the Fathers love by always doing what pleases the Father. The Father (God) answers to no one. Fortunately for all God is Love for when He acts who can reverse His acts.

Randy
 
Jesus taught "The Father was in Him" Its going to be difficult to prove Jesus always "was" and always was God be using text that calls Him God. The fullness of the Deity dwells in Him. He is the image of the invisible God and the exact representation of Gods being. Jesus is called God and Son. I even hate to use the word Jesus was elevated by the Fullness as that would suggest a time Jesus was apart from the Father. Since Paul is describing who Jesus is (His Being) my presumption is that the moment Jesus was the fullness was in Him. There never was a moment it was just Jesus. That being said to me Jesus has always been the Son and in that context is not God. The fullness was the Fathers to give and take as Jesus's God. Jesus remains in the Fathers love by always doing what pleases the Father. The Father (God) answers to no one. Fortunately for all God is Love for when He acts who can reverse His acts.

Randy


That being said to me Jesus has always been the Son and in that context is not God.
The only begotten of the Father is God, was God, will always be God.

In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. 1 John 4:9

The Son was sent into the world. That tells us He was The Son, before He was sent into the world.

That which God beget is God.

That which man beget is man.

The Godhead
, Elohim, created the heavens and the earth.

1 In the beginning God [Elohim] created the heavens and the earth. Genesis 1:1

15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. Colossians 1:15-17

All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. John 1:3



  • For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth...

  • In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

  • All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

By making this statement -


Jesus has always been the Son and in that context is not God.
You have just exalted yourself above the knowledge of God!




JLB
 
Ok, try this one.

You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of gladness more than Your companions."

God the Father speaking to God the Son.

JLB

Are you being silly, or just obtuse?
 
Are you being silly, or just obtuse?

Quoting God's word.

You should try it sometime.

If you have something against this scripture please explain.


8 But to the Son He says: "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your Kingdom. 9 You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of gladness more than Your companions."


JLB
 
Quoting God's word.

You should try it sometime.

If you have something against this scripture please explain.


8 But to the Son He says: "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your Kingdom. 9 You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of gladness more than Your companions."

JLB

So we now have confusion twice confounded.

Here is the Father saying to Jesus, "..O God"

This means that Jesus is the Father's God - or it means something else, which you are not prepared to contemplate.

Which?

We then have Jesus saying that the Father is His God.

That also says something which you are not prepared to contemplate.

Now how do you resolve the problem?

How can Jesus be the Father's God, and the Father be Jesus' God. I'd be interested to hear your take.

And try and avoid the insults, will you? Does you no good at all.
 
The only begotten of the Father is God, was God, will always be God.

In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. 1 John 4:9

The Son was sent into the world. That tells us He was The Son, before He was sent into the world.

That which God beget is God.

That which man beget is man.

The Godhead , Elohim, created the heavens and the earth.

1 In the beginning God [Elohim] created the heavens and the earth. Genesis 1:1

15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. Colossians 1:15-17

All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. John 1:3






  • For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth...
  • In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
  • All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.
By making this statement -



You have just exalted yourself above the knowledge of God!




JLB

Jesus is the First Born of All Creation. The beginning of the Creation of God the Father. Before all things invisible and visible. (Except His God and OUR God) The Fullness of the Deity was pleased to dwell IN Him. Jesus is the image of the Living God and the exact representation of Gods being. All things were created by Gods (Father) command and by His will and being. That which God created He created through the Son. (Jesus) Jesus had a hand in what the Father did.

Is Jesus God?
He never diws
Yes, He is all that the Father is.
No, He has always been the Son.

1 Corinthians 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.

Rev 4:11




Jesus is the true vine and the Father is the gardener.

This is eternal life: The One true God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent.
 
Barnes:
It is undoubtedly an address to the "king" here referred to as God - as one to whom the name "God" - אלהים 'Elohiym - may be properly applied; and, as applied to the Messiah by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, it clearly proves that Christ is Divine.

No one denies that Christ is divine - but the proof from Ps 45 in Heb 1 is inconclusive, and open to serious doubts.

For instance, was the king originally addressed in Ps 45, divine? Clearly not.

Second, the throne of the king was higher than other men. and as a result of the exaltation, he is addressed as 'elohim'.

But in order to keep his feet on the ground, and his head in measurable proportions, the remark 'God, even thy God...' is made.

So here.

Christ is made higher than the angels, exalted to the right hand of God, and is therefore the recipient of the title 'elohim' because He is the King who will sit on the throne of David when the time comes.

Incidentally, did you know that the king's throne in Jerusalem is the 'throne of the Lord'? No? I didn't think so Here:

1 Chronicles 29:23 Then Solomon sat on the throne of the LORD as king instead of David his father, and prospered; and all Israel obeyed him.

It is therefore completely understandable why 'thy throne O God is forever and ever' could apply to Solomon, but with even more force to Jesus.

It is equally understandable why the description 'God, even thy God..' is given.

As King, and higher than the angels, Jesus, like the king of Israel, is called 'God, elohim.'

'God, even thy God' is now equally understandable - no King of Israel, or High Priest for that matter, was ever equal to the God who had annointed him King, and who he served.
 
Back
Top