He spoke it and the messengers of God did some of the work. Words are nothing if they don't have action.But GOD did speak all things into being through HIS Word. Is that in agreement with what you've deduced in your scholarly endeavors?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
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/
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
Strengthening families through biblical principles.
Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.
Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.
He spoke it and the messengers of God did some of the work. Words are nothing if they don't have action.But GOD did speak all things into being through HIS Word. Is that in agreement with what you've deduced in your scholarly endeavors?
There are three because that is what the totality of the evidence shows. I’ve been told by people smarter than me that I’m very logical and analytical. I pick things apart, analyze it all, and follow the evidence to where it leads. The Trinity is the bigger picture. It simply makes the most sense of who God is ontologically (love) and how he acts in creation for its redemption and the salvation of humans. If we get Christ wrong, he isn’t the Christ of the Bible and there is no salvation. This is a central, salcific issue.And it never will to any who chooses to compartmentalize things of faith and refuses to see the bigger picture. There is no distinction to be made. Read Isaiah. You insist on three. Why? What is your motive? Are you gathering or dividing?
Monotheism is the belief that there is only one God. Polytheism is the belief that there is more than one god. Believing or trusting in one or more isn’t relevant to those definitions.No it doesn't because monotheism means trust in one unique to the exclusion of others. There is only the one who created the planet, and it isn't Jesus the Christ.
Yes.Verse 10?
Obtuse? Now I know where the problem lies.And yes, because John the apostle was as obtuse as Heraclitus the Stoic.
There is only one Word in John 1 and indeed in the entire Bible—the preincarnate Christ, the second person of the Trinity.But it is clear one word could be Jesus, and the other the God YHWH.
The word LOGOS has many contexts. Even 1 John 5:7 calls the father LOGOS.There is only one Word in John 1 and indeed in the entire Bible—the preincarnate Christ, the second person of the Trinity.
It is also the belief in a unique supreme God. Monos means unique in Greek.Monotheism is the belief that there is only one God. Polytheism is the belief that there is more than one god. Believing or trusting in one or more isn’t relevant to those definitions.
Who cares? The New Testament has polytheism by your lame definition. John 10:34 and 1 Corinthians 8:5Definition of monotheism from Merriam-Webster:
:the doctrine or belief that there is but one God
John was weeding people out based on what I know of his introduction to "his gospel".Obtuse? Now I know where the problem lies.
You are incorrect.There is only one Word in John 1 and indeed in the entire Bible—the preincarnate Christ, the second person of the Trinity.
That is very clearly referring to three different persons--the Father and the Word and the Holy Spirit.The word LOGOS has many contexts. Even 1 John 5:7 calls the father LOGOS.
It is belief in one God. Monos means "alone," "only one," or something along those lines. In that sense only can it have the idea of uniqueness, but it is never translated as "unique."It is also the belief in a unique supreme God. Monos means unique in Greek.
My lame definition? You mean what Merriam-Webster and other dictionaries give as the definition? But, no, the NT doesn't teach polytheism.Who cares? The New Testament has polytheism by your lame definition. John 10:34 and 1 Corinthians 8:5
(Jhn 10:34 KJV) Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
(1Co 8:5 KJV) For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
What do you mean by "weeding people out"? What do you mean by putting "his gospel" in scare quotes?John was weeding people out based on what I know of his introduction to "his gospel".
Can you cite one legitimate, scholarly source to support your position?You are incorrect.
5:7 ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες εν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα· καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσινThat is very clearly referring to three different persons--the Father and the Word and the Holy Spirit.
1Jn 5:7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.(NKJV)
The context is that the pagan gods are not better.Deu 32:39 "'See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.
Isa 43:10 "You are my witnesses," declares the LORD, "and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.
Isa 44:6 Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.
Isa 45:5 I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides me there is no God; I equip you, though you do not know me,
...
Isa 45:21 Declare and present your case; let them take counsel together! Who told this long ago? Who declared it of old? Was it not I, the LORD? And there is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none besides me.
Isa 45:22 "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.
Isa 46:9 remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me,
That doesn't mean the Father is the Word. As I said, given that it is most likely a late addition to the text in support of the Trinity, it simply cannot be saying the Father is the Word. That idea is found nowhere in the Bible.5:7 ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες εν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα· καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν
There is not any punctuation in Greek, thus the father is another word.
That is not the context at all. God himself is clearly saying he doesn't know of any other gods and that there are no others. If that's what he says, then that is what we ought to believe.The context is that the pagan gods are not better.
You cannot see that, and it is the most basic of Greek grammar and appositives? It can't support the trinity very well as it is. That much is obvious.That doesn't mean the Father is the Word. As I said, given that it is most likely a late addition to the text in support of the Trinity, it simply cannot be saying the Father is the Word. That idea is found nowhere in the Bible.
Yet ye are gods, and there are many gods and many lords. Why the obvious and total contradiction?That is not the context at all. God himself is clearly saying he doesn't know of any other gods and that there are no others. If that's what he says, then that is what we ought to believe.
Again, you need to provide legitimate, scholarly support for your position. It's a thoroughly Trinitarian verse, which it is considered to have been a later addition to the text, in part because it is far too advanced a Trinitarian formula. That has always been the debate around 1 John 5:7. I suspect there isn't a Bible scholar or theologian out there that believes this verse is saying the Father is the Word, nor that there are two Words in the NT.You cannot see that, and it is the most basic of Greek grammar and appositives? It can't support the trinity very well as it is. That much is obvious.
Context, context, context. "You are gods." In John 10:34, Jesus was referring to the judges in Psalm 82, which are human people put in place by God with the power to judge. As for 1 Cor 8:5:Yet ye are gods, and there are many gods and many lords. Why the obvious and total contradiction?
I should have pointed out that this is where your other misunderstanding of Greek comes in again to cause substantial confusion. According to you, the verse should read:5:7 ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες εν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα· καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν
There is not any punctuation in Greek, thus the father is another word.
The misunderstanding is yours not mine.I should have pointed out that this is where your other misunderstanding of Greek comes in again to cause substantial confusion. According to you, the verse should read:
1Jn 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, a Father, a Word, and a Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
So, now there are multiple Fathers, multiple Words, and multiple Holy Spirits. John says “there are three” and he also says “these three.” So, he is clearly speaking a particular three. Which three?
According to the actual rendering you have yet another issue:
1Jn 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
You say that this verse says the Father is the Word, but the verse says there are three. So, if the Father is the Word, then together that is one and the Holy Spirit makes two. Yet, twice John says there are three.
The son is already mentioned in verse 6, so John felt it redundant to note anyone except God.That is very clearly referring to three different persons--the Father and the Word and the Holy Spirit.
The 3 which testify on the earth of course.Yet, twice John says there are three.
And yet you haven’t provided a single scholarly source to support what you have said, not have have provided a refutation of the points I made.The misunderstanding is yours not mine.
No, that is in verse 8. Look again at verse 7:The son is already mentioned in verse 6, so John felt it redundant to note anyone except God.
The 3 which testify on the earth of course.
There is no KAI between pathr and logos. This isn't English and a KAI would be required to divide the objects. This makes them into appositives. They are one in the same.Grammatically, there is nothing to suggest that John is saying the Father is the Word.
They are not one and the same. You need to start providing scholarly references to support your claims. First, John says three twice, so he’s talking about three, not two. Second, there is only one Word in the NT, and he isn’t the Father. Third, the only debate about this passage is whether or not it belongs in the Bible, precisely because it is so strongly Trinitarian. No one, that I have ever come across, has claimed that it is saying the Father is the Word.There is no KAI between pathr and logos. This isn't English and a KAI would be required to divide the objects. This makes them into appositives. They are one in the same.
There are plenty of LOGOI in the New Testament.They are not one and the same. You need to start providing scholarly references to support your claims. First, John says three twice, so he’s talking about three, not two. Second, there is only one Word in the NT, and he isn’t the Father. Third, the only debate about this passage is whether or not it belongs in the Bible, precisely because it is so strongly Trinitarian. No one, that I have ever come across, has claimed that it is saying the Father is the Word.
He is his own word just like you have your own name.No one, that I have ever come across, has claimed that it is saying the Father is the Word.
That's like stating my spirit isn't me. Its not the nature of the Spirit of God in question but the distinct personhood of the Spirit. For the Fathers Spirit would have His nature.But the Holy Spirit isn't the Father. That is consistently and continually made clear.
Is that so?