Anyone who rejects the deity of Christ should listen to these.
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
Jesus Christ is God Almighty, Jehovah
- Thread starter Jerry Shugart
- Start date
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Open Minded Debate Allowed..........
Open Minded Debate Allowed..........
Thats just silly, perhaps you ought to read my commentary further and elsewhere. Your chart is not ignored, and many of the points of belief of Jesus being YHWH are already being challenged in this and other threads. A Unitarian Christology works just as well, but without some of the complexities of a Trinitarian one, hence the exploration of these other feasible alternatives. Mind you there are variations within both Unitarian and Trinitarian perspectives, since we can view Jesus is many different ways, - the fact that different views exist within the history/development of Christianity shows the philosophical diversity and allowances in doctrine, until some groups decided to make one particular explanation into formal creeds or dogma, and the church-institution in Rome had the socio-political power to do just that, while branding other viewpoints as 'heresy'.
No matter one's preferential view of Jesus and his relationship to God or as 'God',...he ever maintains subordinance to his God and Father, and ultimately surrenders the kingdom over to him. A traditional Unitarian view maintains that YHWH is the Father, not anyone else, neither does YHWH share his glory except with His Son, his Messiah, but the Messiah is never YHWH himself, only his Representative, His Agent. They maintain unity of spirit, purpose and will....cooperating together as one. One can speculate or propose various definitions of Jesus humanity and any divinity that he may possess or have been granted, and there we dive into the 'metaphysics' of it all, which can be fun, but ends up with Jesus being a curious confusion of Man and 'God'....and so the story goes......
Open Minded Debate Allowed..........
Thats just silly, perhaps you ought to read my commentary further and elsewhere. Your chart is not ignored, and many of the points of belief of Jesus being YHWH are already being challenged in this and other threads. A Unitarian Christology works just as well, but without some of the complexities of a Trinitarian one, hence the exploration of these other feasible alternatives. Mind you there are variations within both Unitarian and Trinitarian perspectives, since we can view Jesus is many different ways, - the fact that different views exist within the history/development of Christianity shows the philosophical diversity and allowances in doctrine, until some groups decided to make one particular explanation into formal creeds or dogma, and the church-institution in Rome had the socio-political power to do just that, while branding other viewpoints as 'heresy'.
No matter one's preferential view of Jesus and his relationship to God or as 'God',...he ever maintains subordinance to his God and Father, and ultimately surrenders the kingdom over to him. A traditional Unitarian view maintains that YHWH is the Father, not anyone else, neither does YHWH share his glory except with His Son, his Messiah, but the Messiah is never YHWH himself, only his Representative, His Agent. They maintain unity of spirit, purpose and will....cooperating together as one. One can speculate or propose various definitions of Jesus humanity and any divinity that he may possess or have been granted, and there we dive into the 'metaphysics' of it all, which can be fun, but ends up with Jesus being a curious confusion of Man and 'God'....and so the story goes......
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Self focused only in a matter of sharing the truth of his relationship with God and as God's Messiah, but he always pointed the people to worship The Father Alone. His self-focus was in the Father's testimony and approval of his own mission, the one whom God sent and anointed to do his will. Consider the concept of 'agency',...Jesus being God's Agent.
Why did Jesus say "Worship Me"? "Love Me"? "Abide in Me"? If what you say is true, then He should have said "in the Father," but HE DOESN'T!
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
Right Divider
Body part
John 5:23 (AKJV/PCE)
(5:23) That all [men] should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.
How can one honor the Son EVEN as they honor the Father?
Consider the concept of equality. The Son and the Father are equally God.
Traditionally, a very common view among Jewish commentators is that this does refer to a heavenly council or company, which would be the 'angels', 'sons of God' already apart of God's company. Traditional orthodox Jews would never entertain there being 3 separate distinct personalities all existing as One God, as 'God' is ever heralded as a Singular Deity, having of course a plurality of majesty, a manifold glory, yet ever being ONE. Important to see it how the Jews themselves have anciently and modernly translated/interpreted their own scriptures, even if you choose to believe an orthodox Christian concept of the Trinity was a later defined revelation of a 'Godhead' existing there all the time within the One Deity worshipped by the Jews.
Perhaps more on this later, and also in your newer thread on the "us" factor
@freelight -- It is quite telling that whenever the "compound unity" blah, blah, blah, etc., etc., etc., is brought up by a certain crowd, as soon as you show them what happens in Genesis 1:26 of the LXX, with the replacement loan-word, θεος, they all of the sudden want nothing to do with it or the Septuagint and likewise begin to attempt to discredit the Septuagint as if rendered by idiots who did not know what they were doing:
Genesis 1:26 OG LXX
1:26 και ειπεν ο θεος ποιησωμεν ανθρωπον κατ' εικονα ημετεραν και καθ' ομοιωσιν και αρχετωσαν των ιχθυων της θαλασσης και των πετεινων του ουρανου και των κτηνων και πασης της γης και παντων των ερπετων των ερποντων επι της γης
http://bibledatabase.net/html/septuagint/01_001.htm
"And THE THEOS (ο θεος) said, LET US MAKE (ποιησωμεν) man according to OUR (ημετεραν) image . . ."
Ask them, Freelight, what this means concerning their own understanding of θεος in the apostolic writings and how it appears to be nothing more than a loan word for Elohim, (indeed a "compound unity" in some ways of its usage), and how that fact might impact their understanding of some of the most critical and important passages to their doctrine, such as John 1:1. Then, no doubt, you will find out how much they love the truth when you begin to hear the replies, (lol). :chuckle:
Could θεος and especially τον θεον also be intended as compound unities in John 1:1? Do not the majority of New Testament quotes come from the LXX-Septuagint? Do the apostolic writers not also follow the practices already set forth in the LXX such as not using an article with κυριος, (the loan-word for the Tetragrammaton), when it concerns the name of the Father? No wonder the modern shepherds despise the Septuagint: it refutes their seventeen hundred year old tradition and dogma.
Last edited:
Amen
Philippians 2:5-7 King James Version (KJV)
5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
@freelight -- It is quite telling that whenever the "compound unity" blah, blah, blah, etc., etc., etc., is brought up by a certain crowd, as soon as you show them what happens in Genesis 1:26 of the LXX, with the replacement loan-word, θεος, they all of the sudden want nothing to do with it or the Septuagint and likewise begin to attempt to discredit the Septuagint as if rendered by idiots who did not know what they were doing:
Genesis 1:26 OG LXX
1:26 και ειπεν ο θεος ποιησωμεν ανθρωπον κατ' εικονα ημετεραν και καθ' ομοιωσιν και αρχετωσαν των ιχθυων της θαλασσης και των πετεινων του ουρανου και των κτηνων και πασης της γης και παντων των ερπετων των ερποντων επι της γης
http://bibledatabase.net/html/septuagint/01_001.htm
"And THE THEOS (ο θεος) said, LET US MAKE (ποιησωμεν) man according to OUR (ημετεραν) image . . ."
Ask them, Freelight, what this means concerning their own understanding of θεος in the apostolic writings and how it appears to be nothing more than a loan word for Elohim, (indeed a "compound unity" in some ways of its usage), and how that fact might impact their understanding of some of the most critical and important passages to their doctrine, such as John 1:1. Then, no doubt, you will find out how much they love the truth when you begin to hear the replies, (lol). :chuckle:
Could θεος and especially τον θεον also be intended as compound unities in John 1:1? Do not the majority of New Testament quotes come from the LXX-Septuagint? Do the apostolic writers not also follow the practices already set forth in the LXX such as not using an article with κυριος, (the loan-word for the Tetragrammaton), when it concerns the name of the Father? No wonder the modern shepherds despise the Septuagint: it refutes their seventeen hundred year old tradition and dogma.
Yes, let us run with that:
John 1:1 W/H
1 εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος
Elohim = Theos = Compound Unity . . . :chuckle:
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
You say that YHWH shares His glory with the Lord Jesus. With the following verse in view then we can only conclude that the Lord Jesus is JHWH:
"For mine own sake, even for mine own sake, will I do it: for how should my name be polluted? and I will not give my glory unto another" (Isa.48:11).
Since JHWH says that He will not give His glory to another and the Lord Jesus shares the glory of JHWH then we know that the Lord Jesus is JHWH.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Dont forget, God is Our Father too........
Dont forget, God is Our Father too........
As previously stated,...'God' shares his glory with His Son, who wills to glorify Him. 'Abba' is the Father-Source and Progenitor of all. All originates with-in the Father, his Sons being his offspring. He is the Source of life, all its qualities and attributes, and is naturally the Father of all spirits and personalities. God's Servant-Son who is wholly faithful to his divine trust and calling, shares in the glory of his Father, by rightful inheritance. We also share in that inheritance, and can say in the unity of Spirit, that "I and my Father" are One. "even now we are the sons of God" - don't forget Jesus high priestly prayer in John 17 - that prayer can be realized in unity-consciousness.
Dont forget, God is Our Father too........
As previously stated,...'God' shares his glory with His Son, who wills to glorify Him. 'Abba' is the Father-Source and Progenitor of all. All originates with-in the Father, his Sons being his offspring. He is the Source of life, all its qualities and attributes, and is naturally the Father of all spirits and personalities. God's Servant-Son who is wholly faithful to his divine trust and calling, shares in the glory of his Father, by rightful inheritance. We also share in that inheritance, and can say in the unity of Spirit, that "I and my Father" are One. "even now we are the sons of God" - don't forget Jesus high priestly prayer in John 17
- that prayer can be realized in unity-consciousness.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Consider 'relationship' over 'equality'.........
Consider 'relationship' over 'equality'.........
We naturally honor the Son, because he is the Son of God. We do so by honoring that 'relationship'. - superimposing an idea of 'equality' may not be necessary or even useful here, since there can be a 'theological bias' to that preconception. Consider 'relationship', and that we naturally honor a faithful Son, who honors and glorifies His Father winning a like honor and respect....again naturally because He is God's Son. - and in circles we go on this point, since Trinitarians have a mind-set to interpret any passage with their preconceived translation-goggles on. Step back from that,...try a more Unitarian view...and what is lost? Nothing.
The need to make Jesus into 'God' appears to be an obsession of so many, when that may be totally unnecessary. That God sent His Son into the world, and that His Son revealed 'God' to mankind in a most significant WAY is sufficient, and having faith in that 'revelation' of 'God' is the sole essential. From there, one discovers Jesus and then strives to live as Jesus lived, by doing God's will, and following the 2 fundamental laws, which are summed up in one law, LOVE. - all else is commentary, non-essential, speculation or merely conceptual. - such is fine ( I'm very eclectic and enjoy exploring all dimensions),....but lets not forget the essetnials.
Consider 'relationship' over 'equality'.........
We naturally honor the Son, because he is the Son of God. We do so by honoring that 'relationship'. - superimposing an idea of 'equality' may not be necessary or even useful here, since there can be a 'theological bias' to that preconception. Consider 'relationship', and that we naturally honor a faithful Son, who honors and glorifies His Father winning a like honor and respect....again naturally because He is God's Son. - and in circles we go on this point, since Trinitarians have a mind-set to interpret any passage with their preconceived translation-goggles on. Step back from that,...try a more Unitarian view...and what is lost? Nothing.
The need to make Jesus into 'God' appears to be an obsession of so many, when that may be totally unnecessary. That God sent His Son into the world, and that His Son revealed 'God' to mankind in a most significant WAY is sufficient, and having faith in that 'revelation' of 'God' is the sole essential. From there, one discovers Jesus and then strives to live as Jesus lived, by doing God's will, and following the 2 fundamental laws, which are summed up in one law, LOVE. - all else is commentary, non-essential, speculation or merely conceptual. - such is fine ( I'm very eclectic and enjoy exploring all dimensions),....but lets not forget the essetnials.
How does a Unitarian answer Euthyphro's Dilemma?
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Jesus nowhere says "worship Me".
Naturally, abiding in the Son, we abide in the Father, since they are one in spirit, will and purpose. By joining with Jesus we share in that spiritual union, will and purpose of living. The Spirit of God is life and breath. Jesus offers himself as the way, truth and the life....in towards the Father-Source (the Infinite)....to reveal God and bring souls into God-communion.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Thats a philosophical discussion that deserves its own thread, since being a 'Unitarian' or 'Trinitarian' does not necessarily affect ones opinion regarding whatever is proposed, for they are both essentially monotheistic in orientation.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
freelght, you continue to insist that the Lord Jesus is a created being despite the fact that He describes Himself as Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, the same way that the Almighty God describes Himself:
"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty" (Rev.1:7-8).
We can know that this is speaking of the Lord Jesus because common sense dictates that there can be only One who can be described as the "Alpha and Omega" and the "beginning and the ending," and that One is Jehovah, the Almighty God. And from what the Apostle John says at Revelation 22:20 we can know that the Lord Jesus describes Himself in the same exact way:
"And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last" (Rev.22:12-13).
So unless you can answer these facts I will continue to believe that the Lord Jesus is God and therefore not a created being.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
"Us" as in a divine company in audience.......
"Us" as in a divine company in audience.......
The term "us" can be flexible in representing a company in audience, such as God and his company of angel ministers. This does not make the angels co-creators necessarily,...but God can be including the whole of his company in his creative decree to 'fashion' man. So God could have this 'group-consciousness' if you will, in any one of his decrees with his company in mind. But as you note,....in verse 27 it is only 'God' that creates,....God in the singular. - and rightly so, since God is the sole power that alone can create, whether he gives this creative power to his divine sons (angels of various kinds/orders) or not. But here in the official act of creation, God is the Creator.
Its been awhile since I attended this, but it could be interesting to note that in verse 26, the word is translated 'make' (not 'create')...while in the later verse 27....the word 'create' is emphasized. So a study in the Hebrew words might bring deeper meaning here. I remember the Kaballah has some wonderful insights in these parts
"Us" as in a divine company in audience.......
The term "us" can be flexible in representing a company in audience, such as God and his company of angel ministers. This does not make the angels co-creators necessarily,...but God can be including the whole of his company in his creative decree to 'fashion' man. So God could have this 'group-consciousness' if you will, in any one of his decrees with his company in mind. But as you note,....in verse 27 it is only 'God' that creates,....God in the singular. - and rightly so, since God is the sole power that alone can create, whether he gives this creative power to his divine sons (angels of various kinds/orders) or not. But here in the official act of creation, God is the Creator.
Its been awhile since I attended this, but it could be interesting to note that in verse 26, the word is translated 'make' (not 'create')...while in the later verse 27....the word 'create' is emphasized. So a study in the Hebrew words might bring deeper meaning here. I remember the Kaballah has some wonderful insights in these parts
I stand corrected. However, Luke 19:37-40 indicates that Christ was accepting of worship and praise, saying that the rocks would cry out if no praise was being given. If Christ is not God, and is instead a created being, then He by definition is not worthy of being worshipped as God.
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
That passage is fine,...since 'God' is being praised and glorified. The King-Messiah is respected IN the worship of God since He is God's representative.....naturally.