Right Divider
Body part
:cigar:
Jesus is God
- Thread starter Bright Raven
- Start date
:cigar:
genuineoriginal
New member
Would you prefer the NASB?
http://www.lockman.org/nasb/index.php
The translators do not attempt to interpret Scripture through translation. Instead, the NASB translation team adhered to the principles of literal translation. This is the most exacting and demanding method of translation, requiring a word-for-word translation that is both accurate and readable. This method follows the word and sentence patterns of the original authors in order to enable the reader to study Scripture in its most literal format and to experience the individual personalities of those who penned the original manuscripts. For example, one can directly compare and contrast the simple eloquent style of John with the deep complexity of Paul.
Instead of the translators telling the reader what to think, the updated NASB provides the most precise English translation with which to conduct a personal journey through the Word of God.
The translators do not attempt to interpret Scripture through translation. Instead, the NASB translation team adhered to the principles of literal translation. This is the most exacting and demanding method of translation, requiring a word-for-word translation that is both accurate and readable. This method follows the word and sentence patterns of the original authors in order to enable the reader to study Scripture in its most literal format and to experience the individual personalities of those who penned the original manuscripts. For example, one can directly compare and contrast the simple eloquent style of John with the deep complexity of Paul.
Instead of the translators telling the reader what to think, the updated NASB provides the most precise English translation with which to conduct a personal journey through the Word of God.
| 1 Timothy 3:16 NASB 16 By common confession, great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, Was [m]vindicated [n]in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Proclaimed among the nations, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory. m. 1 Timothy 3:16 Or justified n. 1 Timothy 3:16 Or by |
Yes.
The verse is referring to "He who was revealed in the flesh,"
Isaiah said that the "arm of YHVH" would be revealed.
| John 12:36-38 NASB 36 While you have the Light, believe in the Light, so that you may become sons of Light.” These things Jesus spoke, and He went away and [m]hid Himself from them. 37 But though He had performed so many [n]signs before them, yet they were not believing in Him. 38 This was to fulfill the word of Isaiah the prophet which he spoke: “Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?” m. John 12:36 Lit was hidden n. John 12:37 Or attesting signs |
| a priori relating to or denoting reasoning or knowledge which proceeds from theoretical deduction rather than from observation or experience. |
Unfortunately for your argument, the Trinity Doctrine comes entirely from theoretical deduction rather than from observation or experience. (The very definition of an a priori belief)
On the other hand, having actually read through the Bible multiple times, I can state from observation and from experience that the Bible does not teach that Jesus is God. (the opposite of an a priori belief)
You misunderstand my position.
I am showing that the Bible does NOT clearly teach the Trinity doctrine.
If the Bible actually taught the Trinity doctrine, even if it wasn't as clearly taught as "God sent His Son", then there wouldn't be any need for me to argue against people that make the false claim that the Bible teaches the Trinity doctrine.
For over 1,600 years, the official doctrine of Christianity has been that God is a Trinity, and for over 1,900 years, good Christian believers have been unable to find that taught anywhere in the scriptures.
genuineoriginal
New member
Is it the official Trinitarian position that the phrase "It's all throughout the pages of the Bible" actually means "It can't be found anywhere in the Bible"?
I ask this because the teaching of the Trinity can't be found anywhere in the Bible (the very definition of extra-Biblical)
genuineoriginal
New member
Modern translators do not use the word GOD in the verse for a very good reason: THEOS can't be found in the verse in the early Greek manuscripts, showing that it was added later.
No Greek text has the word THEOS in the verse until after the Nicene creed was declared that God was a Trinity in 381 CE.
Sorry again that you don't like the truth.
genuineoriginal
New member
The Bible teaches that people are not of the faith if they won't accept that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.
Your requirements for who you accept as a Christian are different than the Bible's requirements.
It is not up to you to judge whether I am to be considered a believer or not based on extra-Biblical doctrine.
It seems silly to me that you would contradict yourself in the points you claim people must believe.
You should have stuck to what the Bible teaches so you wouldn't have contradicted yourself.
Right Divider
Body part
You think you're funny when you lie.
Your type of spiritual blindness is shown all through scripture.
genuineoriginal
New member
You are not funny when you lie about what the Bible says.
Please clarify, are you claiming it is taught by the Bible or is not taught by the Bible?
genuineoriginal
New member
Yes, if God is Triune and the Trinity Doctrine is a true doctrine, we only know about it by divine revelation that happened a few hundred years after the last book of the Bible was written.
drbrumley
Well-known member
I don't agree with you...Sorry
God's Truth
New member
The trinity doctrine falls on what some Catholic men taught.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
He's an Arian Russellite, actually. He's a false witness against Jehovah.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
True. But what's your point? I never said that the Bible says, "God is a Trinity".
The Bible does not say, "God is a Trinity", though the Bible teaches the Trinity. Neither does genuineoriginal say "I, genuineoriginal, am a God-hating fool!", yet genuineoriginal consistently teaches, on TOL, that genuineoriginal is a God-hating fool.
True. Yet you go around saying "God is not a Trinity", anyway. That's because you're a Christ-despising, Bible-despising hypocrite.
You've got straw on the brain--actually, you've got straw in place of a brain.
No Trinitarian claims that Jesus must be God the Son BECAUSE the Bible does not say Jesus is not God the Son. Rather, Trinitarians claim that BECAUSE the Bible teaches that Jesus is God the Son, and BECAUSE the Bible cannot contradict itself, THEREFORE the Bible does not teach that Jesus is not God the Son.
You've not given any analogy.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
VS
Recently, genuineoriginal claims that it cannot be proved from the Bible "that God is not a Trinity", whereas, earlier, genuineoriginal claimed, to the contrary, that it can be proved from the Bible "that God is not a Trinity".
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
By your phrase, "the Father", do you mean God the Father?
By your word, "God", do you mean God the Father?
Are you saying that Christians are taught to worship God the Father as God the Father?
Notice that, as the phrase you detest--"the Trinity"--is not found in the Bible, your phrase, "worship the Father as God", is also nowhere to be found in the Bible, you Christ-despising hypocrite. Nowhere, in the Bible, do we read "worship the Father as God", and, of course, you have no hope of speaking meaningfully, or coherently, in any attempt to defend this extra-Biblical phrase of yours.
Again, just as your phrase, "worship the Father as God", is nowhere to be found in the Bible, so also is your phrase, "obey Jesus as Lord", nowhere to be found in the Bible. So, there's yet one more example of you manifesting your hypocrisy.
Extra-Biblical phrases hypocritically cherished by genuineoriginal, and his fellow Bible-despising anti-Christians:
- "worship the Father as God"
- "obey Jesus as Lord"
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
By your word, "God", are you referring to God the Father? Yes or No?
By your phrase, "a man", are you referring to Jesus Christ? Yes or No?
But what Trinitarian has ever claimed that God the Father "came as" a man?
What Trinitarian has ever claimed that God the Father "came as" Jesus Christ?
Please try to quote a Trinitarian(s) wherein you would say they are claiming that God the Father "came as" a man.
Please try to quote a Trinitarian(s) wherein you would say they are claiming that God the Father "came as" Jesus Christ.
If you can't do so, then why can't you just shut up and go beg for attention from somewhere else?
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
You just made a false accusation against Right Divider, you Christ-hating sinner. Nowhere did RD claim that the verse has Jesus saying, "I am God", though you have just falsely accused RD of claiming so, you liar. Right Divider rightly stated that the verse has Jesus claiming to be God; RD did NOT state that the verse has Jesus saying, "I am God". RD's vindicatioin is all right there, in the thread, for everyone to see. Notice how you can't even quote Right Divider as having said that the verse has Jesus saying, "I am God". Why are you such a hypocrite--and an exceeding shallow one, at that?
Also note: the phrase, "I am God", in fact, is nowhere to be found in the whole Bible. Nobody, in the whole of Scripture, EVER says, "I am God".
genuineoriginal, by his anti-Christ ravings, teaches us that genuineoriginal is a Bible-despising fool; this is true despite the fact that we, not surprisingly, never find genuineoriginal saying, "I, genuineoriginal, am a Bible-despising fool!"
The Bible doesn't teach anything. People read it, interpret it, and every now and then someone teaches someone else their interpretation of it.
NWL
Active member
Loooool
You believed you were so high and mighty with your knowledge but you have been shamed and embarrassed in only a few posts with me. You are my new record holder at how quick someone ignore the questions and points I make as they are unanswerable as they break your false biblical understanding. You have the same flawed heart as the hypocritical Jews. Just as they looked for excuses and reasons to kill Jesus as he embarrassed them you have looked for reasons and excuses to kill the conversation with me as you are embarrassed by the points I make and you being unable to refute them. The truth apparently is meant to always prevail, yet in your case "you don't debate theology with people you claim are cultists", Jesus himself was a cultist in his day by today's definition of a cult, you are ignorant of many things.
Points I have made that are too difficult for you to handle and which I have refuted:
1) Jesus is not the one speaking in Rev 1:8 as the context shows he is separate from that one by Rev 1:4,5 this is irrefutable, no amount of evidence to the contrary that seems to show Jesus as "the one coming" or as the A&O will unwrite John written words in Rev 1:4,5. One has to tackle the contradiction head on to deal with it. You haven't even given an answer to this question but claim its pre-supposed and yet are unable to explain why its pre-supposed, you simply cannot explain why Jesus is separate from "the one who is, was and is coming" as you want and need him to be "the one who is, was and is coming"
2) You believe "root of David" somehow proves Jesus is God as you wrongly believe the word "root" has something to Jesus being the beginning of David line (I'm not even sure what you believe the root symbolizes as you don't even explain you positions but rather leave it to me to guess them) or the start of his house as its "roots". As I've said before, anyone with a good and basic understanding of the bible knows the expression of Jesus being the "root of David" has nothing to do with David coming from Jesus, but much to the contrary, is an expression that Jesus is David's descendant. Even on the first googled result on a credible trinitarian website they give the following definition, "Root here means stock, family, descendant, hence, "the Root of David" is that which descended from David, not that from which David descended. Jesus Christ in His human nature and family connections was a descendant of David, a member of his family." (https://www.biblestudytools.com/dict...david-root-of/). The only place I have seen people claim "root of David" shows Jesus is God are from non-scholarly self-made websites or blogs where the people like yourself have no clue what the biblical language and metaphorical language means but read it on face-value.
3) The one who is was and is to come judges (Rev 16:5) thus Jesus is that one according to John 5:21,22. This was a fallacious argument that relied on the ignorance of believing the judging in Rev 16:5 and John 5:21 refer to the same judgment when they do not. Even if the "one who is, was and is coming" judges it still doesn't refer to Jesus and can still refer to the Father as the Father is the ultimate judge despite appointing Jesus as a judge, as it is the Father who judges through his son, this is clear according to Acts 17:31, "..Because he [the Father] has set a day on which he purposes to judge the inhabited earth in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed".
4) The title "first and last" (F&L) and the title "Alpha and Omega" (A&O) are not synonymous. The F&L relate to Jesus death and resurrection, this is clear by the context both times the phrase F&L is used. The A&O relates to God having no beginning and end and being the only God. It contradicts God character of the title F&L was the same as A&O and if Jesus is the one God as it would, in essence, be saying Jesus as God in his divine nature as the Almighty said "I became dead" according to Rev 1:18, this is impossible as God cannot die and the verse is clearly talking about God in his highest non-human form, since, the man part of Jesus is not the A&O or Almighty, its only his divinity that is the A&O and Almighty, thus him saying "I BECAME DEAD" is the ALMIGHTY speaking in his divinity which is a contradiction of his eternality. Simply put the "first and last" and "alpha and Omega" simply cannot be in reference to the same thing otherwise God will have had to have died.
---------------------------------
Nothing I've said is unbiblical, everything I've shown has been backed up immensely from the bible, I have not twisted scripture in any way. if I have then show me. The only reason you are making excuses to not talk to me is that you cannot deal and refute the things I say and the questions I pose, you are fooling no one loool. I've shown your ignorance of the Biblical metaphorical language and how being the "root of David" has nothing to do with being before David, rather, its got to do with being his descendant. I've shown how your argument in relation to Jesus being judge and therefore the "one who is, was and is coming" to be fallacious, YOU have shown how you are unable to answer my question, and how the title F&L is different to A&O. You CANNOT refute the truth, that is why you are having such a hard time and have to result in running and killing the conversation the same way the Jews killed of the conversation with Jesus. YOU, the name-calling mocker who acts like a hypocrite have been defeated by JW, go lick your wounds.
Last edited:
NWL
Active member
Generally, I only stop speaking to someone when they repeatedly refuse to answer questions, are wholly unreasonable with the plain reading of the biblical text or are rude. Also, the obligations of life also at times prevent me.
A lot people mistake the actions or privileges of Jesus as evidence of him being God, like you claiming him sitting on the throne makes him God. The only issue with this is that the arguements are not consistent. For example, Jesus said "To the one who conquers I will grant to sit down with me on my throne, just as I conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne", so unless you are willing to accept that we should worship the ones who have conquered as they also sit on the throne, then it's not evidence that we should worship Jesus directly since he sits on the throne. You also fail to realize Jesus is above all things apart from the one who appointed him above all things, it was the Father who appointed Jesus above all things -apart from himself- and the Father that granted Jesus to sit on the throne. No one granted the Father to sit on the throne and no one appointed the Father above all things, this is because its the Father who is the one God (1 Cor 8:4-6) and only he has the authority to do such things (he can also grant others, such as Jesus the power to grant others).
I do not believe Jesus is the one God, he is no doubt a type of God/god but not the one God. Jesus emptied himself when coming to earth, so how could he be God on earth if it was his divinity that he emptied.
Again this argument is not consistent, Jesus also said "whoever receives anyone I send receives me also, and whoever receives me receives also the One who sent me” (John 13:20). These words do not imply the apostles were Jesus or even the Father who sent Jesus do they, despite them communicating a similar thing when Jesus said "when you see him you can say you see the Father". Jesus was sent by the Father and it was the Father who told him what to say and speak, therefore it was the Father's message he was speaking, in a sense then it was the Father speaking and not Jesus, despite Jesus being the one who said the words.
(John 12:49) For I have not spoken of my own initiative, but the Father who sent me has himself given me a commandment about what to say and what to speak.
I do not deny Jesus is a type of God (Isa 9:6, Hebrews 1:8, John 20:28) as there are "many gods", I deny that he is the one God, only the Father is the one God.
(1 Corinthians 8:4, 5) "..Now concerning the eating of food offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world and that there is no God but one. 5 Foreven thoughthere are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” there is actually to us one God, the Father, from whom all things are and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are and we through him."