Jesus is God

[Right Divider]

The three are the same ONE and ONLY God who is the Father.

When did God become a Father?

The scripture proves that it is one image, not three different Persons, as the trinity says.

A Father is a PERSON.
A Son is a PERSON.

Get over your silly "figures" and understand what the Bible teaches.

 

[genuineoriginal]

You have just told me that each of two, mutually-contradictory propositions, can be proved.

Not at all.
I have told you that when you try to use the Bible to prove a pre-existing belief, you will find a way to prove it to yourself.

That does not mean that your pre-existing beliefs are correct, only that your will use confirmation bias to convince yourself that your beliefs are supported by the Bible.
That is the opposite of coming to the Bible to see what the Bible actually teaches despite what you believe.

 

[genuineoriginal]

The Bible says that there is ONE God.

The Bible says that there is one God, the Bible says that there are many gods.

 

[Right Divider]

The Bible says that there is one God, the Bible says that there are many gods.

And you cannot tell them apart.

 

[God's Truth]

When did God become a Father?

The angels are His sons.

The Jews were called His sons and daughters.

He is called Jesus' Father.

A Father is a PERSON.
A Son is a PERSON.

The Bible says there is ONLY ONE GOD and He is the Father.

The Bible does NOT say there is only one God who is the Father and another the Son, and another the Holy Spirit.

Get over your silly "figures" and understand what the Bible teaches.

Stop bringing up the word 'figures' then.

I haven't used that word in a long time.

I was trying to explain the truth to you that you are a father figure and a son figure and Jesus is our Father and brother and a son.

Jesus is speaking in the Old Testament as the Father.

Jesus came to earth and speaks to us as the Son of God.

 

[Theo102]

Yes, ONE is not of absolute singularity but ONE of unity. The trinity.... thanks for playing.

That's an arbitrary interpretation, echad clearly refers to one of many in some contexts. Also the idea that Elohim is always three beings is not supported by the text, eg Moses as one of Elohim in Exodus 19-20.

 

[Theo102]

And you cannot tell them apart.

You can tell them apart by looking at the Hebrew. The singular form of Elah is used in many contexts:

ויאמר ברוך יהוה אלהי שם ויהי כנען עבד למו
And he said, Blessed [be] the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
Genesis 9:26, KJV

 

[Right Divider]

The angels are His sons.

The Jews were called His sons and daughters.

He is called Jesus' Father.

Exactly!! Therefore you must consider the CONTEXT which you do not do.

The Bible says there is ONLY ONE GOD and He is the Father.

There is ONE God: Father; Son; and Holy Spirit.

A Father is a PERSON
A Son is a PERSON.
The Holy Spirit is a PERSON.

The Bible does NOT say there is only one God who is the Father and another the Son, and another the Holy Spirit.

Once again you CONFLATE TERMS in an effort to make your false doctrine become true.

Stop bringing up the word 'figures' then.

Not until you repudiate that nonsense.

I haven't used that word in a long time.

So you no longer believe that?

I was trying to explain the truth to you that you are a father figure and a son figure and Jesus is our Father and brother and a son.

NO I AM NOT.... I am an actual father and an actual son. Your "figures" do not figure.

Jesus is speaking in the Old Testament as the Father.

Where did you get that idea?

Jesus came to earth and speaks to us as the Son of God.

No problem there.

 

[genuineoriginal]

You're interpolating the idea of creation, and you're omitting the definite article just as in Clete's translation.

There is a reason for both.
The phrase "In the Beginning" is found in the story of creation, so a repeat of that phrase is done to draw the reader to the account of creation.

Genesis 1:1 1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

The intended audience of the Gospel of John were Jewish and Gentile believers in Jesus the Messiah and the God of the Old Testament, so the use of τὸν θεόν (the God) was done by the writer to indicate which god was being referred to.

Modern usage of the word "God" (capital G) is that it is referring to the God of the Old Testament and the New Testament, but not any other god (such as Allah).

The presence of the definite article implies that there were other theos - this idea is incompatible with monotheism so that's probably why it got left out of the translation.

The Bible teaches that there are other gods (divine beings, deities), so that has nothing to do with why I left out the definite article.
I substituted the definite article with the capital G, as done in modern usage.

Theos is singular but Elohim is plural, it's a nonsense to translate both of these words as "God".

When translating from one language to another, compromises must be made.
In the case of Elohiym, the word is used to refer to the singular God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who said, "שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ יְהוָה אֶחָֽד׃" ("Hear O Israel, YHVH is Elohiym, YHVH is one").

The pantheon (Elohiym) of the children of Israel was to include no other gods than the singlar God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, YHVH.

pantheon all the gods of a people or religion collectively.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Maybe if you are a pagan you can say that.

Maybe if I use the definitions of words I can say that.

deity a god or goddess

 

[genuineoriginal]

And you cannot tell them apart.

I have no problem with it, since the Bible is very clear about the distinction between the other gods and the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

 

[7djengo7]

The Bible teaches that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is the same God that Jesus said we should pray to when we pray, "Our Father who art in Heaven, Hallowed be thy Name".

True. You are correct, here, in saying that the Bible teaches that Jesus is the same God that Jesus said His people (which excludes genuineoriginal) should pray to when we pray, "Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name".

So, yes the Bible does teach the doctrine that we are to worship "The Father" as God.

Again, you use a phrase--a formula, in fact--found (as far as I am aware, at least) nowhere in the Bible:

"worship [ ] as [ ]"​

What (if anything) would you say it is to worship someone/something AS someone/something? I ask you because that is your formula, and not the Bible's.

What (if anything) would you say is the difference between worshiping the Father, on the one hand, and worshiping the Father AS God, on the other? What motivates you to choose to say "worship the Father AS God" over saying, simply, "worship the Father"?

Oh, also, when you say "worship 'The Father' as God", to what/whom are you referring by your word, 'God'? Are you referring to the Father? Are you saying that we are to worship the Father AS the Father--that is, that we are to worship the Father AS Himself? If not, then AS what or whom would you say we are to worship the Father?

John 4:23-24 23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. 24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

See: absolutely nothing there about worshiping the Father AS ______. That's your formula, not the Bible's. Do you even mean anything by it?

Instead, what we do see in the text you included is mention of worshiping the Father in spirit and in truth. No mention, though, of worshiping the Father AS ______.

However, the Trinity doctrine is not taught by the Bible in any form.

You've already asserted that falsehood, over and over and over... Simply more vain repetition from your anti-Christ, satan-enthralled mind.

So, it is not the phrase that I am opposed to, it is the false claim that the Bible teaches the Trinity.

Here, you've just reworded, yet again, the falsehood you've already been asserting, over and over and over.... Simply more vain repetition from your anti-Christ, satan-enthralled mind.

If you choose to refuse to worship the Father as God despite the teaching of the Bible, that is your choice, and your final destination will be the lake of fire.

The Bible never says anything about worshiping anything, or anyone AS anything, or anyone, and thus, the Bible never says anything about worshiping the Father AS God. That's your own, nonsensical, extra-Biblical formula; nobody's going to the lake of fire on a charge of refusing to be an ignorant cluck in the manner that you are, here, manifesting yourself to be an ignorant cluck. Back to the drawing board for you.

 

[7djengo7]

In no way am I an anti-Christ, nor do I lie about what the Bible teaches about Jesus, the Son of God.

Yeah you are. You're a Christ-blasphemer. You teach that Jesus is not good.

 

[God's Truth]

Exactly!! Therefore you must consider the CONTEXT which you do not do.

You are wrong. Just saying so doesn’t make it true.

You asked me when God is called a Father and I told you, then you merely say this is just ridiculous.

There is ONE God: Father; Son; and Holy Spirit.

The Bible doesn’t say that there is one God the Father, one God the Son, and one God the Holy Spirit. The Bible says there is ONE GOD AND HE IS THE FATHER.

I have given you the two scriptures that say that and you say nothing about it in return.

A Father is a PERSON
A Son is a PERSON.
The Holy Spirit is a PERSON.

They are the same one Person.

Once again you CONFLATE TERMS in an effort to make your false doctrine become true.

That is not true. That is the way you get out of dealing with what I said. Stop with mere denials and insults, because it is no defense for any truth.

Not until you repudiate that nonsense.

Are you a father and a son? So can one person be a father and a son?
Now you see what ‘figure’ means.

So you no longer believe that?

There is nothing wrong with my explaining to you that it is Jesus speaking in the Old Testament as God the Father, and then he came to earth and spoke to us as the son of God and our brother.

NO I AM NOT.... I am an actual father and an actual son. Your "figures" do not figure.

Well the saved are adopted by God and He is not your biological Father.

Where did you get that idea?

So you don’t believe when God the Father speaks in the Old Testament it is Jesus?

 

[Theo102]

There is a reason for both.
The phrase "In the Beginning" is found in the story of creation, so a repeat of that phrase is done to draw the reader to the account of creation.

Genesis 1:1 1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

The intended audience of the Gospel of John were Jewish and Gentile believers in Jesus the Messiah and the God of the Old Testament, so the use of τὸν θεόν (the God) was done by the writer to indicate which god was being referred to.

Modern usage of the word "God" (capital G) is that it is referring to the God of the Old Testament and the New Testament, but not any other god (such as Allah).

It's not the job of the translator to make doctrinal interpolations. The use of the definite article implies YHWH rather than Elohim, so there's a doctrinal mistranslation in your text because you removed the definite article in your translation.

When translating from one language to another, compromises must be made.

Yes, but leaving out the definite article wasn't a compromise since the definite article in the Greek is unequivocal.

In the case of Elohiym, the word is used to refer to the singular God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who said, "שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ יְהוָה אֶחָֽד׃" ("Hear O Israel, YHVH is Elohiym, YHVH is one").

You've also mistranslated the shema. The word 'Elohiym" is not present in the Hebrew.

The pantheon (Elohiym) of the children of Israel was to include no other gods than the singlar God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, YHVH.

pantheon all the gods of a people or religion collectively.

It's not really accurate to call Elohim a pantheon, since in the context of the Mosiac law Elohim is YHWH and his prophet.

 

[God's Truth]

Maybe if I use the definitions of words I can say that.

deity a god or goddess

You chopped up the definition. That is not an honest thing to do.

 

[Right Divider]

They are the same one Person.

NO THEY ARE NOT. You have a faulty definition of PERSON.

 

[God's Truth]

NO THEY ARE NOT. You have a faulty definition of PERSON.

You don't believe when God the Father is speaking in the Old Testament it is Jesus?

 

[7djengo7]

Not at all.

On the contrary, you have, indeed. By having told me that each of two, mutually-contradictory propositions can be proved, you have told me that a proposition can be both false, and proved. Here, you tell me it, again:

​

I have told you that when you try to use the Bible to prove a pre-existing belief, you will find a way to prove it to yourself.

Your inclusion of the words, "to yourself", doesn't help you one whit. Sorry. You're still

telling me that a proposition can be both false, and proved. Your view of the nature of proving is irrational, and utterly worthless. Unlike yourself, rationally-thinking people understand that only true propositions can be proved.​

 

[7djengo7]

Why should I shut up when people like you keep spreading lies about what the Word of God teaches?
Should I be silent while people like you teach others to believe the doctrines of men instead of the doctrines taught in the Bible?

Matthew 15:7-9 7 [JESUS]Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,[/JESUS] 8 [JESUS]This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.[/JESUS] 9 [JESUS]But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.[/JESUS]

You teach that Jesus is not good. That, alone, is reason enough for you to shut up, you lying, Christ-despising Bible-hater.