Jump to content
IGNORED

Jesus Is God


KiwiChristian

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Non-Trinitarian
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  308
  • Content Per Day:  0.10
  • Reputation:   139
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/13/2016
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/14/1944

Greetings again KiwiChristian,

 

4 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

He was fully man and fully God.

You may accept this concept, but I cannot reconcile how Jesus could be lacking in knowledge as a man and at the same time having full knowledge as God. Did he have two separate minds?

 

4 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

So, are you saying Jesus lied in John 2:19 when He said "Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." ?

No, Jesus did not lie. On second considerations to my previous explanation, I am willing to put this statement of Jesus back into the difficult basket for the present, as I am beginning to doubt my explanation as being satisfactory.

 

4 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

According to your interpretation.

Yes, I believe that the resurrection of Lazarus was providentially provided for our instruction as a precursor to the resurrection of Jesus.

 

4 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

It's very easy to get sucked into a closed-minded type of attitude. The JW and mormon cults are not allowed to read ANYTHING that doesn't come from their own organisation.

I enjoy collecting and reading a wide range of Biblical books and commentaries, and some of these are very helpful, especially as part of my special interest, the Psalms and Isaiah. BTW when you seemed to demand what translation I used and I answered, I also asked you what translation you used or preferred, but I did not receive an answer. I only asked this out of interest, as many have different preferences, and there is some value in each translation.

 

4 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

I havent fully read this article, but initial glances look sound.

Yes I read this article, but I believe that God the Father raised Jesus from the tomb by means of the power of the Holy Spirit. Jesus on the other hand was dead before he was raised, and did not have a consciousness. But as I said, I am willing to leave John 2 in the too hard basket for the moment.

 

Kind regards

Trevor

Edited by TrevorL
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Members *
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  176
  • Topics Per Day:  0.07
  • Content Count:  870
  • Content Per Day:  0.35
  • Reputation:   330
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  06/23/2017
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  01/22/1968

1 hour ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again KiwiChristian,

 

 

Hello, my friend.

 

1 hour ago, TrevorL said:

 

 

You may accept this concept, but I cannot reconcile how Jesus could be lacking in knowledge as a man and at the same time having full knowledge as God. Did he have two separate minds?

 

True. I also cannot understand it.

 

Like i said to four mormons in my living room once, if we could understand HOW God IS God, we would BE God.
 

Their response? "well, we hope to be one day".

 

1 hour ago, TrevorL said:

 

No, Jesus did not lie. On second considerations to my previous explanation, I am willing to put this statement of Jesus back into the difficult basket for the present, as I am beginning to doubt my explanation as being satisfactory.

 

Good on you. Like i said, either Jesus WAS God and DID indeed raise Himself up, or He lied or was delusional. 

I prefer to take what the text says. The text says all three people of the "Trinity" raised Jesus.

 

1 hour ago, TrevorL said:

 

 

Yes, I believe that the resurrection of Lazarus was providentially provided for our instruction as a precursor to the resurrection of Jesus.

 

 

That's fine. You can believe what you want. I believe it was to show Jesus  is God and has power/control over life and death.

 

1 hour ago, TrevorL said:

 

 

I enjoy collecting and reading a wide range of Biblical books and commentaries, and some of these are very helpful, especially as part of my special interest, the Psalms and Isaiah.

 

I also enjoy studying from many different sources. I enjoy a wide range of people. I wouldn't say i "follow" any particular person, as no person is right on everything.

 

You have to eat the meat and spit out the bones.

 

People i like are Kent Hovind, Robert Morey, Larry Wessels, James White, Jack Hyles, Gail Riplinger, Sandra Tanner, etc.

 

1 hour ago, TrevorL said:

 

BTW when you seemed to demand what translation I used and I answered, I also asked you what translation you used or preferred, but I did not receive an answer. I only asked this out of interest, as many have different preferences, and there is some value in each translation.

 

Sorry, you are right. i was a hypocrite. I think it is obvious i am one of those horrible, KJV people and i think the modern versions are good translations, but of the wrong and corrupted text.

 

1 hour ago, TrevorL said:

 

 

Yes I read this article, but I believe that God the Father raised Jesus from the tomb by means of the power of the Holy Spirit.

 

Where do you get this from the Bible? Book, chapter and verse, please.

 

1 hour ago, TrevorL said:

 

Jesus on the other hand was dead before he was raised, and did not have a consciousness. But as I said, I am willing to leave John 2 in the too hard basket for the moment.

 

Sure, His BODY was dead.

Remember, WE are a trinity in a way. We are body, spirit and soul.

 

1 hour ago, TrevorL said:

 

 

 

Kind regards

Trevor

Check out the "triple point of water".

Now, if God can make something as simple as H2O exist as water, solid AND vapor AT THE SAME TIME, surely He can do the same to/for Himself.

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Non-Trinitarian
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  308
  • Content Per Day:  0.10
  • Reputation:   139
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/13/2016
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/14/1944

Greetings again KiwiChristian,

 

3 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

True. I also cannot understand it.

Like i said to four mormons in my living room once, if we could understand HOW God IS God, we would BE God.

Their response? "well, we hope to be one day".

God has revealed many things but I simply reject a concept that is contradictory in itself, such as that Jesus was fully man and fully God. I especially reject this as this is never stated in the Scriptures, but is the illogical conclusion of misunderstanding many verses. I think Mormons are more active in NZ than Australia, especially among the Maori population. I have not encountered any and their wrong ideas for 20 years.

 

3 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

Good on you. Like i said, either Jesus WAS God and DID indeed raise Himself up, or He lied or was delusional. 

I prefer to take what the text says. The text says all three people of the "Trinity" raised Jesus.

I am resigned to leaving this in the too hard basket for the moment. If this is the only verse you use to prove the Trinity, then I suggest you are on shaky ground.

 

3 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

That's fine. You can believe what you want. I believe it was to show Jesus  is God and has power/control over life and death.

I agree that Jesus was given this power to raise Lazarus. Please note that Jesus prayed to God first and God heard him John 11:40-42. If Jesus was God he would not have to refer this matter to God the Father.

 

3 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

I also enjoy studying from many different sources. I enjoy a wide range of people. I wouldn't say i "follow" any particular person, as no person is right on everything.

You have to eat the meat and spit out the bones.

People i like are Kent Hovind, Robert Morey, Larry Wessels, James White, Jack Hyles, Gail Riplinger, Sandra Tanner, etc.

I am glad that you seek the counsel from the wise, as we all need a great deal of help. Nevertheless I have never heard of any that you mention, but I should check for some of these on your recommendation.

 

3 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

Sorry, you are right. i was a hypocrite. I think it is obvious i am one of those horrible, KJV people and i think the modern versions are good translations, but of the wrong and corrupted text.

My preference is the KJV, but see the need to check some aspects such as archaic words with modern translations. My brother in law who extensively studied Job suggested that the RV is better in many verses for this difficult book of poetry.

 

3 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

Where do you get this from the Bible? Book, chapter and verse, please.

I have already quoted Acts 2 where it says God raised him, and I do not believe that God Himself descended from heaven, but used his power to achieve this. The two Angels may have been active in this work. Because Jesus was raised by God the Father he is the Son of God in a more complete manner, showing that God gave him life Romans 1:1-4.

 

3 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

Sure, His BODY was dead.

Remember, WE are a trinity in a way. We are body, spirit and soul.

Another subject, but I do not believe that there is consciousness when the body is dead. We sleep in the dust of the earth Daniel 12:2. I do not believe that we have immortal souls, but believe that man is a living soul Genesis 2:7, as were the animals that were created Genesis 1:21.

 

Kind regards

Trevor

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Members *
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  176
  • Topics Per Day:  0.07
  • Content Count:  870
  • Content Per Day:  0.35
  • Reputation:   330
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  06/23/2017
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  01/22/1968

2 hours ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again KiwiChristian,

 

God has revealed many things but I simply reject a concept that is contradictory in itself, such as that Jesus was fully man and fully God.

 

Then you are calling Jesus a liar and are limiting God.

 

2 hours ago, TrevorL said:

 

 

I especially reject this as this is never stated in the Scriptures, but is the illogical conclusion of misunderstanding many verses.

 

Rubbish. It IS shown in the Bible.

 

According to YOUR understanding of many verses.

http://www.bugman123.com/Bible/JesusIsGod.html

 

2 hours ago, TrevorL said:

 

I think Mormons are more active in NZ than Australia, especially among the Maori population. I have not encountered any and their wrong ideas for 20 years.

 

I am resigned to leaving this in the too hard basket for the moment. If this is the only verse you use to prove the Trinity, then I suggest you are on shaky ground.

 

Whoa. Hang on a minute. I dont think ANY Christian bases anything upon ONE verses. See the above link. Saves me typing them out myself.

 

 

2 hours ago, TrevorL said:

 

 

 

I agree that Jesus was given this power to raise Lazarus. Please note that Jesus prayed to God first and God heard him John 11:40-42. If Jesus was God he would not have to refer this matter to God the Father.

 

 

Wrong. He already HAD the power. He did not need to be GIVEN this power.

 

2 hours ago, TrevorL said:

 

I am glad that you seek the counsel from the wise, as we all need a great deal of help. Nevertheless I have never heard of any that you mention, but I should check for some of these on your recommendation.


 

 

I think ALL have their detractors and "anti" people, but like i said, you have to chew the meat and spit out the bones.

 

James White is great debating catholics and muslims, Bob Morey is great on islam, catholicism and mormonism. Gail Riplinger is great on Bible versions. Larry Wessels is a good all-rounder, Kent Hovind is great on the evolution lie/religion.

 

2 hours ago, TrevorL said:

 

 

My preference is the KJV, but see the need to check some aspects such as archaic words with modern translations.

 

The words are there for a reason. For the very few "archaic" words, google is your friend. I think people use the language as an excuse to reject the KJV.

 

I cannot really use other translations and compare or check with the KJV since they were not translated from the same source.

 

2 hours ago, TrevorL said:

My brother in law who extensively studied Job suggested that the RV is better in many verses for this difficult book of poetry.

 

I have already quoted Acts 2 where it says God raised him, and I do not believe that God Himself descended from heaven, but used his power to achieve this.

 

Yes, God did raise Jesus. God is Jesus. God is the Holy Spirit. God is God the father.

 

All three raised Jesus.

 

1 Cor. 6:14  "And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power."

John 2:19,20 "Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days." The Jews replied, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?" But the temple he had spoken of was his body.""

1 Peter 3:18 "For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit."

 

2 hours ago, TrevorL said:

 

The two Angels may have been active in this work.

 

There is ZERO scriptural evidence for this, though.

2 hours ago, TrevorL said:

 

Because Jesus was raised by God the Father he is the Son of God in a more complete manner, showing that God gave him life Romans 1:1-4.

 

False presupposition in the first few words. For want of a better phrase, the TRINITY raised Jesus.

 

2 hours ago, TrevorL said:

 

Another subject, but I do not believe that there is consciousness when the body is dead. We sleep in the dust of the earth Daniel 12:2. I do not believe that we have immortal souls, but believe that man is a living soul Genesis 2:7, as were the animals that were created Genesis 1:21.

 

Old testament saints may indeed have been in the ground until Jesus entered heaven. Actually, come to think of it, they were in a place called "Abraham's Bosom" or "paradise" i believe.

 

It sounds as you are a "soul sleep" advocate. This is not Biblical when studied properly. I will attach a pdf that explains it better than i can.

97. THE ERROR OF SOUL SLEEP.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  26
  • Topic Count:  61
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  9,602
  • Content Per Day:  4.02
  • Reputation:   7,795
  • Days Won:  21
  • Joined:  09/11/2017
  • Status:  Offline

http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/SBL Psalm 82 in John 10 paper.pdf

1. Psalm 82 and Israelite Religion Israelite religion had an assembly of heavenly host under the authority of Yahweh. This assembly has very close affinities to the pantheons of ancient Near East, particularly in Canaanite religion. The most telling example is the literature from Ras Shamra (Ugarit), discovered in the late 1920s. As a Semitic language, Ugaritic is closely related to biblical Hebrew, sharing a good deal of vocabulary, as well as morphological and syntactical features. Upon their decipherment, many of the Ugaritic tablets were found to contain words and phrases describing a council of gods that are conceptually and linguistically parallel to the Hebrew Bible. The Ugaritic divine council was led by El, the same word used in the Hebrew Bible for deity and as the proper name for the God of Israel (e.g., Is 40:18; 43:12). There are explicit references to a council or assembly of El, in some cases overlapping word for-word with those in the Hebrew Bible.

Psalm 82:1 is perhaps the best example, as it employs the expression ʿdt ʾil(m) (Hebrew: לֵ ת־אַ דֲ ף (for the council, along with a transparent reference to gods under the authority of Israel's God: ‚God (יםִ להֱ ֹא (stands in the council of El/the divine council (לֵ ת־אַ דֲ ף ;(among the gods (יםִ להֱ ֹא (he passes judgment.‛ The second occurrence of יםִ להֱ ֹא must be semantically plural due to the preposition ‚in the midst of.‛ These gods are being judged for their corrupt administration of the nations of the earth, having been granted that authority at the division of the nations at Babel according to Deut 32:8-9 (LXX, DSS).4 This plurality cannot be explained as human beings. A parallel passage, Psalm 89:5-7 [6-8], places the God of Israel ‚in the assembly of the holy ones‛ (לַ הְ קִ ב יםִ שֹדְ ק (and then asks ‚For who in the clouds (קַ חַ שַ ב (can be compared to Yahweh? Who is like Yahweh among the sons of God (יםִ לֵ א יֵ נְ ב ,(a god greatly feared in the council of the holy ones (יםִ שֹדְ וד־קֹסְ ב ‛?)The divine council is in the heavens, not on earth where the Jewish judges are. Additionally, there is no text in the Hebrew Bible that has a council of human Israelite judges who are assigned to judge the nations of the earth.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Non-Trinitarian
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  308
  • Content Per Day:  0.10
  • Reputation:   139
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/13/2016
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/14/1944

Greetings Justin Adams,

 

1 hour ago, Justin Adams said:

http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/SBL Psalm 82 in John 10 paper.pdf

1. Psalm 82 and Israelite Religion Israelite religion had an assembly of heavenly host under the authority of Yahweh. This assembly has very close affinities to the pantheons of ancient Near East, particularly in Canaanite religion.

I appreciate the link and the portion of the article that you have quoted. I have had a brief read of the article after downloading the 14-page pdf. Some of the technical aspects of the language could be a bit difficult for me. On the other hand I disagree with his view as I still maintain after reading his arguments that Psalm 82 is speaking of the Judges. I could take some parts of his article and answer these parts, which would in my opinion dismiss some of his statements, but with your and his Trinitarian perspective you most probably would not agree. This answer would take some time. If you want me to simply highlight my major objections I could mention these.

 

For example his opening argument

"First, how is it a coherent defense of John’s well-known high Christology by essentially having Jesus use Psalm 82:6 to say, in effect, that he can call himself the son of God when every other Jew can, too? "

is completely outside my view that the Judges were called Elohim. Jesus is talking about the Judges, not every other Jew. Also he immediately takes the view that Jesus is attempting to prove that he is God. Also the paragraph that you have quoted above seems to take the view that the teaching of the Bible is derived from local sources, eg “Ugaritic divine council”, not a Divine revelation. This view is very scholarly, but in my estimation is linked with Higher Criticism, which has as its basis a rejection of what the Bible teaches. They do not believe that the Pentateuch was given by Moses.

 

Kind regards

Trevor

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  26
  • Topic Count:  61
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  9,602
  • Content Per Day:  4.02
  • Reputation:   7,795
  • Days Won:  21
  • Joined:  09/11/2017
  • Status:  Offline

It took me many years to arrive at what I think is the best understanding for me. There are areas that just disappear into the diminishing horizon of my mind as it is unable to grasp them. Our Yahweh has really reduced Himself more than we can imagine in order to present facts and concepts that will aid us. None of our concepts is complete because were they complete, then we would be God.

When we have our child on our lap we reduce the complexity of our interaction in order to communicate with them. This is what The Most High God has to do to relate to us.

So when we think we have it all sussed out, we have but a shadow of true reality and do indeed see in a glass darkly. If we limit the little we do know to comply with homogeneity in communication, we necessarily reduce it yet further. So for me to understand another person's concepts is at best tenuous and at worse incompatible with my world-view.

Since we cannot readily agree on hard texts, I find it insufficient to argue points that are flavored with questions that if we are honest, we all have - even in regards to our own understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Non-Trinitarian
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  308
  • Content Per Day:  0.10
  • Reputation:   139
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/13/2016
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/14/1944

Greetings again KiwiChristian,

 

Much of what you have stated is a repeat of what we have already discussed, so I decided to answer a few portions.

 

2 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

Wrong. He already HAD the power. He did not need to be GIVEN this power.

I would be interested in what Jesus is teaching us in the following:

Acts 2:22-24 (KJV): Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me.

I will give you my assessment. Jesus wanted to raise Lazarus from the dead, but before he does this he had prayed to God the Father. This either implies that Jesus first requested that Lazarus could be raised, or that he be given the power to perform this particular miracle. Whatever the exact request, God answered him in the affirmative. If he was God the Son, why was it necessary to pray to God the Father? What do you suggest that Jesus had requested to God?

 

2 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

James White is great debating

I have listened to James White discuss the Trinity with Sir Anthony Buzzard. I agreed with most of what Sir Anthony stated. I have a copy of Anthony Buzzard's book.

 

2 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

The words are there for a reason. For the very few "archaic" words, google is your friend. I think people use the language as an excuse to reject the KJV.

I cannot really use other translations and compare or check with the KJV since they were not translated from the same source.

I do not reject the KJV, but heartily endorse it as being the best thing that ever happened with the English Bible(s). You seem to be almost a KJV only advocate. Perhaps you have not read from a RV/KJV interlinear Bible. My mother told me that this was my grandmother’s favourite Bible. She died before I was born. Also in my mother’s estate was an almost unused copy, which my older sister gave me on settlement a few years ago. I like the OT portion, but I accept some of your reservations as I have many doubts about the NT manuscript basis of the RV and most other modern translations. The OT panel attempted to make only minimal alterations and corrections, and the OT is based on essentially the same Hebrew as the KJV. I usually read the top line, the RV, and when it is different then the two are small, and then it is easy to compare with the KJV. I have often sat in a Bible Class and the speaker has to explain the inadequacies of various words in the KJV, while a quick reference to the RV would be sufficient. 

 

Kind regards

Trevor

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  75
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,399
  • Content Per Day:  0.43
  • Reputation:   1,307
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  09/01/2002
  • Status:  Offline

16 hours ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again Adstar and Greetings Justin Adams,

 

I appreciate the question, and I was trying to anticipate what Scripture you had in mind, but could not find this for sure. I looked at 1 Corinthians 10 but could not gather what you are suggesting. To give an answer, I believe that the Angel that appeared to Moses at the bush was the same Angel that guided Israel through the wilderness. We have the incidents of Exodus 32-34 where this Angel threatens to withdraw and leave this guidance to a lesser Angel. Then Moses pleads and his request is granted. Moses then asks to be shown His Glory and a manifestation of His Glory is revealed coupled with a pronunciation of Yahweh’s character of abounding mercy, and yet justice. The difference between this Angel and the Angel if Moses had not intervened is that this was an Angel who stood in God’s presence and was most probably Michael the Archangel. To partly anticipate your answer then, I believe that these are real Angels, ministers of God, and neither are the pre-incarnate Jesus, as I do not believe that Jesus pre-existed before he was born, as I believe that Jesus was a man, the Son of God by birth. But many of the incidents in the OT are a shadow of things to come, by parable, by type and many other aspects. Two examples, the offering of Isaac as a burnt offering, and the sufferings and elevation of Joseph. All the furniture of the Tabernacle point forward to God’s future dwelling in the Word made flesh, the only begotten of the Father John 1:14. No it was not God, who in the English sense of this word is God the Father only. We need to understand the Biblical meaning and use of the Hebrew word Elohim.

Kind regards

Trevor

Exodus 13: KJV

21 "And the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night:"

So you believe an Angel is LORD?

Exodus 3: KJV

4 "And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I. {5} And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground."

So do you believe God is an Angel ???   If so then the continuation of this discussion with you is pointless..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  26
  • Topic Count:  61
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  9,602
  • Content Per Day:  4.02
  • Reputation:   7,795
  • Days Won:  21
  • Joined:  09/11/2017
  • Status:  Offline

Frome TrevorL: "as I do not believe that Jesus pre-existed before he was born,"

I hope in time that you will revise this thought. He (Yeshua) was slain from before the foundation of the world.

By Him the world was created. Yeshua means Yahweh is Salvation. Always was, always will be - unchangeable, The Alpha and The Omega. The Beginning and the End.

Edited by Justin Adams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...