Can the Trinity be Biblically proven?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

VCO

Senior Member
Oct 14, 2013
11,972
4,587
113
. . .
is Hebrews 1:8 not a reference to Psalms 45:6-7
Your arrows are sharpened, nations shall fall under you, in the heart of the king’s enemies. Your throne, O judge, [will exist] forever and ever; the scepter of equity is the scepter of your kingdom.


. . .

WHAT TRANSLATION ARE YOU QUOTING?

I have 18 Translations on my Bible Software program, and NOT ONE OF THEM says O judge:


Psalm 45:6 (KJV)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: . . .

Psalm 45:6 (ASV)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: . . .

Psalm 45:6 (NKJV)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; . . .

Psalm 45:6 (NASB)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; . . .

Psalm 45:6 (HCSB)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Your throne, God, is forever and ever; . . .

Psalm 45:6 (NRSV)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever. . .

Psalm 45:6 (RSV)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Your divine throne endures for ever and ever. . .

Psalm 45:6 (ESV)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Your throne, O God, is forever and ever. . .

Psalm 45:6 (NIV)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; . . .

Psalm 45:6 (BBE)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Your seat of power, O God, is for ever and ever; . . .

Psalm 45:6 (GW)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Your throne, O God, is forever and ever. . .

Psalm 45:6 (YLT)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Thy throne, O God, is age-during, and for ever, . . .

Psalm 45:6 (AMP)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; . . .

Psalm 45:6 (Darby)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; . . .

Psalm 45:6 (NCV)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] God, your throne will last forever and ever. . .

Psalm 45:6 (TLB)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Your throne, O God, endures forever. . .

Psalm 45:6 (LBLA)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Tu trono, oh Dios, es eterno y para siempre; . . .

Psalm 45:6 (RV1909)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Tu trono, oh Dios, eterno y para siempre:. . .
 

bluto

Senior Member
Aug 4, 2016
2,043
513
113
Good grief jaubird, THINK! What does that mean, "im just telling you what the bible says. like i said, test against ALL scripture?" Let me turn your statement around on you. I'm just telling you what the Bible says when Jesus said He was the bread of life. Does that mean Jesus is a loaf of bread jaybird? I mean it says that so I have to believe it, right?

You mentioned what God said to Moses but what does it mean that God will make Moses like a god to Pharoh? Words only have meaning according to how they are used in context. You sir, do not take into account the context. Secondly, who said salvation is dependent on the trinity? I didn't say it and Jesus didn't teach it so why are you accusing me of something I don't believe? In short, your introuducing this issue of yours which has no bearing on our immediate discussion. And of course mankind does not decide who goes to heaven. :rolleyes:

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
 
J

jaybird88

Guest
Good grief jaubird, THINK! What does that mean, "im just telling you what the bible says. like i said, test against ALL scripture?" Let me turn your statement around on you. I'm just telling you what the Bible says when Jesus said He was the bread of life. Does that mean Jesus is a loaf of bread jaybird? I mean it says that so I have to believe it, right?

You mentioned what God said to Moses but what does it mean that God will make Moses like a god to Pharoh? Words only have meaning according to how they are used in context. You sir, do not take into account the context.

i think the passage means a judge or lord over pharaoh. similar context as used in the psalm passage:

"I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High"

Jesus even referenced this passage when questioned about who He was.

the thomas statement your talking about, what was the context since we are talking about context) of this passage? is it really about this nature and that nature of Jesus. i see thomas in disbelief, the resurrection of Jesus, he touched the nail marks. i would think he had a genuine experience, He may have saw or felt the Father, Jesus was the gate and Jesus teaches we can see the Father through Him. this passage could very well mean Jesus is the Most High, but im not the final authority. i personally think its more complicated than just saying both Jesus and the Father are the Most High.

Secondly, who said salvation is dependent on the trinity? I didn't say it and Jesus didn't teach it so why are you accusing me of something I don't believe? In short, your introuducing this issue of yours which has no bearing on our immediate discussion. And of course mankind does not decide who goes to heaven. :rolleyes:
i was assuming you were when you said:
And yes, all of this is a big deal because it can have eternal consequences for people in the long run.
if you weren't talking about the trinity then what exactly are you talking about here?

Good grief jaubird
misspelling my name??? now your just being mean!!! haha
 
Last edited by a moderator:

wattie

Senior Member
Feb 24, 2009
3,050
1,031
113
New Zealand
Okay....'ye are gods'... small 'g'... context determines the meaning of this... this passage is about men in places of judgment.. magistrates..

therefore 'gods' is magistrates/men in places of judgment.

Now you go to God.. in the likes of psalm 46:6-- and it is most certainly about God.. big G..capital!
 
Sep 17, 2016
106
0
0
I would consider the different references to be evidence against these being the same being.

The spirit came down from the father onto the sons head, is not he came down on himself from himself to be on his offspring who was himself's head.

Jesus said "as I am one with him" not "He is me" the first statement could be seen metaphorically being one with someone in will or spirit, as in we agree, you could consider us one on the issue, where as the second would be claiming to literally be the other.

jesus also said "the will of my father" not "my will"

"Anyone who weeks his will and wants to see the truth will see THIS TRUTH IM TEACHING DOES NOT COME FROM ME but IS THE WILL OF MY FATHER'S TEACHING" is also a paraphrased jesus quote where he seems to be claiming not to be his own father but to be a representative for what He would want him to be saying at the time.

With this and all such quotes, I would argue for meaning of unity in spirit (agreeance) not literally being of the same entity
 

wattie

Senior Member
Feb 24, 2009
3,050
1,031
113
New Zealand
I would consider the different references to be evidence against these being the same being.

The spirit came down from the father onto the sons head, is not he came down on himself from himself to be on his offspring who was himself's head.

Jesus said "as I am one with him" not "He is me" the first statement could be seen metaphorically being one with someone in will or spirit, as in we agree, you could consider us one on the issue, where as the second would be claiming to literally be the other.

jesus also said "the will of my father" not "my will"

"Anyone who weeks his will and wants to see the truth will see THIS TRUTH IM TEACHING DOES NOT COME FROM ME but IS THE WILL OF MY FATHER'S TEACHING" is also a paraphrased jesus quote where he seems to be claiming not to be his own father but to be a representative for what He would want him to be saying at the time.

With this and all such quotes, I would argue for meaning of unity in spirit (agreeance) not literally being of the same entity
Well, then how does that avoid being Polytheism?

Surely, God.. is one being.

That's monotheism.

Three persons/expressions/substances.. but one being.

The other thing is..

When Jesus says He is doing things 'by the hand of the Father' or in 'the Father's name' etc..

Well.. when Jewish people saw this.. they knew about their Jewish concept of agency.

[h=2]By: Lewis N. Dembitz[/h]
The Law of Agency deals with the status of a person (known as the agent) acting by direction of another (the principal), and thereby legally binding the principal in his connection with a third person. The person who binds a principal in this manner is his agent, known in Jewish law as sheluaḥ or sheliaḥ (one that is sent): the relation of the former to the latter is known as agency (sheliḥut). The general principle is enunciated thus: A man's agent is like himself (Ḳid. 41b).

So with Jesus.. claiming to do things 'by the hand of the Father' etc...

He is making Himself out to be EQUAL with the Father.... because the Jews listening to Him would have seen it that way by their concept of agency.

That means Jesus is God.

Now if you already believe the Father is God.. and the Holy Spirit is God

Then what will you do with this?

you going to call them different beings? Are you going to make them 'God' in parenthesis?

How is that monotheism?
 

miknik5

Senior Member
Jun 2, 2016
7,833
588
113
To whom the WORD OF GOD has come....Ye are "gods"
 

miknik5

Senior Member
Jun 2, 2016
7,833
588
113
I felt it was necessary to remind of the scriptures and the why it is said "Ye are gods"

THE WORD of GOD has not been received by all
 

miknik5

Senior Member
Jun 2, 2016
7,833
588
113
With regards to Moses being "as God" to "Pharoah"

can an someone tell me who then is "Moses mouthpiece" testifying to what Moses is saying?

and is it Moses who is really saying these things?

Or GOD?
 
Last edited:

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
3,995
927
113
1 John 5:7-8
The “witness of God” is far greater than the “witness of men”. The text is simply ignored by many critical scholars and the same time objected by various anti-trinitarian movements and cults for the reason that accordingly it was a Latin additive during 11[SUP]th[/SUP] or 12[SUP]th[/SUP] Ce. or that it was only supported by a few late Greek manuscripts and was inserted in the 16[SUP]th[/SUP] Ce. The battle seems endless whether it must be retained or outright ignored. But for the bible believers and until now faithfully believe it belongs to the text carrying evidences not only to the external evidences, internal evidences, grammatical style of evidence, and the acceptance of the text during the third and fourth century where corruption of the scriptures abounds during that period. The text is fairly supported and demonstrated in the Bible over Creation (Genesis 1), thus when God the Father said, the Word comes out of His mouth and the world’s were created and where the Holy Spirit moves upon the face of the waters (Genesis 1:2) harmonizing the doctrine of the Trinity. The witness of God is also true in Salvation of mankind (2 Corinthians 13:14) and including in the Baptism (Matthew 3: 16-17; Matthew 28:19). I would quite fairly dismissed the message on the alleged proclamation that the text has been inserted, or added by the later hand or it was altered since it will also be very an easy way for me that it was priory omitted why? Because this the strongest proof of the doctrine of the trinity and is said that someone wanted to corrupt the theology of it! It was said that the Arians expunged the Comma or the one who loves the pre-eminence which Apostle John has written the Epistle warning the Christians or even the Gnostics who evidently substitute, the three in one, the Father, Word and the Holy Ghost into the “Father, Mother and Son.” But then it was returned because it is fitted in the text by from both grammatically and the evidences of Greek mss. including the Church Fathers.

Now I would like to venture you in a gist historical in the “Universal acceptance” of the text in favor of its retention.

1. After the “conversion” of Constantine changed his attitudes towards Christianity resulting to the Edict of Toleration. In 313 AD, Constantine issued the famous Edict of Milan that not only granted freedom to all Christians, but adopted “Christianity” (Cathlocism) as the official(state) Religion of the Roman Empire. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Edict-of-Milan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edict_of_Milan
2. We know that it was a very doubtful if Constantine was ever saved. The marriage of the church and the state then gives way to harlotry, mixing paganism and teaching of Christianity.

3. During the early centuries, several cities became the Great Center of Christendom:

A. Western – Rome, the center of Latin Christianity
B. Eastern- Caesarea, Latin speaking which is in contention with several teachings of the Western church.
C. Asia – Antioch, home of the Byzantine Christianity. This is the “central missionary agency” of Apostle Paul where the disciples were first called Christian (Acts 12:26). It is also a known fact that Constantine moved the seat of Roman Empire in Constantinople.
D. African- Also Latin speaking Christian’s independent with the Western and Eastern Latin Churches. Biblical example of black race conversions is found in Acts 13:1 named Simeon who is called Niger. So it is possible that the African churches were a product of Apostle Paul or that Simeon originally a member of the Antiochan Church reached his native country and preached the Gospel and thus the African churches.

4. The corruptions of many biblical texts including the Johannine Comma were the products of the School of Alexandria (Egypt) where it was influence by the Gnostics teachings and Neo Platonism. The biggest results where the Eastern Churches and Biblical text influenced by the so called corruption of the scriptures.

5. The Western Latin text by St. Jerome has it but according to digitized copy has been corrupted earlier including v 6 and verse 8 where the umlaut carried into the Vaticanus(B) being the scribes careless yet retained the Johaninne Comma. While Codex Sinaiticus does not have it being an alteration for the fact that it was translated in English started with the word “For” and the truth is that “And” is the correct reading. So the EVEN THE GREEK MSS that does or does not contain said Comma were also corrupted.

[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]And there are Three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one.
[/TD]
[TD]quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant in caelo, Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus Sanctus. Et hi tres unum sunt.
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Latin Vulgate Bible with Douay-Rheims and King James Version Side-by-Side+Complete Sayings of Jesus Christ

Codex Sinaticus translation in English

6 This is he that came through water and blood, Jesus Christ: not in the water only, but in the water and in the blood; and it is the Spirit that testifies, because the Spirit is the truth.
7 For they that testify are three,
8 the Spirit, and the water, and the blood, and the three are one.

ουτοϲ εϲτιν ο ελθων δια υδατοϲ και αιματοϲ και πνϲ ιϲ χϲ ουκ εν τωυδατι μονον αλλ εν τω ϋδατι και τω αιματι και το πνα εϲτιν το μαρτυρουνοτι το πνα εϲτιν η αληθεια
7 οτι οι τρειϲ ειϲιν οι μαρτυρουτεϲ
8 το πνα και το ϋδωρ και το αιμα και οι τρειϲ ειϲ το εν ειϲιν
Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | 1 John |

6. While it has been deferred on its transmission in many ages past by the Eastern Church, the Greek Orthodox founds its way of coming back the original Greek text based on the readings of sixty Greek Lectionaries dating from 9[SUP]th[/SUP] to 16[SUP]th[/SUP] Ce.
http://onlinechapel.goarch.org/bibl...04.1John/Bible.grc.GBS.NT.1904.1John.5_v1.pdf

7. The testimonies of the African Churches which are unscratched in early centuries by Arianism are unified in support of the text. “The Comma exists in places where Arianism was not established early, such as Spain and North Africa. Whereas Constantinople and Alexandria were infected with Arianism by the 4th century, Spain and North Africa were relatively less infected until the 5th century. Geographically, Spain and North Africa were the farthest places from the major centers of Arianism. Moreover, whereas primarily Greek and Latin speakers spread Arianism in the rest of Christendom, Spain was introduced to Arianism through Visigoths and North Africa was introduced to Arianism through Vandals. These were both Germanic tribes who used the Gothic Bible of Ulfilas. Thus Arians in Spain and North Africa had less influence on the Latin scriptures. This allowed the Comma to remain in Latin manuscripts of Spain and North Africa.” Cyprian, Priscillian, Phoebadius, Vigilius, Victor, Fulgentius bearing the Comma.

So, we have the many occurrence of witnesses the 1 John 5:7-8 has been unanimously and universally accepted. It was indeed omitted in the many Greek mss. but was preserved to us in the Latin text and in Greek text including the recent coming back through the Orthodox Text in 1904.
 

miknik5

Senior Member
Jun 2, 2016
7,833
588
113
And Moses also will testify

Just as the "mouthpieces" today testify
and Moses and the mouthpieces will not be giving a Testimony of Moses or a Testimony to Moses
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
3,995
927
113
As such, you are calling me a liar! I challenge you to find one other source of Christian authority to find a single interpretation of the Biblical descriptin of God, that duplicates mine 100%, or even close to it. I also challenge you to find one single part of it false. Should you fail to do so, and it is more than likely your views of this issue are false.


Quasar02
You already been exposed for how many times and then you are still on challenging to find Christian Authority that duplicates yours or even close to it? You've been proven in error by the Scriptures and has been unearthed in my other post. It maybe a waste of time going in circle. In the next, I'll try to elaborate what Photinus and Soccinus teaches which you may have it copied.
 
Aug 19, 2016
721
3
0
You already been exposed for how many times and then you are still on challenging to find Christian Authority that duplicates yours or even close to it? You've been proven in error by the Scriptures and has been unearthed in my other post. It maybe a waste of time going in circle. In the next, I'll try to elaborate what Photinus and Soccinus teaches which you may have it copied.


Show me who and what I have posted has been found to be false on this website! More meaningless opinion!


Quasar92
 

bluto

Senior Member
Aug 4, 2016
2,043
513
113
According to the Scriptures, God, who is the Holy Spirit and Father, was the ONLY God from all eternity through the OT, as recorded below:

4.God makes it clear in the OT, He is eternal, that there is no other God but He Himself. "....Before me no God was formed, nor will there be one after me." Isa.43:10. And in Isa.44:6, "....I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God." See also Isa.45:5: "I am the Lord and there is no other," and in Ex.3:14: "I AM WHO I AM."

Yahwey created the universe through the pre-incarnate Jesus, as recorded in Heb.1:1-2. But Jesus did not become the Son of God/God the Son until recorded in Mt.1:20 and in Lk.1:35.


Quasar92
And therein is your big problem quasar? You said this: "Yahwey created the universe through the pre-incarnate Jesus, as recorded in Heb.1:1-2. But Jesus did not become the Son of God/God the Son until recorded in Mt.1:20 and in Lk.1:35."

Jesus Christ was always the Son of God even before eternity, this is what Micah 5:2 is teaching. What your doing is contradicting yourself by saying YHWH created the universe through the "PRE-INCARNATE Jesus." There are "NOT" two Jesus', one who became a man at His incarnationa and one who pre-existed before His incarnation as God Almighty.

What your forgetting is the fact that Jesus Christ was "SENT" which means He existed before His actual birth as a man. Look at Isaiah 9:6, "a son will be given." John 6:38, "For I HAVE COME DOWN FROM HEAVEN, not to do my will, but the will of HIM WHO SENT ME." John 6:39, "And this is the will of HIM WHO SENT ME, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day."

More proof Jesus pre-existed His incarnation. John 1:15, "John bore witness of Him/Jesus, and cried out, saying, "This was He of whom I said, "He comes after me has a higher rank that I, for (or because) HE EXISTED BEFORE ME." How did Joh the Baptist know Jesus existed before him? Then there is John 1:3, John 8:58, Luke 10:18 and other verses that Jesus Christ pre-existed as God Almighty before His incarnation as a man by way of being born. :eek:

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
 
Aug 19, 2016
721
3
0
And therein is your big problem quasar? You said this: "Yahwey created the universe through the pre-incarnate Jesus, as recorded in Heb.1:1-2. But Jesus did not become the Son of God/God the Son until recorded in Mt.1:20 and in Lk.1:35."

Jesus Christ was always the Son of God even before eternity, this is what Micah 5:2 is teaching. What your doing is contradicting yourself by saying YHWH created the universe through the "PRE-INCARNATE Jesus." There are "NOT" two Jesus', one who became a man at His incarnationa and one who pre-existed before His incarnation as God Almighty.

What your forgetting is the fact that Jesus Christ was "SENT" which means He existed before His actual birth as a man. Look at Isaiah 9:6, "a son will be given." John 6:38, "For I HAVE COME DOWN FROM HEAVEN, not to do my will, but the will of HIM WHO SENT ME." John 6:39, "And this is the will of HIM WHO SENT ME, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day."

More proof Jesus pre-existed His incarnation. John 1:15, "John bore witness of Him/Jesus, and cried out, saying, "This was He of whom I said, "He comes after me has a higher rank that I, for (or because) HE EXISTED BEFORE ME." How did Joh the Baptist know Jesus existed before him? Then there is John 1:3, John 8:58, Luke 10:18 and other verses that Jesus Christ pre-existed as God Almighty before His incarnation as a man by way of being born. :eek:

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto


I have no problem at all in respect t yur claim that I do, pertaining to the identity of the Father and the Son. You have a problem of not reading the Biblical description of God ad origin of the pre-incarnate Jesus, I posted on this thread some time ago. Tou can review it here, as I don't have the time to try finding it on this thread:

The Biblical Description of God - in Theology/Prophecy & Revelation Forum Forum

FYI, the only begotten Son of God, did not exist until in MJt.1:20 and in Lk.1:32 and 35. In the sense you claim, he was the firstborn over all creation, recorded in Col.1:15, confirming Pr.8:22-36. As such He can be seen as a sn of God, as the sos of God were in Gen.6. In another sense, all of us who belong to Christ, are also sons of God.

The Biblical description of God documented in the above link, can all be thoroughly supported from the Bible, which the Trinity cannot be. You claim God did not create the universe by Jesus, is refuted in Heb.1:1-2. I am contradicting nor forgetting nothing! Read what the Scriptures teach from the link above. You're spinning your wheels from wild claims you cannot support, or from those I have already acknowledged long ago.

As I have said before, I was a Trinitarian for 45 years and then spent 35 more developing God's identity of Himself from the Bible. You have written nothing I do not already know and have studied and researched it.


Quasar92
 

bluto

Senior Member
Aug 4, 2016
2,043
513
113
I felt it was necessary to remind of the scriptures and the why it is said "Ye are gods"

THE WORD of GOD has not been received by all
It was Jesus who said at John 10:34, "Ye are gods." He is quoting Psalm 82:6 but the question is why? iF you look at John 10:31 Jesus says to the Jews literally, "I and the Father We are one." At vs31 the Jews react to what Jesus said by saying, "The Jews took up stones AGAIN to stone Him." Why?

The answer is at John 10:33, "The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man make Yourself God." The Jews understood full well what Jesus meant when He said "He and the Father are one." They are more than just one in unity or purpose but they are one in nature. So again, why does Jesus quote Psalm 82:6 to the Jews?

What Jesus was doing is taking the Jew's statement about Him blaspheming to its logical conclusion to show that they are being inconsistent, In effect, Jesus is saying, "If you say that I am blaspheming , you must also hold that God is blaspheming because He said to those by whom the word of God came, "ye are gods." Nowhere does Jesus take back His statement and say He is not one with the Father.

Jesus actually accelates His argument by saying the following at John 10:36, "do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and SENT into the world, "You are blaspheming, because I said, "I am the Son of God?" Notice Jesus does not say "I am God" but I'm the Son of God. In other words, why would the Jews want to stone Jesus for blasphemy for claiming that He is the Son of God just as the Jews believe they are sons of God as well? And btw as a side note. There is meaning behind the Jewish idiom of what "son of" means which I will deal with later.

Now, some say the Jews misunderstood what Jesus was saying at John 10:30. This begs the question because whether or not the Jews are correctly or incorrectly understanding Jesus is not the issue. The issue is what was it that Jesus sait that caused the Jews to say He was claiming to be God that so upset them? And like I said, it was the meaning behind John 10:30. :eek:

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
 

VCO

Senior Member
Oct 14, 2013
11,972
4,587
113
i think the passage means a judge or lord over pharaoh. similar context as used in the psalm passage:

"I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High"

Jesus even referenced this passage when questioned about who He was.

the thomas statement your talking about, what was the context since we are talking about context) of this passage? is it really about this nature and that nature of Jesus. i see thomas in disbelief, the resurrection of Jesus, he touched the nail marks. i would think he had a genuine experience, He may have saw or felt the Father, Jesus was the gate and Jesus teaches we can see the Father through Him. this passage could very well mean Jesus is the Most High, but im not the final authority. i personally think its more complicated than just saying both Jesus and the Father are the Most High.



i was assuming you were when you said:


if you weren't talking about the trinity then what exactly are you talking about here?



misspelling my name??? now your just being mean!!! haha

So are you telling us that you have bought into the biggest NEW AGE lie, "Ye are gods.", which is actually the same lie that Satan tempted Eve with; or that you totally do not understand this verse and who AND what HE is talking about in both Psalm 82:6 and John 10:34?

HE is NOT talking to you and me, HE is talking to Kings and Judges of the Jewish Sanhedrin (Supreme Court). He is not talking about the nature of men, but RATHER the Nature of the Positions they held. Their decisions were the final authority, as if GOD Himself had made the decision. HOWEVER, HE is also warning them that they had better be careful, to make JUST Decisions, or HE WILL JUDGE THEM.

I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High [Ps. 82:6].

What does He mean, "Ye are gods"? The Lord Jesus Christ Himself quoted this verse when the Jews questioned His deity. They accused Him of blasphemy because He made Himself God. In John 10:33-37 we read,"The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemist; because I said, I am the Son of God? If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not."


Jesus was telling these Jews that they were sitting in judgment and, when one sits in the place of judgment, he is taking the place of God. Many saints are guilty of that type of thing. They sit in judgment on other saints. Paul says, "But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self. For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord. Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God" (1Cor. 4:3-5). Paul is saying that he is going to stand before God someday and because of that he doesn't even judge himself. My friend, when you start judging someone you are acting for God, and you are a god when you have taken that position of judging. I am fearful of our nation with so many godless people seeking office. They know nothing of the background of this country which was founded upon the Word of God; they are not in spiritual tune with the founding of this nation.


Years ago I was greatly impressed by that judge in New York City who presided at the trial of a husband and wife who were charged with being spies. The judge was a Jew, and he said that the night before he handed down his judgment was spent in prayer. I was impressed with that. Why? He was going to hand down a harsh judgment; he was going to stand in the place of God when he made the decision. That judge was actually standing in the place of God when he judged the lives of these two people who would have to pay for their crime against the government. A man in that position ought to be a godly man. He should be a man of prayer. The big problem in our contemporary society is not so much with the criminal as it is with the judges and the breakdown of law and order. It is strange that the breakdown of law and order has begun with the law profession and not really with the criminal element.


Any time that you pass judgment on a person, you stand in the position of God. Parents ought to recognize that. What does God say to a little fellow growing up in a home? He says, "Children, obey your parents in all things: for this is well pleasing unto the Lord" (Col. 3:20). But wait a minute -- what if his parents don't tell him to do the right things and don't bring him up the way they should? There are many parents like that today. God says,"I am going to hold them responsible. They are in My place. They occupy that position because I have said to that little boy, 'My son, hear the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother' " (Prov. 1:8). God help the father or the mother who does not lead their child in a godly pathway. Someone has asked the question, "What is worse than going to hell?" The answer given by a great preacher in the South years ago was this:"To go to hell and recognize the voice of your son and ask, 'Son, what are you doing here?' and hear him answer, 'Dad, I followed you!' "


This is a tremendous psalm. God says to the judges, "Be sure you judge accurately. Ye are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High."

Thru The Bible with J. Vernon McGee.

OH ARE YOU EVER TREADING ON THIN ICE, making fun of the Typos we Seniors make. Remember GOD is the author of poetic Justice; and your day is coming much sooner than you think. I can assure you that the worst two things about getting old are:

Short term memory loss.

&

Making more and more typos.

I have complained NUMEROUS times to Management about the 5 minute rule to correct typos, to NO avail, desperately trying to explain that it is UNFAIR to us Seniors. I suspect NOTHING will CHANGE until he gets to be our age, and experiences it for himself. YES, I proof read, but my mind reads what I think typed, missing the typos. Only to see them after I have uploaded the posts, THEN if it is a LONG post, I cannot even read it in five minutes; PLUS the program itself will make typos like subtracting Spaces and Blank Lines between paragraphs. BELIEVE ME, IN A FEW YEARS YOU WILL KNOW OUR FRUSTATION, PERSONALLY.
 
J

jaybird88

Guest
So are you telling us that you have bought into the biggest NEW AGE lie, "Ye are gods.", which is actually the same lie that Satan tempted Eve with; or that you totally do not understand this verse and who AND what HE is talking about in both Psalm 82:6 and John 10:34?

HE is NOT talking to you and me, HE is talking to Kings and Judges of the Jewish Sanhedrin (Supreme Court). He is not talking about the nature of men, but RATHER the Nature of the Positions they held. Their decisions were the final authority, as if GOD Himself had made the decision. HOWEVER, HE is also warning them that they had better be careful, to make JUST Decisions, or HE WILL JUDGE THEM.
i am aware of the "little gods" concept. ironic me and bluto were talking about context and you take a statement of mine out of context to attempt to label me.
the point i was making is that the term god in the bible has different meaning, thats it, dont make it into something else.

OH ARE YOU EVER TREADING ON THIN ICE, making fun of the Typos we Seniors make. Remember GOD is the author of poetic Justice; and your day is coming much sooner than you think. I can assure you that the worst two things about getting old are:
Short term memory loss.
&
Making more and more typos.

I have complained NUMEROUS times to Management about the 5 minute rule to correct typos, to NO avail, desperately trying to explain that it is UNFAIR to us Seniors. I suspect NOTHING will CHANGE until he gets to be our age, and experiences it for himself. YES, I proof read, but my mind reads what I think typed, missing the typos. Only to see them after I have uploaded the posts, THEN if it is a LONG post, I cannot even read it in five minutes; PLUS the program itself will make typos like subtracting Spaces and Blank Lines between paragraphs. BELIEVE ME, IN A FEW YEARS YOU WILL KNOW OUR FRUSTATION, PERSONALLY.
i was having fun with bluto did you not see the "hahaha"
 
Sep 17, 2016
106
0
0
Well, then how does that avoid being Polytheism?

Surely, God.. is one being.

That's monotheism.

Three persons/expressions/substances.. but one being.

The other thing is..

When Jesus says He is doing things 'by the hand of the Father' or in 'the Father's name' etc..

Well.. when Jewish people saw this.. they knew about their Jewish concept of agency.

By: Lewis N. Dembitz


The Law of Agency deals with the status of a person (known as the agent) acting by direction of another (the principal), and thereby legally binding the principal in his connection with a third person. The person who binds a principal in this manner is his agent, known in Jewish law as sheluaḥ or sheliaḥ (one that is sent): the relation of the former to the latter is known as agency (sheliḥut). The general principle is enunciated thus: A man's agent is like himself (Ḳid. 41b).

So with Jesus.. claiming to do things 'by the hand of the Father' etc...

He is making Himself out to be EQUAL with the Father.... because the Jews listening to Him would have seen it that way by their concept of agency.

That means Jesus is God.

Now if you already believe the Father is God.. and the Holy Spirit is God

Then what will you do with this?

you going to call them different beings? Are you going to make them 'God' in parenthesis?

How is that monotheism?

The principal of agency you have shared here is what im arguing the difference is, if somebody is acting on behalf of somebody their actions and statements would be in the interest of the person they are on behalf of. However, this does not make the person the same person they are acting on behalf of. So if the person is claiming they are saying the same things to them He would say to them, it would make the person acting for the not present party. This could have been what he meant when he said "I am one with the father", as a statement of unified will and stating they should respect him as such. Similar to the time a woman in exodus spoke against moses, and was afflicted with leprosy, and the given reason "suppose she spit in her father's face", because He made moses like God in the sight of men (which is in an earlier verse of exodus) so speaking against somebody like God is speaking against the closest thing she had ever encountered to God and could be seen as she would speak the same to God,so punish her like she spoke against God. This doesn't mean Moses was God, and even if jesus meant to treat the situation like this, he also would similarly want understanding he was not God, but acting as an agent of, without it being spoken.

The Israelis thought he was claiming to be God like many do today, which is why they were angry to begin with, instead of going on and trying to gain their respect by claiming his eternal status to impress them because he was like God, and wanted them to not understand and simply do what he asked on the authority of the one he has agency for, he could have won them over by explaining in simple terms he agreed and did not mean this.

But as he says at one time, "I will return someday and speak about the father plainly with you, but today I must continue being vague" which is paraphrased but there, then he found more value being vague than he did in explaining concepts like this.

As for your questions at the end, my expressed view directly opposes the notion jesus claimed to literally be God, quite blatantly.
I do not view him as God but somebody with agency as you have presented the concept, therefore, in my proposed viewpoint, they are different, and the way to not confuse it for polytheism is to say he wasn't God in all He is, as the Israelites maintained and he found reason not to differentiate, and the way to not have a polytheistic viewpoint in this view is to not make an idol out of the messiah and worship him as God. To instead view it as I have presented, not as mainstream churches present it.

Friendinpeace
 

bluto

Senior Member
Aug 4, 2016
2,043
513
113
Maybe friend the following post will help that I posted to miknik this morning regarding John 10:30. And regarding what you said about the "principal of agency" I have a question for you? Is there anything an agent cannot do on behalf of the principal?

It was Jesus who said at John 10:34, "Ye are gods." He is quoting Psalm 82:6 but the question is why? iF you look at John 10:31 Jesus says to the Jews literally, "I and the Father We are one." At vs31 the Jews react to what Jesus said by saying, "The Jews took up stones AGAIN to stone Him." Why?

The answer is at John 10:33, "The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man make Yourself God." The Jews understood full well what Jesus meant when He said "He and the Father are one." They are more than just one in unity or purpose but they are one in nature. So again, why does Jesus quote Psalm 82:6 to the Jews?

What Jesus was doing is taking the Jew's statement about Him blaspheming to its logical conclusion to show that they are being inconsistent, In effect, Jesus is saying, "If you say that I am blaspheming , you must also hold that God is blaspheming because He said to those by whom the word of God came, "ye are gods." Nowhere does Jesus take back His statement and say He is not one with the Father.

Jesus actually accelates His argument by saying the following at John 10:36, "do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and SENT into the world, "You are blaspheming, because I said, "I am the Son of God?" Notice Jesus does not say "I am God" but I'm the Son of God. In other words, why would the Jews want to stone Jesus for blasphemy for claiming that He is the Son of God just as the Jews believe they are sons of God as well? And btw as a side note. There is meaning behind the Jewish idiom of what "son of" means which I will deal with later.

Now, some say the Jews misunderstood what Jesus was saying at John 10:30. This begs the question because whether or not the Jews are correctly or incorrectly understanding Jesus is not the issue. The issue is what was it that Jesus sait that caused the Jews to say He was claiming to be God that so upset them? And like I said, it was the meaning behind John 10:30. :eek:

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto