Jesus Christ was God manifest in the Flesh

[zone]

i'm posting this and then that's it.

OP: Re: Jesus Christ was God manifest in the Flesh

my answer: a resounding YES, and AMEN.

Very wise; "persons" is discrete, not distinct. Agreed about tritheism. But where does that leave a conceptual understanding? Still three separate "who"s?

if it is a conceptual understanding, what is that understanding based on? a need to construct or deconstruct THE ETERNAL GOD?

the GodHead is revealed to man in the Holy Scriptures, even in the words of Jesus Emmanuel (God with us) as Triune.

because, as you've said, "persons" is discrete, i have no problem with it UNTIL it leads people into imagining tritheism, (polytheism) which is just another form of Arianism.

i have no problem with "God The Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit", i know God is ONE.

no, not three separate "WHOs" : ONE. God is ONE.

Deuteronomy 6:4
“Hear, O Israel: The LORD (3068. Yhvh) our God, the LORD is one.

The question is: Is the Word God's OWN "who" or a separate "who"? And is the HS yet a separate "who"? OR... Is God one "who"? IOW... How many minds does God have?

yes, the Word is God's OWN "who".
but The Logos alone is not YHVH.
The Father is GREATER quantitatively than LOGOS alone.
no, The Holy Spirit is not a SEPARATE WHO.
God is ONE.

Though this source imbeds the inference of "triune"; notice the reference to the embodiment of the Godhead.

and i agree with the embedding of the Triunity of the GodHead (the Divine Nature).

yes, Jesus is the embodiment of the GodHead

And is this "person" the prosopon (G4383) and hupostasis (G5287) of God?

yes, He is.
Trinitarians know this.
Trinitarian language is totally Biblical: it's when man goes in and makes 3 gods we have a problem.

John 1
The Word Became Flesh
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life,a and the life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light.

9 The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. 11 He came to his own,b and his own peoplec did not receive him. 12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 (John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’&#8221 16 And from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God; the only God,d who is at the Father’s side,e he has made him known.

Can any actual Scripture be utilized to specifically show the Father and Holy Spirit each as a prosopon or hupostasis?

yes...as we've seen.

Do you perceive that God and Father are interchangeable terms?

yes.
THEOS obviously applies to Father.
but the Logos alone is not The Father.
and neither is Pater called Logos..

If God IS the Father... Son and HS are diminished. THIS is the self-undermining fallacy of Trinity doctrine. God is F-S-HS. The Father is... the Father

PATER is Father.
He is GREATER quantitativley than the Incarnate Christ.

"Where" is God's Soul? Scripture speaks of it. Is it metaphorical or literal? I would hate to have to view all scriptural soul references as euphemistic; which would also lead to all spirit references being euphemistic.

Even Trinity is often referred to as Tripartite. Any way one looks at it, God is comprised of constituent "parts". F-S-HS cannot individually be the whole of God to the exclusion of the others. The primary issue is how distinct or discrete they are.

this is still 'Trinitarian' language, and it is still Biblical. and vice versa.

the issue you have, and i concur completely is when we cross the line into separate entities - constructing a "seeable" GodHead (which man is easily wont to do) outside The Lord JESUS CHRIST. we can go the other way though also, and i'm not comfortable deconstructing God, either.

which is why i can't for the life of me understand why we must intrude into the eternal GODHEAD when:

Colossians 2:9
For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form.

(And I hope you know by now... but I'm not being adversarial toward you as I tend to be with some others who are wholly indoctrinated and disingenuous.)

nope.
even if you were, i'm ok with that.
you affirm the Deity of Christ.

(and as much as you might not like to hear it, you also affirm the Triune GodHead)

Nehemiah 9:6
“You are the LORD (3068. Yhvh), you alone. You have made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth and all that is on it, the seas and all that is in them; and you preserve all of them; and the host of heaven worships you.

Colossians 1:6
For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

In the beginning
αρχη noun - dative singular feminine
arche ar-khay': beginning, corner, (at the, the) first (estate), magistrate, power, principality, principle, rule.

the Word
λογος noun - nominative singular masculine
logos log'-os: something said (including the thought); by implication, a topic (subject of discourse), also reasoning (the mental faculty) or motive; by extension, a computation; specially, (with the article in John) the Divine Expression (i.e. Christ) -- account, cause, communication, concerning, doctrine, fame, have to do, intent, matter, mouth, preaching, question, reason, + reckon, remove, say(-ing), shew, speaker, speech, talk, thing, + none of these things move me, tidings, treatise, utterance, word, work.

with God
θεον noun - accusative singular masculine
theos theh'-os: a deity; figuratively, a magistrate; by Hebraism, very -- exceeding, God, god(-ly, -ward).

Word was God.

~

my last thought on it is this:

i have no problem whatsoever affirming a Trinitarian Creed because i know what is meant AND expressed clearly in scripture (i just know the persons part is coming and affirm it privately as discrete, not distinct).

John 14
I Am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life
1“Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God;a believe also in me. 2 In my Father’s house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you?b 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also. 4 And you know the way to where I am going.”c 5 Thomas said to him, “Lord, we do not know where you are going. How can we know the way?” 6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7 If you had known me, you would have known my Father also.d From now on you do know him and have seen him.”

8 Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” 9Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves.

12“Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father. 13 Whatever you ask in my name, this I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If you ask mee anything in my name, I will do it.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

i'm posting this and then that's it.

OP: Re: Jesus Christ was God manifest in the Flesh

my answer: a resounding YES, and AMEN.



if it is a conceptual understanding, what is that understanding based on? a need to construct or deconstruct THE ETERNAL GOD?

the GodHead is revealed to man in the Holy Scriptures, even in the words of Jesus Emmanuel (God with us) as Triune.

because, as you've said, "persons" is discrete, i have no problem with it UNTIL it leads people into imagining tritheism, (polytheism) which is just another form of Arianism.

i have no problem with "God The Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit", i know God is ONE.

no, not three separate "WHOs" : ONE. God is ONE.

Deuteronomy 6:4
“Hear, O Israel: The LORD (3068. Yhvh) our God, the LORD is one.



yes, the Word is God's OWN "who".
but The Logos alone is not YHVH.
The Father is GREATER quantitatively than LOGOS alone.
no, The Holy Spirit is not a SEPARATE WHO.
God is ONE.



and i agree with the embedding of the Triunity of the GodHead (the Divine Nature).

yes, Jesus is the embodiment of the GodHead



yes, He is.
Trinitarians know this.
Trinitarian language is totally Biblical: it's when man goes in and makes 3 gods we have a problem.

John 1
The Word Became Flesh
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life,a and the life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light.

9 The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. 11 He came to his own,b and his own peoplec did not receive him. 12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 (John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’”) 16 And from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God; the only God,d who is at the Father’s side,e he has made him known.



yes...as we've seen.



yes.
THEOS obviously applies to Father.
but the Logos alone is not The Father.
and neither is Pater called Logos..



PATER is Father.
He is GREATER quantitativley than the Incarnate Christ.



this is still 'Trinitarian' language, and it is still Biblical. and vice versa.

the issue you have, and i concur completely is when we cross the line into separate entities - constructing a "seeable" GodHead (which man is easily wont to do) outside The Lord JESUS CHRIST. we can go the other way though also, and i'm not comfortable deconstructing God, either.

which is why i can't for the life of me understand why we must intrude into the eternal GODHEAD when:

Colossians 2:9
For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form.



nope.
even if you were, i'm ok with that.
you affirm the Deity of Christ.

(and as much as you might not like to hear it, you also affirm the Triune GodHead)

Nehemiah 9:6
“You are the LORD (3068. Yhvh), you alone. You have made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth and all that is on it, the seas and all that is in them; and you preserve all of them; and the host of heaven worships you.

Colossians 1:6
For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

In the beginning
αρχη noun - dative singular feminine
arche ar-khay': beginning, corner, (at the, the) first (estate), magistrate, power, principality, principle, rule.

the Word
λογος noun - nominative singular masculine
logos log'-os: something said (including the thought); by implication, a topic (subject of discourse), also reasoning (the mental faculty) or motive; by extension, a computation; specially, (with the article in John) the Divine Expression (i.e. Christ) -- account, cause, communication, concerning, doctrine, fame, have to do, intent, matter, mouth, preaching, question, reason, + reckon, remove, say(-ing), shew, speaker, speech, talk, thing, + none of these things move me, tidings, treatise, utterance, word, work.

with God
θεον noun - accusative singular masculine
theos theh'-os: a deity; figuratively, a magistrate; by Hebraism, very -- exceeding, God, god(-ly, -ward).

Word was God.

~

my last thought on it is this:

i have no problem whatsoever affirming a Trinitarian Creed because i know what is meant AND expressed clearly in scripture (i just know the persons part is coming and affirm it privately as discrete, not distinct).

John 14
I Am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life
1“Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God;a believe also in me. 2 In my Father’s house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you?b 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also. 4 And you know the way to where I am going.”c 5 Thomas said to him, “Lord, we do not know where you are going. How can we know the way?” 6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7 If you had known me, you would have known my Father also.d From now on you do know him and have seen him.”

8 Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” 9Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves.

12“Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father. 13 Whatever you ask in my name, this I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If you ask mee anything in my name, I will do it.

I've evidently done a poor job in expressing myself if you perceive that I affirm Trinity doctrine or thinking. God as Spirit-Soul-Body of One Divinity is very far removed from what you describe. Trinity IS three "persons". That's the formulation. Construction or deconstruction of God in a theological sense is rather a false dichotomy and extremely subjective. I've never represented Logos as all of God; but Logos isn't anything besides what Logos is, either. I thought you had a glimpse of that.

Your view is Tritheism-averse Trinitarian, but Trini nonetheless. I am content to thank God for you and how you've stirred my heart these past weeks.

 

[zone]

I've evidently done a poor job in expressing myself if you perceive that I affirm Trinity doctrine or thinking. .

no PPS.
i didn't say you adhere to Trinitarianism (3 distinct persons/entities).
i know you don't.
i know you reject even any hint of the language.

but look what you have said here:

Very wise; "persons" is discrete, not distinct.

Even Trinity is often referred to as Tripartite. Any way one looks at it, God is comprised of constituent "parts". F-S-HS cannot individually be the whole of God to the exclusion of the others. The primary issue is how distinct or discrete they are.

F-S-HS cannot individually be the whole of God to the exclusion of the others.

i've never said so either. they are not separate persons/entities.

IS the Son (Incarnate Jesus Christ) also The Father (Pater)?

if the answer is no, we have a Triune GodHead as revealed to man: God is comprised of constituent "parts".

God as Spirit-Soul-Body of One Divinity is very far removed from what you describe. Trinity IS three "persons". That's the formulation..

i said i do not affirm the three distinct "persons".
i affirm the Triune GodHead as revealed to man in Redemptive History.
i don't use a "formulation".

Construction or deconstruction of God in a theological sense is rather a false dichotomy and extremely subjective...

exactly. that's why i don't understand why we feel compelled to do it:
whether it be a construction of 3 gods in a single GodHead, or Modalism.

I've never represented Logos as all of God;..

i know that.
that's one of the things i like about ya

Your view is Tritheism-averse Trinitarian, but Trini nonetheless. I am content to thank God for you and how you've stirred my heart these past weeks.

not according to the THREE PERSONS FORMULA (nor distinct entities, nor any of the other divisions of the Eternal Deity man makes).

but i respect and grasp that Eternal Deity through the PERSON and Work of Jesus Chist.

Hebrews 1
The Supremacy of God’s Son
1Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, 2but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. 3He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.

but Logos isn't anything besides what Logos is, either. I thought you had a glimpse of that..

i do.

but here we are.

let's bring Billy back for a moment:

Dear Pastor so-and-so,
i wanted to write with a question i have about Logos.
Why is Jesus called The Word, and why does it say the Word is Logos?
i thought Jesus was God.
thank you,
Billy
p.s: i turned 17 today

 

[Red33]

Phil


I believe that Christ is a person in his own right, therefore obviously not the Father. I believe the spirit proceeds from the Father and exhibits in the son
Therefore the fulness of the Godhead bodily dwells in the son.

Now I guess to you and others if the spirit exhibits in the son and therefore the Father dwells fully in the son you could say via the spirit you feel you can say and use the words Christ is God Himself. This is one of the two areas we disagree. From a humanistic point of view with rational understanding I suppose I can see where you are coming from, but against that view is clear scripture. The Father according to Paul, John and Christ is the one true God and only he can be refered to as God Himself. Christ is the son of God, but does have the title God, confusing maybe but that is what scripture says. The name of the Father is in the son. And of course in Biblical terms many were refered to as gods

And I believe(as you do not) that the Father is greater than the son, for Christ plainly said so. And the Father is the only true God

But the person of who Christ is in nature we would both agree on.

Incidentally in accordance with scripture I believe Christ reigns now over God's kingdom and will until all dominion, authority and power has been defeated, then he will become subject to the Father as is clearly stated in scripture.

For Christ has been given all power and authority in Heaven and on earth by his Father.

I guess you will still have to call me a heretic, but one of us must have a severe lack of understanding the Gospel message, for I am utterly convinced I am saved.

I believe the problem is the rational mind. It has to reason that if the spirit fully exhibits in Christ he must be God Himself. But then you have to decide what is most important
The rationalisation of man, or clear emphatic scripture, because if this debate has shown one thing to be true it is that if you say Christ is God Himself, or that you must believe he is to have eternal life you cannot stand on the plainest of statements in the Bible

So what matters more? The brilliance of man, or plain Biblical statements on this issue?

I stand on the plainest of scripture, it is for others to decide what they will stand on

Not only does the Father dwell in the Son but the Son dwells in the Father (Jn 14:9-11). This is where the error takes place and the understanding of the Son being equal to the Father (Jn 5:18, Phil 2:6). This is the deity of the one and true God. Jesus never confessed the Father as the one and true God without revealing that He came from the Father and that the Father was in Him. There is no one and true God without the Father and the Son and that is what the Holy Spirit reveals in the scriptures to the heart of man. You can't have the Father without the Son nor can you have the Son without the Father because they are one and they are the same.

This is not rationalization, this is the understanding of the spiritual man according to the scriptures. Anyone or any doctrine that denies that Jesus Christ, as the Son of God, was God in the flesh denies that God came in the flesh. That is the objective and spiritual truth of the scriptures that the Holy Spirit reveals to the heart of the spiritual man that God has created through the new birth. If a professing believer does not understand this word of truth concerning the Son, it has either been snatched from him or he had apostacized away from it.

 

[livingbygrace]

Not only does the Father dwell in the Son but the Son dwells in the Father (Jn 14:9-11). This is where the error takes place and the understanding of the Son being equal to the Father (Jn 5:18, Phil 2:6). This is the deity of the one and true God. Jesus never confessed the Father as the one and true God without revealing that He came from the Father and that the Father was in Him. There is no one and true God without the Father and the Son and that is what the Holy Spirit reveals in the scriptures to the heart of man. You can't have the Father without the Son nor can you have the Son without the Father because they are one and they are the same.

This is not rationalization, this is the understanding of the spiritual man according to the scriptures. Anyone or any doctrine that denies that Jesus Christ, as the Son of God, was God in the flesh denies that God came in the flesh. That is the objective and spiritual truth of the scriptures that the Holy Spirit reveals to the heart of the spiritual man that God has created through the new birth. If a professing believer does not understand this word of truth concerning the Son, it has either been snatched from him or he had apostacized away from it.

Nor can anyone be being led of the Holy Spirit if they WILL NOT accept the plain and cointinuous words of Christ as to the neccessary beiief in him to have eternal life
For the Holy Spiirit COULD NOT, NOR WOULD EVER contradict the requirement Christ said was neccessary for a person to have eternal life

Therefore your opinions are irrelevant as you are simply speaking for yourself and not being led of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Red33]

Nor can anyone be being led of the Holy Spirit if they WILL NOT accept the plain and cointinuous words of Christ as to the neccessary beiief in him to have eternal life
For the Holy Spiirit COULD NOT, NOR WOULD EVER contradict the requirement Christ said was neccessary for a person to have eternal life

Therefore your opinions are irrelevant as you are simply speaking for yourself and not being led of the Holy Spirit.

If I am not led by the Spirit then who am I led by? In your heart you would like to say I am led of the devil, but you fear if you say that you will be treading on something you would like to stay away from so you compare me to a Pharisee. It does not matter if you say it because you have already conceived it in your heart and God looks upon the heart. To say, it is a sin of pride on my part would only be done for the sake of others and how they might be persuaded in their thinking. In both cases, if said, it would be sin because you would make others think evil or make them judge without mercy. If the Holy Spirit is involved in my words of grace, then you have judged the Holy Spirit and God's grace unjustly.

(Mt 5:23-26) Who is the adversary?

 

[wakeup]

If I am not led by the Spirit then who am I led by? In your heart you would like to say I am led of the devil, but you fear if you say that you will be treading on something you would like to stay away from so you compare me to a Pharisee. It does not matter if you say it because you have already conceived it in your heart and God looks upon the heart. To say, it is a sin of pride on my part would only be done for the sake of others and how they might be persuaded in their thinking. In both cases, if said, it would be sin because you would make others think evil or make them judge without mercy. If the Holy Spirit is involved in my words of grace, then you have judged the Holy Spirit and God's grace unjustly.

(Mt 5:23-26) Who is the adversary?

God dwells in Jesus and therefore Jesus is God: this is your claim.
The holy spirit dwells in you that is your claim, therefore that makes you the holy spirit?
Are you??

 

[Red33]

God dwells in Jesus and therefore Jesus is God: this is your claim.
The holy spirit dwells in you that is your claim, therefore that makes you the holy spirit?
Are you??

The Father has always been in the Son and the Son has always been in the Father and that makes them eternally one and the same in essence through uncreated like. To see the Son is to see the Father.

We have been regenerated by an act of mercy and the Holy Spirit has been given unto us to indwell the believer. We have been placed in Christ and hid with Christ in God. It took an act of redemption to make that happen which translated us from the power of darkness into the kingdom of God's dear Son. We needed to be born again as a new creature and Christ was the one who gave us that new birth. Jesus Christ needed no regeration or act of redemption to make Him one with the Father because He was always in the Father and the Father was always in Him. They are eternal life and we were given eternal life as a gift of grace through Christ. That is sound doctrine.

 

[JAYNE]

New International Version (©1984)
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
New Living Translation (©2007)
In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.
English Standard Version (©2001)
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
International Standard Version (©2008)
In the beginning, the Word existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.
GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.
King James Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
American King James Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
American Standard Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Bible in Basic English
From the first he was the Word, and the Word was in relation with God and was God.
Douay-Rheims Bible
IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Darby Bible Translation
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
English Revised Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Webster's Bible Translation
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Weymouth New Testament
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
World English Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Young's Literal Translation
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;

Barnes' Notes on the Bible
In the beginning - This expression is used also in Genesis 1:1. John evidently has allusion here to that place, and he means to apply to "the Word" an expression which is there applied "to God." In both places it clearly means before creation, before the world was made, when as yet there was nothing. The meaning is: that the "Word" had an existence before the world was created. This is not spoken of the man Jesus, but of that which "became" a man, or was incarnate, John 1:14. The Hebrews, by expressions like this, commonly denoted eternity. Thus. the eternity of God is described Psalm 90:2; "Before the mountains were brought forth, etc.;" and eternity is commonly expressed by the phrase, before the foundation of the world." Whatever is meant by the term "Word," it is clear that it had an existence before "creation." It is not, then, a "creature" or created being, and must be, therefore, uncreated and eternal. There is only one Being that is uncreated, and Jesus must be therefore divine. Compare the Saviour's own declarations respecting himself in the following places: John 8:58; John 17:5; John 6:62; John 3:13; John 6:46; John 8:14; John 16:28.
Was the Word - Greek, "was the λόγος Logos." This name is given to him who afterward became "flesh," or was incarnate (John 1:14 - that is, to the Messiah. Whatever is meant by it, therefore, is applicable to the Lord Jesus Christ. There have been many opinions about the reason why this name was given to the Son of God. It is unnecessary to repeat those opinions. The opinion which seems most plausible may be expressed as follows:
1. A "word" is that by which we communicate our will; by which we convey our thoughts; or by which we issue commands the medium of communication with others.
2. The Son of God may be called "the Word," because he is the medium by which God promulgates His will and issues His commandments. See Hebrews 1:1-3.
3. This term was in use before the time of John.
(a) It was used in the Aramaic translation of the Old Testament, as, "e. g.," Isaiah 45:12; "I have made the earth, and created man upon it." In the Aramaic it is, "I, 'by my word,' have made," etc. Isaiah 48:13; "mine hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth." In the Aramaic, "'By my word' I have founded the earth." And so in many other places.
(b) This term was used by the Jews as applicable to the Messiah. In their writings he was commonly known by the term "Mimra" - that is, "Word;" and no small part of the interpositions of God in defense of the Jewish nation were declared to be by "the Word of God." Thus, in their Targum on Deuteronomy 26:17-18, it is said, "Ye have appointed the word of God a king over you this day, that he may be your God."
(c) The term was used by the Jews who were scattered among the Gentiles, and especially those who were conversant with the Greek philosophy.
(d) The term was used by the followers of Plato among the Greeks, to denote the Second Person of the Trinity. The Greek term νοῦς nous or "mind," was commonly given to this second person, but it was said that this nous was "the word" or "reason" of the First Person of the Trinity. The term was therefore extensively in use among the Jews and Gentiles before John wrote his Gospel, and it was certain that it would be applied to the Second Person of the Trinity by Christians. whether converted from Judaism or Paganism. It was important, therefore, that the meaning of the term should be settled by an inspired man, and accordingly John, in the commencement of his Gospel, is at much pains to state clearly what is the true doctrine respecting the λόγος Logos, or Word. It is possible, also, that the doctrines of the Gnostics had begun to spread in the time of John. They were an Oriental sect, and held that the λόγος Logos or "Word" was one of the "Aeones" that had been created, and that this one had been united to the man Jesus. If that doctrine had begun then to prevail, it was of the more importance for John to settle the truth in regard to the rank of the Logos or Word. This he has done in such a way that there need be no doubt about its meaning.
Was with God - This expression denotes friendship or intimacy. Compare Mark 9:19. John affirms that he was "with God" in the beginning - that is, before the world was made. It implies, therefore, that he was partaker of the divine glory; that he was blessed and happy with God. It proves that he was intimately united with the Father, so as to partake of his glory and to be appropriately called by the name God. He has himself explained it. See John 17:5; "And now, O Father, glorify thou we with thine own self, with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." See also John 1:18; "No man hath seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." See also John 3:13; "The Son of man, which is in heaven." Compare Philippians 2:6-7.
Was God - In the previous phrase John had said that the Word was "with God." Lest it should be supposed that he was a different and inferior being, here John states that "he was God." There is no more unequivocal declaration in the Bible than this, and there could be no stronger proof that the sacred writer meant to affirm that the Son of God was equal with the Father; because:
1. There is no doubt that by the λόγος Logos is meant Jesus Christ.
2. This is not an "attribute" or quality of God, but is a real subsistence, for it is said that the λόγος Logos was made flesh σάρξ sarx - that is, became a human being.
3. There is no variation here in the manuscripts, and critics have observed that the Greek will bear no other construction than what is expressed in our translation - that the Word "was God."
continued... Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
In the beginning - That is, before any thing was formed - ere God began the great work of creation. This is the meaning of the word in Genesis 1:1, to which the evangelist evidently alludes. This phrase fully proves, in the mouth of an inspired writer, that Jesus Christ was no part of the creation, as he existed when no part of that existed; and that consequently he is no creature, as all created nature was formed by him: for without him was nothing made that is made, John 1:3. Now, as what was before creation must be eternal, and as what gave being to all things, could not have borrowed or derived its being from any thing, therefore Jesus, who was before all things and who made all things, must necessarily be the Eternal God.
Was the Word - Or, existed the Logos. This term should be left untranslated, for the very same reason why the names Jesus and Christ are left untranslated. The first I consider as proper an apellative of the Savior of the world as I do either of the two last. And as it would be highly improper to say, the Deliverer, the Anointed, instead of Jesus Christ, so I deem it improper to say, the Word, instead of the Logos. But as every appellative of the Savior of the world was descriptive of some excellence in his person, nature, or work, so the epithet Λογος, Logos, which signifies a word spoken, speech, eloquence, doctrine, reason, or the faculty of reasoning, is very properly applied to him, who is the true light which lighteth every man who cometh into the world, John 1:9; who is the fountain of all wisdom; who giveth being, life, light, knowledge, and reason, to all men; who is the grand Source of revelation, who has declared God unto mankind; who spake by the prophets, for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy, Revelation 19:10; who has illustrated life and immortality by his Gospel, 2 Timothy 1:10; and who has fully made manifest the deep mysteries which lay hidden in the bosom of the invisible God from all eternity, John 1:18.
The apostle does not borrow this mode of speech from the writings of Plato, as some have imagined: he took it from the Scriptures of the Old Testament, and from the subsequent style of the ancient Jews. It is true the Platonists make mention of the Logos in this way: - καθ' ὁν, αει οντα, τα γενομενα εγενετο - by whom, eternally existing, all things were made. But as Plato, Pythagoras, Zeno, and others, traveled among the Jews, and conversed with them, it is reasonable to suppose that they borrowed this, with many others of their most important notions and doctrines, from them.
And the Word was God - Or, God was the Logos: therefore no subordinate being, no second to the Most High, but the supreme eternal Jehovah. Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
In the beginning was the word,.... That this is said not of the written word, but of the essential word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, is clear, from all that is said from hence, to John 1:14 as that this word was in the beginning, was with God, and is God; from the creation of all things being ascribed to him, and his being said to be the life and light of men; from his coming into the world, and usage in it; from his bestowing the privilege of adoption on believers; and from his incarnation; and also there is a particular application of all this to Christ, John 1:15. And likewise from what this evangelist elsewhere says of him, when he calls him the word of life, and places him between the Father and the Holy Ghost; and speaks of the record of the word of God, and the testimony of Jesus, as the same thing; and represents him as a warrior and conqueror, 1 John 1:1. Moreover this appears to be spoken of Christ, from what other inspired writers have said of him, under the same character; as the Evangelist Luke, Luke 1:2, the Apostle Paul, Acts 20:32 and the Apostle Peter, 2 Peter 3:5. And who is called the word, not as man; for as man he was not in the beginning with God, but became so in the fulness of time; nor is the man God; besides, as such, he is a creature, and not the Creator, nor is he the life and light of men; moreover, he was the word, before he was man, and therefore not as such: nor can any part of the human nature be so called; not the flesh, for the word was made flesh; nor his human soul, for self-subsistence, deity, eternity, and the creation of all things, can never be ascribed to that; but he is the word as the Son of God, as is evident from what is here attributed to him, and from the word being said to be so, as in John 1:14 and from those places, where the word is explained by the Son, compare 1 John 5:5. And is so called from his nature, being begotten of the Father; for as the word, whether silent or expressed, is the birth of the mind, the image of it, equal to it, and distinct from it; so Christ is the only begotten of the Father, the express image of his person, in all things equal to him, and a distinct person from him: and he may be so called, from some action, or actions, said of him, or ascribed to him; as that he spoke for, and on the behalf of the elect of God, in the eternal council and covenant of grace and peace; and spoke all things out of nothing, in creation; for with regard to those words so often mentioned in the history of the creation, and God said, may Jehovah the Son be called the word; also he was spoken of as the promised Messiah, throughout the whole Old Testament dispensation; and is the interpreter of his Father's mind, as he was in Eden's garden, as well as in the days of his flesh; and now speaks in heaven for the saints. The phrase, , "the word of the Lord", so frequently used by the Targumists, is well known: and it is to be observed, that the same things which John here says of the word, they say likewise, as will be observed on the several clauses; from whence it is more likely, that John should take this phrase, since the paraphrases of Onkelos and Jonathan ben Uzziel were written before his time, than that he should borrow it from the writings of Plato, or his followers, as some have thought; with whose philosophy, Ebion and Cerinthus are said to be acquainted; wherefore John, the more easily to gain upon them, uses this phrase, when that of the Son of God would have been disagreeable to them: that there is some likeness between the Evangelist John and Plato in their sentiments concerning the word, will not be denied. Amelius (f), a Platonic philosopher, who lived after the times of John, manifestly refers to these words of his, in agreement with his master's doctrine: his words are these,
"and this was truly "Logos", or the word, by whom always existing, the things that are made, were made, as also Heraclitus thought; and who, likewise that Barbarian (meaning the Evangelist John) reckons was in the order and dignity of the beginning, constituted with God, and was God, by whom all things are entirely made; in whom, whatsoever is made, lives, and has life, and being; and who entered into bodies, and was clothed with flesh, and appeared a man; so notwithstanding, that he showed forth the majesty of his nature; and after his dissolution, he was again deified, and was God, as he was before he descended into a body, flesh and man.
In which words it is easy to observe plain traces of what the evangelist says in the first four verses, and in the fourteenth verse of this chapter; yet it is much more probable, that Plato had his notion of the Logos, or word, out of the writings of the Old Testament, than that John should take this phrase, or what he says concerning the word, from him; since it is a matter of fact not disputed, that Plato went into Egypt to get knowledge: not only Clemens Alexandrinus a Christian writer says, that he was a philosopher of the Hebrews (g), and understood prophecy (h), and stirred up the fire of the Hebrew philosophy (i); but it is affirmed by Heathen writers, that he went into Egypt to learn of the priests (k), and to understand the rites of the prophets (l); and Aristobulus, a Jew, affirms (m), he studied their law; and Numenius, a Pythagoric philosopher , charges him with stealing what he wrote, concerning God and the world, out of the books of Moses; and used to say to him, what is Plato, but Moses "Atticising?" or Moses speaking Greek: and Eusebius (o), an ancient Christian writer, points at the very places, from whence Plato took his hints: wherefore it is more probable, that the evangelist received this phrase of the word, as a divine person, from the Targums, where there is such frequent mention made of it; or however, there is a very great agreement between what he and these ancient writings of the Jews say of the word, as will be hereafter shown. Moreover, the phrase is frequently used in like manner, in the writings of Philo the Jew; from whence it is manifest, that the name was well known to the Jews, and may be the reason of the evangelist's using it.

 

[JAYNE]

https://www.facebook.com/note.php?s...s-was-god-the-word-in-flesh/10150295624396919

New International Version (©1984)
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
New Living Translation (©2007)
In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.
English Standard Version (©2001)
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
International Standard Version (©2008)
In the beginning, the Word existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.
GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.
King James Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
American King James Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
American Standard Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Bible in Basic English
From the first he was the Word, and the Word was in relation with God and was God.
Douay-Rheims Bible
IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Darby Bible Translation
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
English Revised Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Webster's Bible Translation
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Weymouth New Testament
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
World English Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Young's Literal Translation
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;

Barnes' Notes on the Bible
In the beginning - This expression is used also in Genesis 1:1. John evidently has allusion here to that place, and he means to apply to "the Word" an expression which is there applied "to God." In both places it clearly means before creation, before the world was made, when as yet there was nothing. The meaning is: that the "Word" had an existence before the world was created. This is not spoken of the man Jesus, but of that which "became" a man, or was incarnate, John 1:14. The Hebrews, by expressions like this, commonly denoted eternity. Thus. the eternity of God is described Psalm 90:2; "Before the mountains were brought forth, etc.;" and eternity is commonly expressed by the phrase, before the foundation of the world." Whatever is meant by the term "Word," it is clear that it had an existence before "creation." It is not, then, a "creature" or created being, and must be, therefore, uncreated and eternal. There is only one Being that is uncreated, and Jesus must be therefore divine. Compare the Saviour's own declarations respecting himself in the following places: John 8:58; John 17:5; John 6:62; John 3:13; John 6:46; John 8:14; John 16:28.
Was the Word - Greek, "was the λόγος Logos." This name is given to him who afterward became "flesh," or was incarnate (John 1:14 - that is, to the Messiah. Whatever is meant by it, therefore, is applicable to the Lord Jesus Christ. There have been many opinions about the reason why this name was given to the Son of God. It is unnecessary to repeat those opinions. The opinion which seems most plausible may be expressed as follows:
1. A "word" is that by which we communicate our will; by which we convey our thoughts; or by which we issue commands the medium of communication with others.
2. The Son of God may be called "the Word," because he is the medium by which God promulgates His will and issues His commandments. See Hebrews 1:1-3.
3. This term was in use before the time of John.
(a) It was used in the Aramaic translation of the Old Testament, as, "e. g.," Isaiah 45:12; "I have made the earth, and created man upon it." In the Aramaic it is, "I, 'by my word,' have made," etc. Isaiah 48:13; "mine hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth." In the Aramaic, "'By my word' I have founded the earth." And so in many other places.
(b) This term was used by the Jews as applicable to the Messiah. In their writings he was commonly known by the term "Mimra" - that is, "Word;" and no small part of the interpositions of God in defense of the Jewish nation were declared to be by "the Word of God." Thus, in their Targum on Deuteronomy 26:17-18, it is said, "Ye have appointed the word of God a king over you this day, that he may be your God."
(c) The term was used by the Jews who were scattered among the Gentiles, and especially those who were conversant with the Greek philosophy.
(d) The term was used by the followers of Plato among the Greeks, to denote the Second Person of the Trinity. The Greek term νοῦς nous or "mind," was commonly given to this second person, but it was said that this nous was "the word" or "reason" of the First Person of the Trinity. The term was therefore extensively in use among the Jews and Gentiles before John wrote his Gospel, and it was certain that it would be applied to the Second Person of the Trinity by Christians. whether converted from Judaism or Paganism. It was important, therefore, that the meaning of the term should be settled by an inspired man, and accordingly John, in the commencement of his Gospel, is at much pains to state clearly what is the true doctrine respecting the λόγος Logos, or Word. It is possible, also, that the doctrines of the Gnostics had begun to spread in the time of John. They were an Oriental sect, and held that the λόγος Logos or "Word" was one of the "Aeones" that had been created, and that this one had been united to the man Jesus. If that doctrine had begun then to prevail, it was of the more importance for John to settle the truth in regard to the rank of the Logos or Word. This he has done in such a way that there need be no doubt about its meaning.
Was with God - This expression denotes friendship or intimacy. Compare Mark 9:19. John affirms that he was "with God" in the beginning - that is, before the world was made. It implies, therefore, that he was partaker of the divine glory; that he was blessed and happy with God. It proves that he was intimately united with the Father, so as to partake of his glory and to be appropriately called by the name God. He has himself explained it. See John 17:5; "And now, O Father, glorify thou we with thine own self, with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." See also John 1:18; "No man hath seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." See also John 3:13; "The Son of man, which is in heaven." Compare Philippians 2:6-7.
Was God - In the previous phrase John had said that the Word was "with God." Lest it should be supposed that he was a different and inferior being, here John states that "he was God." There is no more unequivocal declaration in the Bible than this, and there could be no stronger proof that the sacred writer meant to affirm that the Son of God was equal with the Father; because:
1. There is no doubt that by the λόγος Logos is meant Jesus Christ.
2. This is not an "attribute" or quality of God, but is a real subsistence, for it is said that the λόγος Logos was made flesh σάρξ sarx - that is, became a human being.
3. There is no variation here in the manuscripts, and critics have observed that the Greek will bear no other construction than what is expressed in our translation - that the Word "was God."
continued... Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
In the beginning - That is, before any thing was formed - ere God began the great work of creation. This is the meaning of the word in Genesis 1:1, to which the evangelist evidently alludes. This phrase fully proves, in the mouth of an inspired writer, that Jesus Christ was no part of the creation, as he existed when no part of that existed; and that consequently he is no creature, as all created nature was formed by him: for without him was nothing made that is made, John 1:3. Now, as what was before creation must be eternal, and as what gave being to all things, could not have borrowed or derived its being from any thing, therefore Jesus, who was before all things and who made all things, must necessarily be the Eternal God.
Was the Word - Or, existed the Logos. This term should be left untranslated, for the very same reason why the names Jesus and Christ are left untranslated. The first I consider as proper an apellative of the Savior of the world as I do either of the two last. And as it would be highly improper to say, the Deliverer, the Anointed, instead of Jesus Christ, so I deem it improper to say, the Word, instead of the Logos. But as every appellative of the Savior of the world was descriptive of some excellence in his person, nature, or work, so the epithet Λογος, Logos, which signifies a word spoken, speech, eloquence, doctrine, reason, or the faculty of reasoning, is very properly applied to him, who is the true light which lighteth every man who cometh into the world, John 1:9; who is the fountain of all wisdom; who giveth being, life, light, knowledge, and reason, to all men; who is the grand Source of revelation, who has declared God unto mankind; who spake by the prophets, for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy, Revelation 19:10; who has illustrated life and immortality by his Gospel, 2 Timothy 1:10; and who has fully made manifest the deep mysteries which lay hidden in the bosom of the invisible God from all eternity, John 1:18.
The apostle does not borrow this mode of speech from the writings of Plato, as some have imagined: he took it from the Scriptures of the Old Testament, and from the subsequent style of the ancient Jews. It is true the Platonists make mention of the Logos in this way: - καθ' ὁν, αει οντα, τα γενομενα εγενετο - by whom, eternally existing, all things were made. But as Plato, Pythagoras, Zeno, and others, traveled among the Jews, and conversed with them, it is reasonable to suppose that they borrowed this, with many others of their most important notions and doctrines, from them.
And the Word was God - Or, God was the Logos: therefore no subordinate being, no second to the Most High, but the supreme eternal Jehovah. Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
In the beginning was the word,.... That this is said not of the written word, but of the essential word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, is clear, from all that is said from hence, to John 1:14 as that this word was in the beginning, was with God, and is God; from the creation of all things being ascribed to him, and his being said to be the life and light of men; from his coming into the world, and usage in it; from his bestowing the privilege of adoption on believers; and from his incarnation; and also there is a particular application of all this to Christ, John 1:15. And likewise from what this evangelist elsewhere says of him, when he calls him the word of life, and places him between the Father and the Holy Ghost; and speaks of the record of the word of God, and the testimony of Jesus, as the same thing; and represents him as a warrior and conqueror, 1 John 1:1. Moreover this appears to be spoken of Christ, from what other inspired writers have said of him, under the same character; as the Evangelist Luke, Luke 1:2, the Apostle Paul, Acts 20:32 and the Apostle Peter, 2 Peter 3:5. And who is called the word, not as man; for as man he was not in the beginning with God, but became so in the fulness of time; nor is the man God; besides, as such, he is a creature, and not the Creator, nor is he the life and light of men; moreover, he was the word, before he was man, and therefore not as such: nor can any part of the human nature be so called; not the flesh, for the word was made flesh; nor his human soul, for self-subsistence, deity, eternity, and the creation of all things, can never be ascribed to that; but he is the word as the Son of God, as is evident from what is here attributed to him, and from the word being said to be so, as in John 1:14 and from those places, where the word is explained by the Son, compare 1 John 5:5. And is so called from his nature, being begotten of the Father; for as the word, whether silent or expressed, is the birth of the mind, the image of it, equal to it, and distinct from it; so Christ is the only begotten of the Father, the express image of his person, in all things equal to him, and a distinct person from him: and he may be so called, from some action, or actions, said of him, or ascribed to him; as that he spoke for, and on the behalf of the elect of God, in the eternal council and covenant of grace and peace; and spoke all things out of nothing, in creation; for with regard to those words so often mentioned in the history of the creation, and God said, may Jehovah the Son be called the word; also he was spoken of as the promised Messiah, throughout the whole Old Testament dispensation; and is the interpreter of his Father's mind, as he was in Eden's garden, as well as in the days of his flesh; and now speaks in heaven for the saints. The phrase, , "the word of the Lord", so frequently used by the Targumists, is well known: and it is to be observed, that the same things which John here says of the word, they say likewise, as will be observed on the several clauses; from whence it is more likely, that John should take this phrase, since the paraphrases of Onkelos and Jonathan ben Uzziel were .........see the following link for the continuation:
https://www.facebook.com/note.php?s...s-was-god-the-word-in-flesh/10150295624396919

 

[JAYNE]

REPLY DELETED
REPOSTED WITH LINK

 

[southern]

Good verse and good point, and we all know what kind of problem Thomas had until his confession in (Jn 20:28).

living God Ministries Incorporated - Home - Fultondale, AL

 

[mikeboll64]

i have no problem with "God The Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit", i know God is ONE.

no, not three separate "WHOs" : ONE. God is ONE.

If our ONE God consists of Father, Son and Spirit, then who is the Son OF this ONE God that was sent into the world as the sacrificial Lamb OF our ONE God who consists of Father, Son and Spirit?

The scriptural fact of the matter is that Jehovah is the Most High God. (Gen 14:22)

And Jesus is the SON OF the Most High God. (Mark 5:7)

It seems as though many of you do not accept these scriptures as truth.

It also seems that many don't understand the possessive quality of the word "OF".

Jesus was begotten BY his God. (Psalm 2:7, John 3:16)
Jesus is a creation OF his God. (Col 1:15, Rev 3:14)
Jesus is the Son OF his God. (Matt 16:16)
Jesus is the Word/Spokesman OF his God. (John 1:1, Rev 19:13)
Jesus is the Messiah/Christ/Anointed One OF his God. ( Luke 2:11, Acts 2:36)
Jesus is the sacrificial Lamb OF his God. (John 1:29, Rev 7:10)
Jesus is a prophet OF his God. (Luke 4:24, Acts 3:22)
Jesus is an angel/messenger OF his God. (John 8:28, 12:49, Galatians 4:14, Revelation 19:13, 22:16)
Jesus is the mediator BETWEEN God and men. (1 Tim 2:5)
Jesus is a Priest OF God. (Heb 5:10)
Jesus is a Servant OF his God. (Acts 4:30)
Jesus obeys his God. (John 8:29, 12:49)
Jesus worships his God. (John 4:22)
Jesus says his God is greater than him, and all. (John 14:28, 10:29)
Jesus says that our God is also his own God. (John 20:17, Rev 3:12)
Jesus distinguishes himself as someone other than his God. (John 10:36, 17:3)
Jesus was sent BY his God. (Gal 4:4)
Jesus sits at the right hand OF his God. (Mark 16:19, Acts 2:33)
Jesus rules in the power, authority, and name OF his God. (Micah 5:4, Matt 28:18)
Jesus will hand the reign of the Kingdom back to his own God. (1 Cor 15:24, 28)

peace,
mike

 

[AnandaHya]

Jesus was BEGOTTEN NOT made. he is not a creation but the Creator. He is the VERY physical manifestation of the invisible GOD

. in Heaven Three are one but most don't even bother to learn why three agree as one on Earth,

so why should we speak of heavenly things when they do not even accept the Truth concerning Earthly Truths already revealed?

this verses just reinforce the BEGOTTEN NOT made nature of Jesus Christ.

Colossians 1:15
New King James Version (NKJV)
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

Revelation 3:14
New King James Version (NKJV)

14 “And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans[a] write,
‘These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God:

 

[mikeboll64]

Jesus was BEGOTTEN NOT made.

Hi Ananda,

But you were begotten by your father, and are still a creation of God, right? Being begotten doesn't cancel out being a creation. In fact, the word "begotten" refers to one who was BROUGHT INTO EXISTENCE by a father. Why would it mean anything different in the case of Jesus?

he is not a creation but the Creator.

No scripture speaks of Jesus creating anything at all.

He is the VERY physical manifestation of the invisible GOD,

That can't be, because no man has seen God at any time. And many people saw Jesus.

 

[jandian]

We can only prayer for those who doesn't understand Jesus Christ is God. It is one of those things no amount of scripture quoting can solve. Because there are scriptures that can appear to support both arguments.

Been there.

It was only when God spoke quietly to my heart, that things I didn't see before was made clear. Mind you, I was serving God for many years prior.

 

[mikeboll64]

We can only prayer for those who doesn't understand Jesus Christ is God. It is one of those things no amount of scripture quoting can solve.

Really? What exactly are we supposed to test the spirits against, if not the scriptures?

The spirit that guides you apparently tells you that Jesus is God Most High. But scripture tells me that Jesus is the SON OF God Most High.

Does the spirit that guides you tell you that God Most High illogically has a God of his own? Because that's what you have to believe in order to believe that Jesus IS God Most High. Because Jesus DOES have a God of his own. He told us that his God was also our God.

peace,
mike

 

[jandian]

Yes the scriptures does say that, but it is not all of the scriptures is it?....it also said God became flesh and dwelt among us....Do you discard that. You cant because ti is also the word of God..... Where we get lost, is how each peace of information God gives us applies.

 

[AnandaHya]

Yes Jandian its true only God can open the eyes of those blind to what scripture truly says.

but sometimes God asks us to speak and try even if we are not heard.

Mike Did you know that Jesus was asked this exact question? "that can't be, because no man has seen God at any time. And many people saw Jesus."

Have you read His answer?

John 14

7 “If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him.”
8 Philip said to Him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us.”
9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works. 11 Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves.

that passage right there shows that Jesus IS the Father Manifested to the world.

don't you understand that JESUS is the fulfillment of this prophecy, that the Child is called the Everlasting Father?

Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

I will not argue with you but if you wish to discuss the related scriptures I would be willing to discourse concerning the topic.

 

[Brighthouse]

Hi Anandahya!! As I read the 2 things you wrote here,the Lord in me would have me tell you something. Matt 17:16 "And Jesus said to him,Blessed are you,( your name) because flesh and blood did not revel this to you,but MY Father wgo is in heaven." Blessing always to you sis!