POLL: The Deity of Christ

[oldhermit]

OK, let's stay with substance.

LOL. I am not sure that really fits. The problem is that we do not have sufficient language to describe what we cannot comprehend.

 

[Elin]

speaking of suiting our own fancies, a monk sometime in the 4th century changed the bible.

first 1 John 5:7 holds these three are one

is an attempt by the devil to pervert Gods word,

and was not inspired by John or Gods power.

And what in that version of 1Jn 5:7 is not found in the rest of God's word, which testifies that
there is but one God, in which there are three divine persons?

 

[senzi]

The only thing strange is your ignorance of the fact that this has been Christian faith since Jn 1:1, 13:

". . .and the Word was God. . .The Word became flesh. . ."

If you want to respond to a post it would be appropriate to respond to the point made, not ignore it and continually quote your one scripture, it kinda gets monotonous

 

[prove-all]

That means one is not allowed to deny the deity of Christ Jesus.

what about the trinty? is this the forums rules are youres

 

[oldhermit]

speaking of suiting our own fancies, a monk sometime in the 4th century changed the bible.

first 1 John 5:7 holds these three are one

is an attempt by the devil to pervert Gods word,

and was not inspired by John or Gods power.

I too question the validity of that verse because of the almost non existent manuscript evidence for it. However, this does not meat that what the verse says is untrue. What this verse says is found in other passages to confirm if not the validity of the presence of the verse, certainly the content of what it says.

 

[prove-all]

And what in that version of 1Jn 5:7 is not found in the rest of God's word, which testifies that

there is but one God, in which there are three divine persons?

the only verse in the bible that says the three are one is that verse,

and was added to the bible from side notes, was not inspired word of God,

and I believe it says they might get a double curse for doing so

 

[Elin]

The Greek parakletos (comforter) is masculine in gender, so translators used the personal pronouns he and him for the Greek masculine pronouns. In many languages, a word’s gender has nothing to do with whether the thing itself is literally male or female. For example, the Spanish word mesa (table) is feminine. Gender in language is a mere grammatical tool.

In Greek, as in English, the word spirit is neuter—neither masculine nor feminine in gender.
Pneuma is the Greek word meaning “spirit.” It is always grammatically neuter, properly represented by the English pronoun “it”

Nope. . .in Jn 16:13-14, pneuma (neuter gender) has a masculine pronoun, against all the rules of grammar, denoting the Holy Spirit is a person--"he".

Jesus always uses a masculine pronoun of the Holy Spirit, never a neuter one.

 

[Elin]

I'm becoming convinced I'm a genius. I keep asking questions of people they can't answer.

Or at least, they don't try to answer. Perhaps I should tone down my intellect.

[/sarcasm]

Good idea, the intellect of man is a stumbling block if relied on to learn spiritual truth

Nope. . .

We are transformed by the renewing of our minds.

 

[Elin]

1corinthians 3:19-22

You are using 1Co 3:19-22 incorrectly in this case, for you are setting it against Ro 12:2,
and the word of God does not contradict itself.

 

[prove-all]

Actually, the spirit did not enter until his baptism. so this is wrong..

I believe at this point Jesus quilified for his future kingdom rule over earth,

but has now yet recieved, but thank God that Christ died to take us with him when he does.


the spirit was given out by the father, later Christ dolls out Gods power now after pentacost that year.


He had the full measure before mabe, but started the priest hood at 30 right then too,

mabe anoited to serve God then as priest.

 

[Elin]

God is not who he is, but what he is.
Who he is, is Jehovah.
What he is should be understood as an anthology of perfect attributes represented in three hypostatic distinctions.

That is really good. . .gives me a really good "feel" of what God (who is immaterial spirit) is. . .and how the laws of the universe are patterned thereon.

 

[SolidGround]

This is not what John 1 says about the Logos. How conversant are you with NT Greek?

Not fluent. I need to make use of resources when faced with it.

 

[oldhermit]

Not fluent. I need to make use of resources when faced with it.

Would you be willing to take a walk with me through the Greek of John 1:1? I think it may help.

 

[SolidGround]

Would you be willing to take a walk with me through the Greek of John 1:1? I think it may help.

Sure, it would be a pleasant walk.

 

[SolidGround]

Upon a bit of research, certain CoG congregations seem to have come to similar conclusions to what I am trying to express. I will look into them and see if there are any further implications that I may have missed which discredit the whole idea.

Also, my understanding of the word Spirit is more based on the Hebrew "ruach" than the Greek "pneuma".

 

[jaybird88]

Having read through the posts on this thread, I cannot see he once mentioned the word deity let alone denied it.

i agree, he didnt act rude, he backed his words with scripture but rather than question and test his viewpoint he was silenced.

 

[oldhermit]

Sure, it would be a pleasant walk.

Let us begin here. These arguments and comments do not originate with me. I have them from a professor of New Testament Greek. I have taken the liberty to rework some of the arguments and added some of my own comments and observations from the grammar.

εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος
"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God."

There are a couple things you need to know about Greek syntax in order to understand what John is really saying in this verse. First, Koine Greek normally drops the article in a prepositional phrase. The absence of the article in a prepositional phrase is normal in the Greek, and doesn't mean anything. It is the INCLUSION of the article in a prepositional phrase that is unusual, so when John includes the use of the article in these prepositional phrases it means something.

The prepositional phrase "εν αρχη" (in beginning) doesn't contain an article, but is still properly translated "in the beginning." The prepositional phrase "προς τον θεον," (was with the God) however, does include the article (τον). Since it was proper not to include it, the INCLSION then of the article here means something. In general, the inclusion of an article when it is not expected means he is being very specific about a particular individual who is God. In order to fully understand how that effects this verse, we need to go to the last clause. To understand the implications of the last clause, you need to understand Greek syntax. First, Greek distinguishes the role a noun plays in a sentence by changing the case. In general, if the noun is the subject, it is in the nominative case. If it is the direct object, it is in the accusative case. However, there is a strange class of verbs that do not take a direct object, they take a predicate. There are three verbs that do this in Koine Greek. This means that you have two nouns that are the same case (nominative), where one is the subject, and one is the predicate. So if both are in the same case, how do you know which is the subject, and which is the predicate?

Here are the rules (Notice, I said these are rules. You can't ignore them, you can't change them, you can't remove them, and you can't add to them!)
1. If both nouns have the article attached, then the first is the subject, the second is the predicate.
2. If NEITHER noun has the article attached, then the first is the subject, the second is the predicate.
3. If one has an article, but the other does not, then the one WITH the article is the subject, and the one without the article is the predicate.

So in the phrase "και θεος ην ο λογος", we see that λογος has an article (o) and θεος does not. Thus, o λογος is the subject, while θεος is the predicate.

Are you with me so far?

 

[senzi]

You are using 1Co 3:19-22 incorrectly in this case, for you are setting it against Ro 12:2,
and the word of God does not contradict itself.

I will not be responding to anymore of your posts. The notion I am contradicting rom 12:2 by my usage of 1cor3:19-22 is ridiculous.

 

[flob]

The NT reveals that the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is likewise God,
both separate persons from God the Father (Mt 3:16-17, 28:19).

To the contrary of the word 'separate':
You, Father, are in Me and I in You,
Jn 17:21.

God is one single unified essence. Yet, within this single unified essence of God are three separate and distinct persons of deity who are one God, each member having his part in the creation and redemption of man”

Speaking of language: Father, Son, and Spirit are distinct. But not separate.

He who sent Me is with Me; He has not left Me alone, 8:29.
Come to know and continue to know that the Father is in Me and I am in the Father, 10:38.
Indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you...Christ is in you, Rm 8:9-10.
He who is joined to the Lord is one spirit, 1 Cor 6:17.

The short answer to your question is that the term "God" as it is used in scripture is a descriptive term that defies what he is not who he is. What he is, is God. Who God is, is Jehovah.
God is not who he is, but what he is.

To the contrary:
God is a person.
Elohim said, Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness......Jehovah Elohim formed man, Gen 1:26; 2:7

 

[oldhermit]

To the contrary:
God is a person.
Elohim said, Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness......Jehovah Elohim formed man, Gen 1:26; 2:7

You're not understanding what I am saying. Yes, God is a person. What I am saying is that the word 'God' is a descriptive reference. The same thing is seen in scripture when the word is use to refer to false gods. "God" defines a being of a superior class.