-
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.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
L
layman316
Guest
Actually i've put it away using references to massive concepts in the bible.
Jesus consistently spoke to God outside of himself.
'The Kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ'
'The hometown of my mother and father Jimmy'
You have to give Scriptures to support of your views because most of what you say is not based on Biblical evidence.
These are grammatical anomolies.
The application of 'God and Father' being the same person is merited, because Jesus consistently calls God 'father'.
The application of Lord and Saviour' being the same person is semi-merited. Lord can mean judge/someone who lord's over man. In which case Jesus would be 'Lord' in this instance.
But the application of 'God and Saviour' being the same person is not merited because Jesus speaks to God outside of himself many times.
this is a problem in English because these things can all easily be taken each way. Separate, or the same.
But by reference to other scripture, 'God and Saviour' must be separate.
'My God'. 'Only one is good'. 'My father'. 'At his right hand'. etc etc.
The application of 'God and Father' being the same person is merited, because Jesus consistently calls God 'father'.
The application of Lord and Saviour' being the same person is semi-merited. Lord can mean judge/someone who lord's over man. In which case Jesus would be 'Lord' in this instance.
But the application of 'God and Saviour' being the same person is not merited because Jesus speaks to God outside of himself many times.
this is a problem in English because these things can all easily be taken each way. Separate, or the same.
But by reference to other scripture, 'God and Saviour' must be separate.
'My God'. 'Only one is good'. 'My father'. 'At his right hand'. etc etc.
L
layman316
Guest
The workplace of my best friend and girlfiend Emily
If these are the same person it would read better worded this way.
"The workplace of Emily who is my girlfriend and best friend."
If you are speaking of two persons, you would say, "The workplace of my best friend and my girlfriend Emily. "
I take it for what it says, not adding meaning to the text like your above post.
Or, if I misunderstood what you said, you may have violated the law of non-contradiction by agreeing with me that both have the same essence and nature.
This just shows me how opposed you are to whatever I say.
This is turning into a fight to see who's right, not a mission to get the correct meaning out of scripture.
If I say to you 'Look, it's raining cats and dogs', I have added meaning to the fact that it's raining. It's raining heavily. It paints a better picture.
If I'm walking down the street and say to you, 'You know, me and my wife are one', you know exactly what I mean. Literally, I've told you we're the same person. But obviously the fact that I'm in the street and she's at home would tell you blatantly otherwise, and that it was a reference to our like-mindedness.
L
layman316
Guest
These are grammatical anomolies.
The application of 'God and Father' being the same person is merited, because Jesus consistently calls God 'father'.
The application of Lord and Saviour' being the same person is semi-merited. Lord can mean judge/someone who lord's over man. In which case Jesus would be 'Lord' in this instance.
But the application of 'God and Saviour' being the same person is not merited because Jesus speaks to God outside of himself many times.
this is a problem in English because these things can all easily be taken each way. Separate, or the same.
But by reference to other scripture, 'God and Saviour' must be separate.
'My God'. 'Only one is good'. 'My father'. 'At his right hand'. etc etc.
The problem isn’t with the English it is those who reject the plain reading of the text. But, we are getting off topic.
The fact is, the grammar tells us that "our great God and Savior Jesus Christ is one person, because that is who is appearing.
2Pe 1:1 Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:
A.T. Robertson: Of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ (tou theou hēmōn kai sōtēros Iēsou Christou). So the one article (tou) with theou and sōtēros requires precisely as with tou kuriou hēmōn kai sōtēros Iēsou Christou (of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ), one person, not two, in 2Pe_1:11 as in 2Pe_2:20; 2Pe_3:2, 2Pe_3:18. So in 1Pe_1:3 we have ho theos kai patēr (the God and Father), one person, not two. The grammar is uniform and inevitable (Robertson, Grammar, p. 786), as even Schmiedel (Winer-Schmiedel, Grammatik, p. 158) admits: “Grammar demands that one person be meant.”
Last edited:
L
layman316
Guest
This just shows me how opposed you are to whatever I say.
This is turning into a fight to see who's right, not a mission to get the correct meaning out of scripture.
If I say to you 'Look, it's raining cats and dogs', I have added meaning to the fact that it's raining. It's raining heavily. It paints a better picture.
If I'm walking down the street and say to you, 'You know, me and my wife are one', you know exactly what I mean. Literally, I've told you we're the same person. But obviously the fact that I'm in the street and she's at home would tell you blatantly otherwise, and that it was a reference to our like-mindedness.
And you are agreeing with everything I say?...lol The fact is you are wrong and you refuse to see it. I posted an expert on the grammar and it supports what I’ve been saying all along. You can continue to reject the grammar or accept it. If you accept the grammar they we are on the same page. That is your choice.
The problem isn’t with the English it is those who reject the plain reading of the text. But, we are getting off topic.
The fact is, the grammar tells us that "our great God and Savior Jesus Christ is one person, because that is who is appearing.
2Pe 1:1 Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:
A.T. Robertson: Of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ (tou theou hēmōn kai sōtēros Iēsou Christou). So the one article (tou) with theou and sōtēros requires precisely as with tou kuriou hēmōn kai sōtēros Iēsou Christou (of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ), one person, not two, in 2Pe_1:11 as in 2Pe_2:20; 2Pe_3:2, 2Pe_3:18. So in 1Pe_1:3 we have ho theos kai patēr (the God and Father), one person, not two. The grammar is uniform and inevitable (Robertson, Grammar, p. 786), as even Schmiedel (Winer-Schmiedel, Grammatik, p. 158) admits: “Grammar demands that one person be meant.”
I could argue all day about English grammar merits when the word 'and' is used, and I'm sure there are other greek studies suggesting the contrary to what you've just written. Anybody can learn a bit of greek and reverse engineer a script.
But nobody can get away from this:
'Adonai, Eli, lama sabachtani?'
'My God, Why have you forsaken me?' - Jesus himself
Nor this 'Why do you call me good? There is but one who is good' - Jesus himself
Nor this 'Our father, who art in heaven' - Jesus himself
Nor this 'God cannot look upon sin'
And you are agreeing with everything I say?...lol The fact is you are wrong and you refuse to see it. I posted an expert on the grammar and it supports what I’ve been saying all along. You can continue to reject the grammar or accept it. If you accept the grammar they we are on the same page. That is your choice.
What grammar? English grammar allows for these 'God and saviour' statements to be either singular or plural in noun.
If Jesus and God are the same entity entirely, then tell me, how was God able to be born of a woman into a fleshy body?
How was Satan able to even attempt to tempt God?
How did God ever starve himself in the desert?
How did God look upon other sins, and be the victim of sins of men?
How did God speak to God outside of himself? and why?
How did God die?
How was Satan able to even attempt to tempt God?
How did God ever starve himself in the desert?
How did God look upon other sins, and be the victim of sins of men?
How did God speak to God outside of himself? and why?
How did God die?
L
layman316
Guest
What grammar? English grammar allows for these 'God and saviour' statements to be either singular or plural in noun.
Robertson is the greatest and most recognized Greek Scholars of our time. He is an expert of the grammar.
A.T. Robertson:
Of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ (tou theou hēmōn kai sōtēros Iēsou Christou). So the one article (tou) with theou and sōtēros requires precisely as with tou kuriou hēmōn kai sōtēros Iēsou Christou (of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ), one person, not two, in 2Pe_1:11 as in 2Pe_2:20; 2Pe_3:2, 2Pe_3:18. So in 1Pe_1:3 we have ho theos kai patēr (the God and Father), one person, not two. The grammar is uniform and inevitable (Robertson, Grammar, p. 786), as even Schmiedel (Winer-Schmiedel, Grammatik, p. 158) admits: "Grammar demands that one person be meant."
Robertson is the greatest and most recognized Greek Scholars of our time. He is an expert of the grammar.
A.T. Robertson:
Of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ (tou theou hēmōn kai sōtēros Iēsou Christou). So the one article (tou) with theou and sōtēros requires precisely as with tou kuriou hēmōn kai sōtēros Iēsou Christou (of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ), one person, not two, in 2Pe_1:11 as in 2Pe_2:20; 2Pe_3:2, 2Pe_3:18. So in 1Pe_1:3 we have ho theos kai patēr (the God and Father), one person, not two. The grammar is uniform and inevitable (Robertson, Grammar, p. 786), as even Schmiedel (Winer-Schmiedel, Grammatik, p. 158) admits: "Grammar demands that one person be meant."
Then tell me, if Jesus did not call himself 'good', yet 'God is good', then how can Jesus be God? The grammar study must be false, otherwise the apostle who wrote it did not think too much on the matter of correct grammar.
If God is in heaven, and Jesus was on Earth, and one will sit at the right hand of the other, then the trinitarian statement that God and Jesus are the same entity, is false.
Can a father be his own son?
Can a sinless being who cannot look upon sin, take on the sins of the world?
L
layman316
Guest
If Jesus and God are the same entity entirely, then tell me, how was God able to be born of a woman into a fleshy body?
How was Satan able to even attempt to tempt God?
How did God ever starve himself in the desert?
The incarnation my friend. When Jesus came down from the Father and became human He was susceptible to every human experience as all men are, yet He did not sin.
How did God look upon other sins, and be the victim of sins of men?
How did God speak to God outside of himself? and why?
How did God die?
Again, the incarnation. Jesus in His incarnate state prayed to His Father.
Rev 1:17 And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me, saying to me, "Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last.
Rev 1:18 I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death.
If Jesus did not come to die, we would all still be lost in our sins.
L
layman316
Guest
I cannot throw out a whole book of evidence for one grammatical technicality. Sorry.
Just what I expected you would say. You reject the grammar, the experts on grammar, simply because it causes you to reevaluate your view. I was in your place once. If you wish to know why the early church held the belief that God is triune in nature, it was partly due to the grammar.
Again: The grammar is uniform and inevitable (Robertson, Grammar, p. 786), as even Schmiedel (Winer-Schmiedel, Grammatik, p. 158) admits: "Grammar demands that one person be meant."
Last edited:
The first and the last, to what?
The first to die and rise. and the last to enter into Hades.
Do not be afraid: I am the first and the last. I am he who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forever and ever. And I hold the keys to Hades and death.
- 'Don't be afraid anymore, I am the first to rise and the last to die. Look at the proof, I was dead and I live, and I will always live. I hold power over death itself'.
Whatever way you spin it, this verse is about death and life. About the fact that Jesus died with sin and rose clean. And will never die again. And holds all power over death.
It is the fulfilment of the prophecy of old that 'Death and hades will be defeated'.
And what did that prophecy originally say?
The Spirit of the LORD will rest on him-- the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the Spirit of counsel and of power, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD--
So the spirit of the Lord is as I have said. Wisdom, understaning. Love, faith, hope. That spirit resided in Jesus.
The days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will raise up to David a righteous Branch, a King who will reign wisely and do what is just and right in the land. 6 In his days Judah will be saved and Israel will live in safety. This is the name by which he will be called: The LORD Our Righteousness. - Aka Jesus.
I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him
Though all these verses refer to God's raising up of this prophet. But never to God's 'becoming' of the prophet.
It does not sit with God's state that He should become a man. But certainly can BEGET a saviour:
So Christ also did not take upon himself the glory of becoming a high priest. But God said to him, "You are my Son; today I have become your Father." 6 And he says in another place, "You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek."
The first to die and rise. and the last to enter into Hades.
Do not be afraid: I am the first and the last. I am he who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forever and ever. And I hold the keys to Hades and death.
- 'Don't be afraid anymore, I am the first to rise and the last to die. Look at the proof, I was dead and I live, and I will always live. I hold power over death itself'.
Whatever way you spin it, this verse is about death and life. About the fact that Jesus died with sin and rose clean. And will never die again. And holds all power over death.
It is the fulfilment of the prophecy of old that 'Death and hades will be defeated'.
And what did that prophecy originally say?
The Spirit of the LORD will rest on him-- the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the Spirit of counsel and of power, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD--
So the spirit of the Lord is as I have said. Wisdom, understaning. Love, faith, hope. That spirit resided in Jesus.
The days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will raise up to David a righteous Branch, a King who will reign wisely and do what is just and right in the land. 6 In his days Judah will be saved and Israel will live in safety. This is the name by which he will be called: The LORD Our Righteousness. - Aka Jesus.
I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him
Though all these verses refer to God's raising up of this prophet. But never to God's 'becoming' of the prophet.
It does not sit with God's state that He should become a man. But certainly can BEGET a saviour:
So Christ also did not take upon himself the glory of becoming a high priest. But God said to him, "You are my Son; today I have become your Father." 6 And he says in another place, "You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek."
L
layman316
Guest
What grammar? English grammar allows for these 'God and saviour' statements to be either singular or plural in noun.
Let's examine your view for this verse.
Tit 2:13 looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,
Who is appearing?
If we were to accept your grammar, this verse would be saying that both God and Jesus are appearing.
L
layman316
Guest
The first and the last, to what?
The first to die and rise. and the last to enter into Hades.
Do not be afraid: I am the first and the last. I am he who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forever and ever. And I hold the keys to Hades and death.
- 'Don't be afraid anymore, I am the first to rise and the last to die. Look at the proof, I was dead and I live, and I will always live. I hold power over death itself'.
Whatever way you spin it, this verse is about death and life. About the fact that Jesus died with sin and rose clean. And will never die again. And holds all power over death.
It is the fulfilment of the prophecy of old that 'Death and hades will be defeated'.
And what did that prophecy originally say?
The Spirit of the LORD will rest on him-- the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the Spirit of counsel and of power, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD--
So the spirit of the Lord is as I have said. Wisdom, understaning. Love, faith, hope. That spirit resided in Jesus.
The days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will raise up to David a righteous Branch, a King who will reign wisely and do what is just and right in the land. 6 In his days Judah will be saved and Israel will live in safety. This is the name by which he will be called: The LORD Our Righteousness. - Aka Jesus.
I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him
Though all these verses refer to God's raising up of this prophet. But never to God's 'becoming' of the prophet.
It does not sit with God's state that He should become a man. But certainly can BEGET a saviour:
So Christ also did not take upon himself the glory of becoming a high priest. But God said to him, "You are my Son; today I have become your Father." 6 And he says in another place, "You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek."
You are all over the place. What is your point?
Rev 1:8"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End," says the Lord, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty."
Who is the almightly?
Let's examine your view for this verse.
Tit 2:13 looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,
Who is appearing?
If we were to accept your grammar, this verse would be saying that both God and Jesus are appearing.
Yes, both God and Jesus. And of course. God being all the more revealed through what Jesus says and does.
Because, as I said previously, God's spirit of wisdom, understanding, love, counsel etc rests on Jesus.
L
layman316
Guest
Yes, both God and Jesus. And of course. God being all the more revealed through what Jesus says and does.
Because, as I said previously, God's spirit of wisdom, understanding, love, counsel etc rests on Jesus.
So God the Father is going to appear (come to earth) with Jesus the Son?
This is another reason why your interpretation of the verse can't work. God the Father does not appear with the Son. This would be considered heresy even to most cult groups like the Oneness Pentecostals.
Last edited: