sorry to bust everyone chops but JESUS IS NOT GOD. he NEVER claimed to be god in his own words in the bible. There are soooooooo many verses to proove why is isnt god. i'll just give out a few for example. john 14:28 why does god have to say "the father is greater than i"? matthew 26:39 so god has to pray to god? interesting lol john 20:17 this verse sounds like were all god sons oh, cant forget about matthew 6:9-13 jesus says "OUR FATHER" so god has to say "our father"? cool!! lolz
@egwpisteuw first of YOU need to repent and accept what jesus said in john 16:12-14 the coming of the last and final messenger muhammed. those verses are implict you wrote. That still does not make him god saying I AM is not clearly said, if you want to be rational, you could look at what the TRUE god says in isaiah 46:9-10. God CLEARLY says "I am god" not only he says it once, but TWICE in the same verse.now do you see that anywhere in the bible form jesus? NO jesus is a messenger
@egwpisteuw sorry bro but jesus already said himelf in john 16:12-14 that theres someone to fulfill his prophecy after him, that pesron is prophet muhammed. and for your info me as muslim follow jesus christ if you didnt know. let me school you for a sec. in islam, if you dont follow the laws from moses through jesus, then you cant be a muslim. muslims follow all of the prophets
@egwpisteuw for example, jesus never ate pork. muslims dont eat pork. jesus prayed with his face on the ground (matthew 26:39). moses bowed (exodus 34:8) this is how muslims pray and follow the prophets and there are many more to name. now, do you christians do something like this Um, NO. case closed. thats why we have the qur'an to fulfill the message from jesus.
The Quran is a revelation from Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4) pretending to be the god Allah. It is nothing but a vicious attack on the Person and Work of our Great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.
@egwpisteuw thanks for letting me know that not only you dont know anything about islam, but the qur'an also. this lets me know that you wasn't paying attention to what jesus said in john 16:12-14 prophet muhammed only speaks of what he hears, the revelation from god. thats why you dont see him speaking of himself in the qur'an. why? because the qur'an is from gods words. whatever god says is revealed to muhammed. or you can say the qur'an is the direct word of god to be exact
@nafis100 ---->because the qur'an is from gods words.
The Quran is the word of the god of this world, Satan:
in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 2 Cor 4:4
@egwpisteuw on top of that , u dont even understand what 2 cor 4:4 is saying!!! what that means is that whoever doesn't believe in god, they will be blinded by god and won't see the message, glory and light of jesus christ. in other words, they will be punishment is hellfire for being an unbeliever. this has nothing to do with the quran being from satan. or allah pretending to be god
@egwpisteuw And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. if you want to use satan, then you could say "satan" alone. not satan doing works for allah. Allah is the same god who created you, me, and every human on this planet. allah is the verbatim word of god. its just like saying "hello" in spanish. i'll say "hola" but im still saying the same hello. well its the same thing with god. except for im saying it in arabic. you see?
@egwpisteuw if you want to learn more about god then watch "Top 10 reasons why jesus isnt god" by joshua evans. here on youtube. he will you understand the nature of both god and jesus (pbuh) have a nice day =)
@egwpisteuw to be exact, corinthians is written by paul who never seen jesus in his life. its a teaching of his own, and he also believed that jesus could not be god. but didnt confirm he was eternal .you could say he used a phrase like "the god of this age"
@egwpisteuw on top of that, the bible you christians are reading contradicts itself over and over thats its not even funny anymore. and its not the original script either. you cant just pick on parts of the bible and make jesus god in your eyes. you have to look at the bible as a whole. take a look at why jesus calls himself "son of man" if jesus was god, thats violating numbers 23:19 GOD IS NOT A MAN see? there goes a contradict right there for example.
@egwpisteuw jesus is a man and he's human, he is a prophet and a messenger, and of course the messiah. THATS ALL JESUS IS. nothing more. i love jesus myself and i have to defend him for people like you making him god when he's clearly not.
@egwpisteuw i forgot to mention, john 8:24 has nothing to do with him jesus being god. this verse means that you will die with sins if you dont believe jesus message is the truth way and life to worship god, then you will die with sins. this is the same applied to prophet moses and abraham.
Scripture cannot contradict scripture--that is a violation of the hermaneutical law of non-contradiction. The Apostle John made it a major point to emphasize the I AM statements of Jesus. These statements can only be made by God. Both John 8:24 and John 8:58 are pointing directly to the OT
Ex 3:14: God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.'
See now that I, even I AM, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand. Deut 32:39
You are My witnesses," declares the LORD, "And My servant whom I have chosen, So that you may know and believe Me And understand that I AM. Before Me there was no God formed, And there will be none after Me. Isaiah 43:10
@egwpisteuw deut 32:39 says i am he! not i am. thats different from jesus says back in john thats being one in purpose with god if you want to rationalize that. again, you cant pick and choose verses that give jesus divinity because you gonna have to go back to the other verses that clearly doesnt make him god. like i said earlier, the bible is contradicting, thats why theres verses that make it seem like jesus is god, then other verses that doesnt make him god
@egwpisteuw for example in matthew 26:39 god shouldnt have pray to god with his face on the ground, john 14:28 god shouldn't have to say someone is greater than him john 5:30 god shouldn't have to say "by myself i can do nothing" when you just created the whole universe. god shouldn't have to die for peoples sins. thats like predicting your own death. does that make any logical sense to you?
And God said, Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; Gen 1:26 see Also John 1:1 + 14; 14:1; 20:28; Heb. 1:8; Rom. 9:5; 2 Pet. 1:1;1 John 5:20 ; Isaiah 40:1-3 ;49:5
@treasureinvessel Yes, all these passages and many more prove the Deity of Jesus Christ. The more I dig into this doctrine the more clearly I see it woven throught the scriptures: OT and NT. It comes through even more clearly in the Hebrew and Greek as many of the English translations obscure it.
By the way, my next video is on Heb 1:8-9 (hopefully Monday).
Well first, we can say Yahweh all we wish, since it is gibberish. The Name is yod-hey-vav-hey. This could never become "Yahweh". This is why educated Christians instead say Yahve. But onto the point. "The LORD said to my Lord" is the proper rendering. The word used is Adoni not Adonai. Adonai is the surrogate for YHVH, Adoni is the standard term for anyone of authority. It could even be translated 'sir'.
The point here, is that this in no way implies divinity for Jesus.
@smartwarlord I'm fine with the Yahve pronunciation which is more consistent with the way it spelled and the pronunciation of the vav that I am using. All of the Hebrew Bible readings that I have listened to have been by Jews so I have never actually heard a Hebrew speaker pronounce it...
Right, I mainly don't use Yahve because there is a significant chance that isn't the proper pronunciation. Why get G-d's Own Name wrong, when you can just say HaShem (the Name) instead?
@smartwarlord Concenring God's name, I think Christians are much more influenced by the immanence of God and less daunted by His transcendance. After all, He is עמנו אל "God with Us" and the veil of the temple has been torn in two (Matthew 27:51)--our access to Him is unimpeded...
@smartwarlord The word אדני (adoni) alone in Psalm 110:1 does not prove that Jesus is God, but the fact that it refers to Messiah, and that Messiah was both David's Lord when he wrote and to be his son born at a future date clearly means that Messiah was to be God--and Jesus is Messiah, and therefore God.
That's an incorrect inference. The Moshiach will be greater than David for he will do things David could not. the Psalm only states what we already know, the Moshiach being David's Lord (adoni) is a given. There's no implication that the Moshiach will have a higher level of being, to that of David. Since Moshiach will be David (his exact representative on Earth), he thus must be human, not a demigod or G-d Himself.
@smartwarlord Then why were the Pharisees silent and not only silent, but clearly bested. They did not DARE to ask Him another question, EVER. Surely they understood that He had just proved that Messiah would be God, and since He also claimed to be Messiah, they now understood why "being a man He made Himself out to be God" (John 10:33), because Messiah would be both God and Man. Surely this came over them like a flood...
Well, the word is Adoni in the Masoretic Text, to be sure. See, the Masorites pointed the vowel on the word Adonai when they felt it was idicative of merely human lordship making it Adoni. If you examine the Dead Sea Scrolls, you'll see that the original Hebrew was always Adonai in all those cases, and it was used both of God and men.
@smartwarlord Oh I agree, I'm not big on pronouncing the Tetragrammaton, I agree with you there. I was just pointing out the whole "Men are adoni, God is Adonai, Jesus is Adoni not Adoni in Psalm 110, so he isn't God" false dillema that I've occasionally run across with Unitarian Christians.
One of the many problems with proclaiming Jesus is not God, is then you would have to proclaim Jesus was a bad moral teacher and a liar, something no holy prophet of God would be. Jesus had many opportunities to deny being God, to save Himself from the cross, but He never would, because Jesus is God! For proclaiming Himself to be God in His words and actions He was crucified as He said He would be. The Jewish scholars wanted to stone Him many times for claiming to be God.
@hottamale02 Yes exactly. The theme of the Deity of Jesus Christ is a major Bible theme, if not THE major Bible theme. It seperates true Religion from the false. The OT clearly taught the Deity of Messiah, and the NT clearly teaches that Jesus is the Messiah and that Jesus is God. To deny this one has to "explain away" passage after passage in both Testaments. I plan to drive this home in my exposition of this doctrine to the point where disagreement will be tantamount to utter illogic.
@egwpisteuw~Amen brother!! May your message and the message of God ring load a clear in the ears of all mankind before it is too late. This is the message of Truth and because people doubt this Truth, they form all kinds of doctrines of men, and travel down roads to destruction...Blessings and Peace, In Christ's Holy Name...
And they say: The Beneficent hath taken unto Himself a son. (88) Assuredly ye utter a disastrous thing (89) Whereby almost the heavens are torn, and the earth is split asunder and the mountains fall in ruins, (90) That ye ascribe unto the Beneficent a son, (91) When it is not meet for (the Majesty of) the Beneficent that He should choose a son. (92) There is none in the heavens and the earth but cometh unto the Beneficent as a slave.
@salamuun Your allah having no son is not a problem since he is not God.Ali - 29:46, Dawood - 29:46, Ali - 35:31, Dawood - 35:31, Dawood - 5:68 - 69, and a host of others declare the Gospels are true. Abdullah Ibn Abbas, one of the Sahaba, Mohammed's cousin, whose opinions are held to be above the opinions and commentaries of all other Sheikhs who are not Sahaba confirms this and it is the SAME BIble we have today. Jesus said in John 10:30-33 that He is God.
@salamuun The Jews here, clearly understood what Jesus was saying, He claimed to be God. The Quran tells us that a prophet cannot lie, so you, as a Muslim, are now left with two choices. You can dismiss Jesus as a prophet, which in turn crumbles the Quran under its feet. Or you can accept Jesus for who He said He was, and Muhammad as a fraud. In either case, Islam fails.
There is no reason to impose that view on the text. Jesus doesn't claim in this section to be the Messiah, he merely makes a question of "Pharisees" (doubtful the author here is implying ACTUAL Pharisees) and they are unable to respond properly. The Moshiach/Messiah/Christ will be a Lord (Adoni) of Men, but not G-d Himself, or surely the text in Psalms would say this.
@smartwarlord Oh.....sure it is. Because you said so. Liikely defense. Who was Abraham talking to in Genesis 17 & 18? How about Genesis 19:24? The LORD (YHWH) rained fire from the LORD (YHWH) out of Heaven. Hmmm. There are examples everywhere in the OT and NT. It's not my fault you are blind.
Read the paper titled "The Doctrine of the Trinity in the Old Testament By Nathan Kassulke" (you can find it in pdf format via a Google search). I see very clearly the doctrine that God is a "singularity that is also a plurality" developed in the Hebrew Bible.
Jesus is the Character of God's hypostasis, that is to say he is EXACTLY what God is. He's not a seperate, lesser god; he's a distinct person possessing the very same Deity.
Read the preceeding chapter in Isaiah. It's about idols being impotent. Could it be that God is saying all they aren't gods at all in Isaiah 45:5...rather than saying that he doesn't have a Son who possesses his Deity?
Did anyone before the rise of Christianity believe in the Trinity? No. Was there a consensus in early Christianity in favor of the Trinity? No, it was a minority position for centuries. Does the New Testament mention or preach the Trinity? No. Is Jesus ever depicted as claiming unique deity, that is to say, that he himself is G-d, the Creator, etc. Rather than an angel (cf John 17:5) or lesser god (cf John 1:1)? No.
@smartwarlord >>>Was there a consensus in early Christianity in favor of the Trinity? No, it was a minority position for centuries.
Oooh...you SURE you wanna stick with THAT position? If you wanna dig up some church history...let's go!
>>> Is Jesus ever depicted as claiming unique deity...
How's bout Hebrews 1:1-12? Or the answer he gave at his trial as to whether or not he was the Son of God? Riding the clouds? That's Deity language all the way! John 8:58? John 10:30?
Yes I'll gladly go over Church History here. Trias (Greek) only appears in Theophilus of Antioch's work c185CE, and Trinitas (Latin) likewise appears in Tertullian c190CE.
Here's the problem, it's not in the New Testament, which means, none of the authors had this view. Simple logic.
Hebrews isn't the words of Jesus.
David was also G-d's Son, does that make him the fourth member of the Trinity?
John 8:58 is a common Jewish saying, pre and post Jesus, it's not a claim of divinity.
John 10:30 is a little more tricky, of course the historical Christian approach is to read it "WE are ONE", but the question here is did the author view it that way or not? It's clear from John 1:1 that the author did not believe Jesus was equivalent to G-d, but rather was the first created being (cf Colossians 1:15) who oversaw the Creation, Justin Martyr also believed this, and equated Jesus with Wisdom (of the Solomonic works). Wisdom however, is not G-d, and is subordinate.
@smartwarlord >>>John 10:30 is a little more tricky, of course the historical Christian approach is to read it "WE are ONE
I'm not claiming Christ is saying he's One Deity with the Father here. But look @ what he's claiming to be One with Him concerning:
Dispensing eternal life. Read Jonah 2:9. Salvation is from the Lord. Jews would hear that and realize that in claiming to dispense salvation, he was claiming to be God...and that's exactly what happened in John 10:31-33.
10. But I-with a voice of thanks will I sacrifice to You; what I vowed I will pay, for the salvation of the Lord.
Christians mis-translate it to mean "from the Lord", this is Septuagint influence.
There is no evidence Jews ever thought Jesus was claiming to be G-d, even from your own documents. The peasants mentioned in those bits of John want to kill him from the start, not because he says this.
@smartwarlord >>> Jesus was equivalent to G-d, but rather was the first created being (cf Colossians 1:15) who oversaw the Creation, Justin Martyr also believed this
Not quite; and Colossians 1:15 is describing Christ as the HEIR of Creation. That's what the firstborn is. And applying Proverbs 8:22 to Christ hardly means you think he's less than God. Athanasius, Clement, and Origen all applied it to Him, and they FIRMLY held his deity. cont
Yes Colossians 1:15 is inherently Arian, heck, even Origen who lived BEFORE Arius, thought it was as I stated.
I'm not seeing how the author of Colossians is applying Proverbs 8 to Jesus. Even if he was, the person mentioned in Proverbs 8 is not a deity, but a flesh and blood human being...
Athanasius is the only person you mentioned so far that was a devout Trinitarian, but he comes 160 years after the NT was written.
@smartwarlord >>>I'm not seeing how the author of Colossians is applying Proverbs 8 to Jesus
Didn't say that. I'm saying NUMEROUS Church Fathers applied Pro 8:22 to Christ but FIRMLY believed he was God, and some FLATLY denied he was a creature. It has to do with the verb Ektisen; it can apply to what God produces, by either creation or generation. They, along with Justin applied Prov 8:22 to Jesus and firmly believed he was God. They believed it was about his Eternal Generation.
Who has more authority, the author of Colosians or the Church Fathers?
there's nothing in Proverbs 8 or 22 specifically, that implies the being in question was uncreated. G-d isn't a trickster as in Islam, He is direct, your "interpretation" is by all means indirect.
@sm>>Who has more authority, the author of Colosians...
Paul of Course. But I'm rather surprised a guy as literate in scripture as you would insist Prototokos MUST mean that. The Firstborn was the rightful heir. And Christ is the rightful heir...because accd to the next verse...thru him EVERYTHING was made, and it exists FOR him.
>>>there's nothing in Proverbs 8... uncreated
So God was once unwise and had to create wisdom? Or was He ALWAYS GENERATING it?
And it's assuredly NOT my interp of that verse that this is anything but Wisdom personified. I'm simply saying the pre-nicene church applied this verse to Christ, but they also believed he was God. They simply believed it referred to his eternal generation.
Do you think the Arians didn't read the next verse? According to Arianism, EVERYTHING WAS made for the Logos. However, this doesn't make the Logos G-d, but rather something quite different, 'a god'. (john 1:1)
You have an anthropomorphic view of G-d, G-d does not "have wisdom", rather He uses wisdom for His purposes. That is why Solomon speaks of Wisdom as independent of G-d.
**A** god? **a** god that two verses later, made everything, and apart from him, NOTHING that **was made** was made? Wouldn't this kinda exclude him from being made?
John 1:1-3 is teaching Christ's deity. If John taught Christ was a created god, why did his church, just 5 yrs after he died , believe he was Uncreated Diety? (Ignatius, letter to the Ephesians ch 7)
Why did his student's student (Irenaeus) write that the Son ETERNALLY co-existed with God, and was God?
"In the Beginning was the Word, and God was with the Word, and the Word was a god"
That is the direct translation from the Coptic, the original translation from the Greek NT. I will take their view over yours, since they were bilingual in both languages and were far closer to the period than modern Trinitarians who want to render it another way.
The impossible notion John was 100 years old is the fiction of Papias, a noted idiot (cf Eusebius). If he existed, he'd have died early.
@smartwarlord >>>That is the direct translation from the Coptic
An indef article in Sahidic can indicate EITHER a quality (he was of God's nature) or an entity(he was a god).
Being that the Coptic was translated around the time of Clem of Alexandria being the dean of the Catechetical School, and the Bishop of Alexandria, and he preached that Christ was Uncreated Deity...and for all practical puropses, this guy WAS Coptic Christianity at the time...I'm picking the former, not the latter.
You do realize it would make him one of the oldest (if not the oldest) men in the entire Roman Empire?
Do you think the man who wrote the Gospel is the same as the one who wrote 1 John? Do you think 2 & 3 John have the same author? If so, is that the same author as the previous two documents? Do you think he also wrote the completely unrelated Apocalypse of John?
@smartwarlord Hang on...you're setting up a rabbit trail, and most likely unwittingly. I'm not claiming the Ontological doctrine is taught in the bible, ie, HOW it is so that One God is 3 person. Is the Economic doctrine, ie THAT One God is 3 persons? Yep. And so did the early Church. Read the Ignatian Epistles(106 AD)... They SCREAM Christ's deity. Justin Martyr can occasionally sound like an Arian's friend, but he was a FIRM believer in Jesus' deity. Irenaeus too.
I take John Calvin's stance that all of the Ignatian epistles are forged. Besides, only their Greek versions (much longer than the Syriac) mention Jesus being anything more than "the messiah" (whatever, that meant to early Christians, since it's clearly not the Son of David, King on His Throne)
There is nowhere in any of Justin Martyr's works suggesting Trinitarianism. He believed as i previously stated, that Jesus was a subordinate god to G-d.
@smartwarlord >>>I take John Calvin's stance that all of the Ignatian epistles are forged.
So Irenaeus and Origen quoted forged epistles? On what scholarly basis do you hold this position.
>>>There is nowhere in any of Justin Martyr's works suggesting Trinitarianism
Better re-read them.
"But both Him, and the Son... and the prophetic Spirit, we worship and adore." (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch 6) "Whence to God alone we render worship." (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch 17)
On the scholarly basis attested by all of the critical scholars of the last 200 years. I challenge you to provide a single reputable scholar who thinks the Greek version of Ignatius' Epistles are genuine.
Look at the Greek, the two are different words. The first could be translated respect (comparable with the other word adore), and the last is the worship one gives only to G-d, found throughout the Septuagint in reference to G-d Himself.
@smartwarlord>>>. I challenge you to provide a single reputable scholar...
Lightfoot, Zahn, Allen Brent. There's three. Now, wait. Are you talking about the Middle Recension? The Seven Letters? Not the Long Recension, yeah, those other 8 are forgeries, and the other seven are interpolated. I'm talking about the Middle Recension. And scholars believe those letters are legit. And they SCREAM Christ's deity.
@smartwarlord >>>So let's drop the Ignatius subject.
Well, that's fine, but I haven't really seen much info showing why i should view the Seven letters of the Middle Recension as forgeries. And if they aren't...and they really came from Ignatius, you have an Apostolic student in 106 saying that Christ is uncreated, his God, that Christ raised himself from the dead, and so on. It kinda kills your whole "Christ's deity was not believed for centuries" arguement.
@smartwarlord >>>Echad means One, not Three or Plurality.
What's the Shema really about? It's about who Israel is to be loyal to...YHWH and YHWH alone. Does not the NPJSV translate it:
"Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD alone."
And from what I've understood, there's a footnote in the NPJSV stating that this is the interp of medieval commentators Abraham Ibn Ezra and Rabbi Shmuel Ben Meir.
I'm not sure if the Shema is necessarily a formula for Unitarian Monotheism.
"Hear Israel, The L-RD is our G-d, the L-RD [He is] alone"
However that's not important, since, of course, 'Sh'ma Yisrael HaShem Eloheinu HaShem Echad' could just read the way Christians like "Hear, O Israel: The Lord is our God; the Lord is one."
It's not so much the rendering of the verse, but rather the word here for One that matters. G-d does not use Yachid (which I suppose could be twisted towards Trinitarianism) but He uses cont
"He uses" Echad, which is used throughout the [Hebrew] Bible, if this one instance can mean plural one, then all the others can as well, creating complete havoc with the text, which is not permitted:
"Do not add to the word which I command you, nor diminish from it, to observe the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you. "Devarim 4:2
Unitarian Monotheism is an oxymoron, based on Plato, I'm on the same page here with Christians over Islam's failures.
Actually, I doubt anyone has...it's the NJPSV; my bad on the typo. The New Jewish Publication Society Version. Anyway, I'm not so much arguing that Deut 6:4 is teaching Plural Unity, but instructing Israel as to WHO it's to be loyal to.
Possibly, but as you know the Shema is uttered daily, for the last 3200 years. It is of course to remind people whom they serve, but also, is a critical statement of Monotheism.
I don't accept anything from the JPS company any more than you probably accept the Douay Rheims as accurate.
Please pick up an ArtScroll Tanakh, you will see where Christian translations deviate from the text. (I don't blame them, the author of Hebrews does the same)
@smartwarlord Why then did God choose to reveal himself in the very first verse of the Bible via a noun that can be both singular and plural (אלהים)? And why just a few verses later did God say נעשה אדם בצלמנו כדמותנו "Let us make man in our image according to our likeness" (Gen 1:26)?
The Absurdity of the claim that Gen 1:1 is Polytheistic, as you would like it to be is apparent. The sole reason the verse uses Elohim, instead of El, Eloah or Elohei, is because the verb (bara) is not plural. Thus for it to be proper Hebrew it must appear in this way. Elohim is used of G-d, men and angels. It is neither plural nor the concept of "plural majesty".
The second verse provided follows the same grammatical rules. G-d is speaking to the angels, but creating by Himself.
@smartwarlord I really don't understand your first point. אלהים is both a singular and plural noun and can be used with either a singular or plural verb (i.e., it is just like sheep in English). For example:
ההצילו אתם אלהי הגוים
Have the gods of the nations delivered them (2 Kings 19:12).
@smartwarlord As to your second point, it makes no sense whatsoever and is simply an attempt to "explain away" the fact that God is being presented as a plurality here. If you simply let the Hebrew Bible speak for itself, you find evidence for a God that is singular AND evidence for a God that is plural. Hence, the God of the Hebrew Bible is presented as a God that is a Singularity that is also a Plurality.
@smartwarlord You can't read! Of course, again you will say mistranslated, it's easy, and with no proof, except the Watchtowers bible. Genesis 17 And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect. Verse 3 3And Abram fell on his face: and God talked with him, saying. And then finally, 22And he left off talking with him, and God went up from Abraham. You lose EASILY here.
@smartwarlord Genesis 18:1 And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; This was NOT an angel since just a bit later He said in verse 13: And the LORD said unto Abraham, Wherefore did Sarah laugh, saying, Shall I of a surety bear a child, which am old? Because the verse before that says she laughed WITHIN herself about it. An angel cannot know the thoughts of the mind and heart, only God can.
@salamuun Did not Jesus claim to be God's Son numerous times in the Gospels? Did not his closest associates declare that he was God's Son? Did not THEIR disciples declare that he was the Son of God? Even the Christian heretics, ie the Arians, Ebionites, Sabellians, Adoptionists, while they departed from much CHristological orthodoxy, they certainly didn't deny that CHrist was God's Son. Did it take 500 years for God to get the message right about Jesus?
@salamuun To support this Quranic doctrine, you must then find an alternative explanation for Matt 22:42-45 than what I have expounded in this video. If you cannot, then you must reject this Quranic doctrine, and Islam with it.
sorry to bust everyone chops but JESUS IS NOT GOD. he NEVER claimed to be god in his own words in the bible. There are soooooooo many verses to proove why is isnt god. i'll just give out a few for example. john 14:28 why does god have to say "the father is greater than i"? matthew 26:39 so god has to pray to god? interesting lol john 20:17 this verse sounds like were all god sons oh, cant forget about matthew 6:9-13 jesus says "OUR FATHER" so god has to say "our father"? cool!! lolz
nafis100 1 month ago
@nafis100 ------>sorry to bust everyone chops but JESUS IS NOT GOD...
You need repent of your unbelief and accept Jesus Christ as God and Savior. This is the only object of faith that saves as Jesus Himself said:
Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I AM, you will die in your sins (John 8:24).
God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM" Ex 3:14
Unless you believe that Jesus is the Great I AM of Exodus 3:14, you are unsaved.
egwpisteuw 1 month ago
@egwpisteuw first of YOU need to repent and accept what jesus said in john 16:12-14 the coming of the last and final messenger muhammed. those verses are implict you wrote. That still does not make him god saying I AM is not clearly said, if you want to be rational, you could look at what the TRUE god says in isaiah 46:9-10. God CLEARLY says "I am god" not only he says it once, but TWICE in the same verse.now do you see that anywhere in the bible form jesus? NO jesus is a messenger
nafis100 1 month ago
@nafis100 ------>first of YOU need to...
This is a serious matter for you. ONLY faith in Jesus Christ as God can save you. You need to repent of your unbelief and obey John 8:24:
...unless you believe that I AM, you will die in your sins (John 8:24).
egwpisteuw 1 month ago
@egwpisteuw sorry bro but jesus already said himelf in john 16:12-14 that theres someone to fulfill his prophecy after him, that pesron is prophet muhammed. and for your info me as muslim follow jesus christ if you didnt know. let me school you for a sec. in islam, if you dont follow the laws from moses through jesus, then you cant be a muslim. muslims follow all of the prophets
nafis100 1 month ago
@egwpisteuw for example, jesus never ate pork. muslims dont eat pork. jesus prayed with his face on the ground (matthew 26:39). moses bowed (exodus 34:8) this is how muslims pray and follow the prophets and there are many more to name. now, do you christians do something like this Um, NO. case closed. thats why we have the qur'an to fulfill the message from jesus.
nafis100 1 month ago
@nafis100 ---->the qur'an...
The Quran is a revelation from Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4) pretending to be the god Allah. It is nothing but a vicious attack on the Person and Work of our Great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.
egwpisteuw 1 month ago
@egwpisteuw thanks for letting me know that not only you dont know anything about islam, but the qur'an also. this lets me know that you wasn't paying attention to what jesus said in john 16:12-14 prophet muhammed only speaks of what he hears, the revelation from god. thats why you dont see him speaking of himself in the qur'an. why? because the qur'an is from gods words. whatever god says is revealed to muhammed. or you can say the qur'an is the direct word of god to be exact
nafis100 1 month ago
@nafis100 ---->because the qur'an is from gods words.
The Quran is the word of the god of this world, Satan:
in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 2 Cor 4:4
egwpisteuw 1 month ago
@egwpisteuw on top of that , u dont even understand what 2 cor 4:4 is saying!!! what that means is that whoever doesn't believe in god, they will be blinded by god and won't see the message, glory and light of jesus christ. in other words, they will be punishment is hellfire for being an unbeliever. this has nothing to do with the quran being from satan. or allah pretending to be god
nafis100 1 month ago
@nafis100 ---->what 2 cor 4:4 is saying...
The god of this world is Satan who veils the Gospel from those who are perishing (2 Cor 4:3).
This is exactly what the Quran does, it attacks the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is the work of Satan posing as Allah.
egwpisteuw 1 month ago
@egwpisteuw And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. if you want to use satan, then you could say "satan" alone. not satan doing works for allah. Allah is the same god who created you, me, and every human on this planet. allah is the verbatim word of god. its just like saying "hello" in spanish. i'll say "hola" but im still saying the same hello. well its the same thing with god. except for im saying it in arabic. you see?
nafis100 1 month ago
@egwpisteuw if you want to learn more about god then watch "Top 10 reasons why jesus isnt god" by joshua evans. here on youtube. he will you understand the nature of both god and jesus (pbuh) have a nice day =)
nafis100 1 month ago
@egwpisteuw to be exact, corinthians is written by paul who never seen jesus in his life. its a teaching of his own, and he also believed that jesus could not be god. but didnt confirm he was eternal .you could say he used a phrase like "the god of this age"
nafis100 1 month ago
@egwpisteuw on top of that, the bible you christians are reading contradicts itself over and over thats its not even funny anymore. and its not the original script either. you cant just pick on parts of the bible and make jesus god in your eyes. you have to look at the bible as a whole. take a look at why jesus calls himself "son of man" if jesus was god, thats violating numbers 23:19 GOD IS NOT A MAN see? there goes a contradict right there for example.
nafis100 1 month ago
@egwpisteuw jesus is a man and he's human, he is a prophet and a messenger, and of course the messiah. THATS ALL JESUS IS. nothing more. i love jesus myself and i have to defend him for people like you making him god when he's clearly not.
nafis100 1 month ago
@egwpisteuw i forgot to mention, john 8:24 has nothing to do with him jesus being god. this verse means that you will die with sins if you dont believe jesus message is the truth way and life to worship god, then you will die with sins. this is the same applied to prophet moses and abraham.
nafis100 1 month ago
@egwpisteuw then john 8:24 contradicts again in john 8:58 you see?
nafis100 1 month ago
@nafis100 ----->john 8:24 contradicts again in john 8:58 you see?
Scripture cannot contradict scripture--that is a violation of the hermaneutical law of non-contradiction. The Apostle John made it a major point to emphasize the I AM statements of Jesus. These statements can only be made by God. Both John 8:24 and John 8:58 are pointing directly to the OT
Ex 3:14: God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.'
(cont)
egwpisteuw 1 month ago
@nafis100 (cont)
See now that I, even I AM, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand. Deut 32:39
You are My witnesses," declares the LORD, "And My servant whom I have chosen, So that you may know and believe Me And understand that I AM. Before Me there was no God formed, And there will be none after Me. Isaiah 43:10
egwpisteuw 1 month ago
@egwpisteuw deut 32:39 says i am he! not i am. thats different from jesus says back in john thats being one in purpose with god if you want to rationalize that. again, you cant pick and choose verses that give jesus divinity because you gonna have to go back to the other verses that clearly doesnt make him god. like i said earlier, the bible is contradicting, thats why theres verses that make it seem like jesus is god, then other verses that doesnt make him god
nafis100 1 month ago
@nafis100 ----->deut 32:39 says i am he! not i am.
כי אני אני הוא
That, I, (even), I AM
This is the best translation from the Hebrew. The Septugint translates it into Greek as:
ἴδετε ἴδετε ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι
ἐγώ εἰμι (ego eimi) "I AM" being exactly what Jesus said in both John 8:24 and 8:58.
God is the One who simply IS, the Being One, the who can simply say I AM. This is why Jesus made the I AM statements, He is God.
egwpisteuw 1 month ago
@egwpisteuw for example in matthew 26:39 god shouldnt have pray to god with his face on the ground, john 14:28 god shouldn't have to say someone is greater than him john 5:30 god shouldn't have to say "by myself i can do nothing" when you just created the whole universe. god shouldn't have to die for peoples sins. thats like predicting your own death. does that make any logical sense to you?
nafis100 1 month ago
@nafis100 --->for example in matthew 26:39...
Jesus is BOTH God AND Man, He is both equal to the Father AND the Father is greater.
Jesus is EXACTLY who the Quran says He is not: God the Son, the second member of the Trinity.
egwpisteuw 1 month ago
Jesus is God Halleluyah
maggieflewitt 4 months ago
Jesus the Christ is one of the Godhead.
And God said, Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; Gen 1:26 see Also John 1:1 + 14; 14:1; 20:28; Heb. 1:8; Rom. 9:5; 2 Pet. 1:1;1 John 5:20 ; Isaiah 40:1-3 ;49:5
treasureinvessel 9 months ago
@treasureinvessel Yes, all these passages and many more prove the Deity of Jesus Christ. The more I dig into this doctrine the more clearly I see it woven throught the scriptures: OT and NT. It comes through even more clearly in the Hebrew and Greek as many of the English translations obscure it.
By the way, my next video is on Heb 1:8-9 (hopefully Monday).
egwpisteuw 9 months ago
@egwpisteuw looking foreward. We must give heed to what is spoken concerning the Son.
treasureinvessel 9 months ago
Lovely. Fav'd, featured.... appendage up! -- all that.
Matthew 22 is so rich in truth... even in the parable at the outset, Jesus predicts (rightly) what would become of His Gospel.
Great stuff :-)
justchemicali 9 months ago
Well first, we can say Yahweh all we wish, since it is gibberish. The Name is yod-hey-vav-hey. This could never become "Yahweh". This is why educated Christians instead say Yahve. But onto the point. "The LORD said to my Lord" is the proper rendering. The word used is Adoni not Adonai. Adonai is the surrogate for YHVH, Adoni is the standard term for anyone of authority. It could even be translated 'sir'.
The point here, is that this in no way implies divinity for Jesus.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord I'm fine with the Yahve pronunciation which is more consistent with the way it spelled and the pronunciation of the vav that I am using. All of the Hebrew Bible readings that I have listened to have been by Jews so I have never actually heard a Hebrew speaker pronounce it...
egwpisteuw 9 months ago
@egwpisteuw
Right, I mainly don't use Yahve because there is a significant chance that isn't the proper pronunciation. Why get G-d's Own Name wrong, when you can just say HaShem (the Name) instead?
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord Concenring God's name, I think Christians are much more influenced by the immanence of God and less daunted by His transcendance. After all, He is עמנו אל "God with Us" and the veil of the temple has been torn in two (Matthew 27:51)--our access to Him is unimpeded...
egwpisteuw 9 months ago
@smartwarlord The word אדני (adoni) alone in Psalm 110:1 does not prove that Jesus is God, but the fact that it refers to Messiah, and that Messiah was both David's Lord when he wrote and to be his son born at a future date clearly means that Messiah was to be God--and Jesus is Messiah, and therefore God.
This is Jesus clear teaching in Matt 22:42-45.
egwpisteuw 9 months ago
@egwpisteuw
That's an incorrect inference. The Moshiach will be greater than David for he will do things David could not. the Psalm only states what we already know, the Moshiach being David's Lord (adoni) is a given. There's no implication that the Moshiach will have a higher level of being, to that of David. Since Moshiach will be David (his exact representative on Earth), he thus must be human, not a demigod or G-d Himself.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord Then why were the Pharisees silent and not only silent, but clearly bested. They did not DARE to ask Him another question, EVER. Surely they understood that He had just proved that Messiah would be God, and since He also claimed to be Messiah, they now understood why "being a man He made Himself out to be God" (John 10:33), because Messiah would be both God and Man. Surely this came over them like a flood...
egwpisteuw 9 months ago
@smartwarlord >>>The word used is Adoni not Adonai
Well, the word is Adoni in the Masoretic Text, to be sure. See, the Masorites pointed the vowel on the word Adonai when they felt it was idicative of merely human lordship making it Adoni. If you examine the Dead Sea Scrolls, you'll see that the original Hebrew was always Adonai in all those cases, and it was used both of God and men.
,
msm1876 9 months ago
@msm1876
That may be true, but would you prefer G-d's uncorrupted text, or the work of a fringe sect? Who can you trust?
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord Oh I agree, I'm not big on pronouncing the Tetragrammaton, I agree with you there. I was just pointing out the whole "Men are adoni, God is Adonai, Jesus is Adoni not Adoni in Psalm 110, so he isn't God" false dillema that I've occasionally run across with Unitarian Christians.
msm1876 9 months ago
One of the many problems with proclaiming Jesus is not God, is then you would have to proclaim Jesus was a bad moral teacher and a liar, something no holy prophet of God would be. Jesus had many opportunities to deny being God, to save Himself from the cross, but He never would, because Jesus is God! For proclaiming Himself to be God in His words and actions He was crucified as He said He would be. The Jewish scholars wanted to stone Him many times for claiming to be God.
hottamale02 9 months ago
@hottamale02 Yes exactly. The theme of the Deity of Jesus Christ is a major Bible theme, if not THE major Bible theme. It seperates true Religion from the false. The OT clearly taught the Deity of Messiah, and the NT clearly teaches that Jesus is the Messiah and that Jesus is God. To deny this one has to "explain away" passage after passage in both Testaments. I plan to drive this home in my exposition of this doctrine to the point where disagreement will be tantamount to utter illogic.
egwpisteuw 9 months ago
@egwpisteuw~Amen brother!! May your message and the message of God ring load a clear in the ears of all mankind before it is too late. This is the message of Truth and because people doubt this Truth, they form all kinds of doctrines of men, and travel down roads to destruction...Blessings and Peace, In Christ's Holy Name...
hottamale02 9 months ago
Surah Maryam (Mary):
And they say: The Beneficent hath taken unto Himself a son. (88) Assuredly ye utter a disastrous thing (89) Whereby almost the heavens are torn, and the earth is split asunder and the mountains fall in ruins, (90) That ye ascribe unto the Beneficent a son, (91) When it is not meet for (the Majesty of) the Beneficent that He should choose a son. (92) There is none in the heavens and the earth but cometh unto the Beneficent as a slave.
salamuun 9 months ago
@salamuun Your allah having no son is not a problem since he is not God.Ali - 29:46, Dawood - 29:46, Ali - 35:31, Dawood - 35:31, Dawood - 5:68 - 69, and a host of others declare the Gospels are true. Abdullah Ibn Abbas, one of the Sahaba, Mohammed's cousin, whose opinions are held to be above the opinions and commentaries of all other Sheikhs who are not Sahaba confirms this and it is the SAME BIble we have today. Jesus said in John 10:30-33 that He is God.
mkzmotorsports 9 months ago
@salamuun The Jews here, clearly understood what Jesus was saying, He claimed to be God. The Quran tells us that a prophet cannot lie, so you, as a Muslim, are now left with two choices. You can dismiss Jesus as a prophet, which in turn crumbles the Quran under its feet. Or you can accept Jesus for who He said He was, and Muhammad as a fraud. In either case, Islam fails.
mkzmotorsports 9 months ago 2
@mkzmotorsports
There is no reason to impose that view on the text. Jesus doesn't claim in this section to be the Messiah, he merely makes a question of "Pharisees" (doubtful the author here is implying ACTUAL Pharisees) and they are unable to respond properly. The Moshiach/Messiah/Christ will be a Lord (Adoni) of Men, but not G-d Himself, or surely the text in Psalms would say this.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord There is no reason to impose that view.....except the obvious! John 1:1 is a crystal clear example of who He is.
mkzmotorsports 9 months ago
@mkzmotorsports
John 1:1-18 is an addition into the Gospel.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord Oh.....sure it is. Because you said so. Liikely defense. Who was Abraham talking to in Genesis 17 & 18? How about Genesis 19:24? The LORD (YHWH) rained fire from the LORD (YHWH) out of Heaven. Hmmm. There are examples everywhere in the OT and NT. It's not my fault you are blind.
mkzmotorsports 9 months ago
@mkzmotorsports
Actually no, you're the blind one, imposing a Greek concept of "Trinity" unto a Monotheistic Hebrew text.
The messengers in the chapters you refer to are angels. Not gods or god parts.
Your verse is mis-translated slightly:
24. And the Lord caused to rain down upon Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire, from the Lord, from heaven.
it is merely a re-iteration that this was caused directly by G-d, not by mere earthly forces.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord ---->"a Monotheistic Hebrew text"
Read the paper titled "The Doctrine of the Trinity in the Old Testament By Nathan Kassulke" (you can find it in pdf format via a Google search). I see very clearly the doctrine that God is a "singularity that is also a plurality" developed in the Hebrew Bible.
egwpisteuw 9 months ago
@egwpisteuw
Absurd.
Echad means One, not Three or Plurality.
5. I am the Lord, and there is no other; besides Me there is no God: I will strengthen you although you have not known Me. - Isaiah 45:5
Why do you reject what G-d said through the Prophet? Why do you believe in other gods? (namely the triune one)
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord >>> Why do you believe in other gods?
Jesus is the Character of God's hypostasis, that is to say he is EXACTLY what God is. He's not a seperate, lesser god; he's a distinct person possessing the very same Deity.
Read the preceeding chapter in Isaiah. It's about idols being impotent. Could it be that God is saying all they aren't gods at all in Isaiah 45:5...rather than saying that he doesn't have a Son who possesses his Deity?
msm1876 9 months ago
@msm1876
Did anyone before the rise of Christianity believe in the Trinity? No. Was there a consensus in early Christianity in favor of the Trinity? No, it was a minority position for centuries. Does the New Testament mention or preach the Trinity? No. Is Jesus ever depicted as claiming unique deity, that is to say, that he himself is G-d, the Creator, etc. Rather than an angel (cf John 17:5) or lesser god (cf John 1:1)? No.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord >>>Was there a consensus in early Christianity in favor of the Trinity? No, it was a minority position for centuries.
Oooh...you SURE you wanna stick with THAT position? If you wanna dig up some church history...let's go!
>>> Is Jesus ever depicted as claiming unique deity...
How's bout Hebrews 1:1-12? Or the answer he gave at his trial as to whether or not he was the Son of God? Riding the clouds? That's Deity language all the way! John 8:58? John 10:30?
msm1876 9 months ago
@msm1876
Yes I'll gladly go over Church History here. Trias (Greek) only appears in Theophilus of Antioch's work c185CE, and Trinitas (Latin) likewise appears in Tertullian c190CE.
Here's the problem, it's not in the New Testament, which means, none of the authors had this view. Simple logic.
Hebrews isn't the words of Jesus.
David was also G-d's Son, does that make him the fourth member of the Trinity?
John 8:58 is a common Jewish saying, pre and post Jesus, it's not a claim of divinity.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord
John 10:30 is a little more tricky, of course the historical Christian approach is to read it "WE are ONE", but the question here is did the author view it that way or not? It's clear from John 1:1 that the author did not believe Jesus was equivalent to G-d, but rather was the first created being (cf Colossians 1:15) who oversaw the Creation, Justin Martyr also believed this, and equated Jesus with Wisdom (of the Solomonic works). Wisdom however, is not G-d, and is subordinate.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord >>>John 10:30 is a little more tricky, of course the historical Christian approach is to read it "WE are ONE
I'm not claiming Christ is saying he's One Deity with the Father here. But look @ what he's claiming to be One with Him concerning:
Dispensing eternal life. Read Jonah 2:9. Salvation is from the Lord. Jews would hear that and realize that in claiming to dispense salvation, he was claiming to be God...and that's exactly what happened in John 10:31-33.
msm1876 9 months ago
@msm1876
Sorry that's also incorrect.
10. But I-with a voice of thanks will I sacrifice to You; what I vowed I will pay, for the salvation of the Lord.
Christians mis-translate it to mean "from the Lord", this is Septuagint influence.
There is no evidence Jews ever thought Jesus was claiming to be G-d, even from your own documents. The peasants mentioned in those bits of John want to kill him from the start, not because he says this.
These weren't literate scripture-reading Jews.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@smartwarlord >>>There is no evidence Jews ever thought Jesus was claiming to be G-d, even from your own documents
What does John 10:33 say?
msm1876 9 months ago
@smartwarlord >>> Jesus was equivalent to G-d, but rather was the first created being (cf Colossians 1:15) who oversaw the Creation, Justin Martyr also believed this
Not quite; and Colossians 1:15 is describing Christ as the HEIR of Creation. That's what the firstborn is. And applying Proverbs 8:22 to Christ hardly means you think he's less than God. Athanasius, Clement, and Origen all applied it to Him, and they FIRMLY held his deity. cont
msm1876 9 months ago
@msm1876
Yes Colossians 1:15 is inherently Arian, heck, even Origen who lived BEFORE Arius, thought it was as I stated.
I'm not seeing how the author of Colossians is applying Proverbs 8 to Jesus. Even if he was, the person mentioned in Proverbs 8 is not a deity, but a flesh and blood human being...
Athanasius is the only person you mentioned so far that was a devout Trinitarian, but he comes 160 years after the NT was written.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord >>>I'm not seeing how the author of Colossians is applying Proverbs 8 to Jesus
Didn't say that. I'm saying NUMEROUS Church Fathers applied Pro 8:22 to Christ but FIRMLY believed he was God, and some FLATLY denied he was a creature. It has to do with the verb Ektisen; it can apply to what God produces, by either creation or generation. They, along with Justin applied Prov 8:22 to Jesus and firmly believed he was God. They believed it was about his Eternal Generation.
msm1876 9 months ago
@msm1876
Who has more authority, the author of Colosians or the Church Fathers?
there's nothing in Proverbs 8 or 22 specifically, that implies the being in question was uncreated. G-d isn't a trickster as in Islam, He is direct, your "interpretation" is by all means indirect.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@sm>>Who has more authority, the author of Colosians...
Paul of Course. But I'm rather surprised a guy as literate in scripture as you would insist Prototokos MUST mean that. The Firstborn was the rightful heir. And Christ is the rightful heir...because accd to the next verse...thru him EVERYTHING was made, and it exists FOR him.
>>>there's nothing in Proverbs 8... uncreated
So God was once unwise and had to create wisdom? Or was He ALWAYS GENERATING it?
cont
msm1876 9 months ago
@msm1876 cont.
And it's assuredly NOT my interp of that verse that this is anything but Wisdom personified. I'm simply saying the pre-nicene church applied this verse to Christ, but they also believed he was God. They simply believed it referred to his eternal generation.
msm1876 9 months ago
@msm1876
Anything created in Heaven is eternal, so I'm not seeing how the verses in Proverbs should apply to Jesus.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@smartwarlord >>>Anything created in Heaven is eternal, so I'm not seeing how the verses in Proverbs should apply to Jesus.
Me either. I'm just saying the Pre-Nicene Fathers applied it to Him, but did so in a way that did NOT indicate that he was a spirit creature.
msm1876 9 months ago
@msm1876
Do you think the Arians didn't read the next verse? According to Arianism, EVERYTHING WAS made for the Logos. However, this doesn't make the Logos G-d, but rather something quite different, 'a god'. (john 1:1)
You have an anthropomorphic view of G-d, G-d does not "have wisdom", rather He uses wisdom for His purposes. That is why Solomon speaks of Wisdom as independent of G-d.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@sma> 'a god'
**A** god? **a** god that two verses later, made everything, and apart from him, NOTHING that **was made** was made? Wouldn't this kinda exclude him from being made?
John 1:1-3 is teaching Christ's deity. If John taught Christ was a created god, why did his church, just 5 yrs after he died , believe he was Uncreated Diety? (Ignatius, letter to the Ephesians ch 7)
Why did his student's student (Irenaeus) write that the Son ETERNALLY co-existed with God, and was God?
msm1876 9 months ago
@msm1876
"In the Beginning was the Word, and God was with the Word, and the Word was a god"
That is the direct translation from the Coptic, the original translation from the Greek NT. I will take their view over yours, since they were bilingual in both languages and were far closer to the period than modern Trinitarians who want to render it another way.
The impossible notion John was 100 years old is the fiction of Papias, a noted idiot (cf Eusebius). If he existed, he'd have died early.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord >>>That is the direct translation from the Coptic
An indef article in Sahidic can indicate EITHER a quality (he was of God's nature) or an entity(he was a god).
Being that the Coptic was translated around the time of Clem of Alexandria being the dean of the Catechetical School, and the Bishop of Alexandria, and he preached that Christ was Uncreated Deity...and for all practical puropses, this guy WAS Coptic Christianity at the time...I'm picking the former, not the latter.
msm1876 9 months ago
@smartwarlord <<<The impossible notion John was 100 years old is the fiction of Papias, a noted idiot (cf Eusebius)
Eusebius looked down on Papias b/c he was pre-mil, an Eusebius thought ill of that theology, nothing more.
I'll take Irenaeus' word for it that John died after the reign of Domitian. He learned from John's student himself.
msm1876 9 months ago
@msm1876
You do realize it would make him one of the oldest (if not the oldest) men in the entire Roman Empire?
Do you think the man who wrote the Gospel is the same as the one who wrote 1 John? Do you think 2 & 3 John have the same author? If so, is that the same author as the previous two documents? Do you think he also wrote the completely unrelated Apocalypse of John?
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord >>>Do you think the man who wrote the Gospel is the same as the one who wrote 1 John?
The early church had no problem accepting that unanimously.
>>>Do you think 2 & 3 John have the same author?
Based on the tone and style of those letters, probably.
>>>Do you think he also wrote the completely unrelated Apocalypse of John?
Yeah, I'd say that it was rather likely him, based on Irenaeus' testimony and his proximity to John.
msm1876 9 months ago
@smartwarlord Hang on...you're setting up a rabbit trail, and most likely unwittingly. I'm not claiming the Ontological doctrine is taught in the bible, ie, HOW it is so that One God is 3 person. Is the Economic doctrine, ie THAT One God is 3 persons? Yep. And so did the early Church. Read the Ignatian Epistles(106 AD)... They SCREAM Christ's deity. Justin Martyr can occasionally sound like an Arian's friend, but he was a FIRM believer in Jesus' deity. Irenaeus too.
msm1876 9 months ago
@msm1876
I take John Calvin's stance that all of the Ignatian epistles are forged. Besides, only their Greek versions (much longer than the Syriac) mention Jesus being anything more than "the messiah" (whatever, that meant to early Christians, since it's clearly not the Son of David, King on His Throne)
There is nowhere in any of Justin Martyr's works suggesting Trinitarianism. He believed as i previously stated, that Jesus was a subordinate god to G-d.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord >>>I take John Calvin's stance that all of the Ignatian epistles are forged.
So Irenaeus and Origen quoted forged epistles? On what scholarly basis do you hold this position.
>>>There is nowhere in any of Justin Martyr's works suggesting Trinitarianism
Better re-read them.
"But both Him, and the Son... and the prophetic Spirit, we worship and adore." (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch 6) "Whence to God alone we render worship." (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch 17)
msm1876 9 months ago
@msm1876
On the scholarly basis attested by all of the critical scholars of the last 200 years. I challenge you to provide a single reputable scholar who thinks the Greek version of Ignatius' Epistles are genuine.
Look at the Greek, the two are different words. The first could be translated respect (comparable with the other word adore), and the last is the worship one gives only to G-d, found throughout the Septuagint in reference to G-d Himself.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord>>>. I challenge you to provide a single reputable scholar...
Lightfoot, Zahn, Allen Brent. There's three. Now, wait. Are you talking about the Middle Recension? The Seven Letters? Not the Long Recension, yeah, those other 8 are forgeries, and the other seven are interpolated. I'm talking about the Middle Recension. And scholars believe those letters are legit. And they SCREAM Christ's deity.
msm1876 9 months ago
@msm1876
It's obvious we're not going to agree on this. So let's drop the Ignatius subject.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@smartwarlord >>>So let's drop the Ignatius subject.
Well, that's fine, but I haven't really seen much info showing why i should view the Seven letters of the Middle Recension as forgeries. And if they aren't...and they really came from Ignatius, you have an Apostolic student in 106 saying that Christ is uncreated, his God, that Christ raised himself from the dead, and so on. It kinda kills your whole "Christ's deity was not believed for centuries" arguement.
msm1876 9 months ago
@smartwarlord >>>Echad means One, not Three or Plurality.
What's the Shema really about? It's about who Israel is to be loyal to...YHWH and YHWH alone. Does not the NPJSV translate it:
"Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD alone."
And from what I've understood, there's a footnote in the NPJSV stating that this is the interp of medieval commentators Abraham Ibn Ezra and Rabbi Shmuel Ben Meir.
I'm not sure if the Shema is necessarily a formula for Unitarian Monotheism.
msm1876 9 months ago
@msm1876
Never heard of the NPJSV.
Ibn Ezra's rendering:
"Hear Israel, The L-RD is our G-d, the L-RD [He is] alone"
However that's not important, since, of course, 'Sh'ma Yisrael HaShem Eloheinu HaShem Echad' could just read the way Christians like "Hear, O Israel: The Lord is our God; the Lord is one."
It's not so much the rendering of the verse, but rather the word here for One that matters. G-d does not use Yachid (which I suppose could be twisted towards Trinitarianism) but He uses cont
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord
cont.
"He uses" Echad, which is used throughout the [Hebrew] Bible, if this one instance can mean plural one, then all the others can as well, creating complete havoc with the text, which is not permitted:
"Do not add to the word which I command you, nor diminish from it, to observe the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you. "Devarim 4:2
Unitarian Monotheism is an oxymoron, based on Plato, I'm on the same page here with Christians over Islam's failures.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord >>>Never heard of the NPJSV
Actually, I doubt anyone has...it's the NJPSV; my bad on the typo. The New Jewish Publication Society Version. Anyway, I'm not so much arguing that Deut 6:4 is teaching Plural Unity, but instructing Israel as to WHO it's to be loyal to.
msm1876 9 months ago
@msm1876
Possibly, but as you know the Shema is uttered daily, for the last 3200 years. It is of course to remind people whom they serve, but also, is a critical statement of Monotheism.
I don't accept anything from the JPS company any more than you probably accept the Douay Rheims as accurate.
Please pick up an ArtScroll Tanakh, you will see where Christian translations deviate from the text. (I don't blame them, the author of Hebrews does the same)
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord Why then did God choose to reveal himself in the very first verse of the Bible via a noun that can be both singular and plural (אלהים)? And why just a few verses later did God say נעשה אדם בצלמנו כדמותנו "Let us make man in our image according to our likeness" (Gen 1:26)?
egwpisteuw 9 months ago
@egwpisteuw
The Absurdity of the claim that Gen 1:1 is Polytheistic, as you would like it to be is apparent. The sole reason the verse uses Elohim, instead of El, Eloah or Elohei, is because the verb (bara) is not plural. Thus for it to be proper Hebrew it must appear in this way. Elohim is used of G-d, men and angels. It is neither plural nor the concept of "plural majesty".
The second verse provided follows the same grammatical rules. G-d is speaking to the angels, but creating by Himself.
smartwarlord 9 months ago
@smartwarlord I really don't understand your first point. אלהים is both a singular and plural noun and can be used with either a singular or plural verb (i.e., it is just like sheep in English). For example:
ההצילו אתם אלהי הגוים
Have the gods of the nations delivered them (2 Kings 19:12).
egwpisteuw 9 months ago
@smartwarlord As to your second point, it makes no sense whatsoever and is simply an attempt to "explain away" the fact that God is being presented as a plurality here. If you simply let the Hebrew Bible speak for itself, you find evidence for a God that is singular AND evidence for a God that is plural. Hence, the God of the Hebrew Bible is presented as a God that is a Singularity that is also a Plurality.
egwpisteuw 9 months ago
@smartwarlord You can't read! Of course, again you will say mistranslated, it's easy, and with no proof, except the Watchtowers bible. Genesis 17 And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect. Verse 3 3And Abram fell on his face: and God talked with him, saying. And then finally, 22And he left off talking with him, and God went up from Abraham. You lose EASILY here.
mkzmotorsports 9 months ago
@smartwarlord Genesis 18:1 And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; This was NOT an angel since just a bit later He said in verse 13: And the LORD said unto Abraham, Wherefore did Sarah laugh, saying, Shall I of a surety bear a child, which am old? Because the verse before that says she laughed WITHIN herself about it. An angel cannot know the thoughts of the mind and heart, only God can.
mkzmotorsports 9 months ago
@mkzmotorsports Oooh....great point about about only God knowing one's inner thoughts!
msm1876 9 months ago
@salamuun Did not Jesus claim to be God's Son numerous times in the Gospels? Did not his closest associates declare that he was God's Son? Did not THEIR disciples declare that he was the Son of God? Even the Christian heretics, ie the Arians, Ebionites, Sabellians, Adoptionists, while they departed from much CHristological orthodoxy, they certainly didn't deny that CHrist was God's Son. Did it take 500 years for God to get the message right about Jesus?
msm1876 9 months ago
@salamuun To support this Quranic doctrine, you must then find an alternative explanation for Matt 22:42-45 than what I have expounded in this video. If you cannot, then you must reject this Quranic doctrine, and Islam with it.
egwpisteuw 9 months ago