GNT grammar does not support “ God the son”

The Real John Milton said:
That’s just more eisegesis.
Click to expand...
Fred is a not-so-secret Sabellian. He can't and won't properly distinguish between the divine persons. Both the Son and the Father are the same person in his view, although he pays incoherent lip service to their separate existences. For in his view, the Son is YHWH, courtesy of those verses that defer to calling upon the name of YHWH in the Old Testament, as replicated in the New in respect of the Lord Jesus (cf. 1 Co 1:2). Yet he ignores the Old Testament where YHWH is held out as the Father of Jesus (e.g. Isa 63:16, Isa 64:8), as substantiated in the writings of John.

Thus Fred endlessly confounds the divine persons, and refuses to consider OT verses such as Ps 110:1, Dan 7:13,14 which reveal the theological distinction between the divine persons.

You're wasting your time debating with him. To debate is impossible, because to hold any view other than Fred's view is to be relegated axiomatically to the status of a heretic, even though Fred's teaching is nowhere taught in the bible (there is no teaching that YHWH is Jesus, only that Jesus came from YHWH).

The Sabellian view, which began with Noetus, has never really gone away. It is espoused by many would-be "Trinitarianians" who imagine that just by using the nomenclature of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, they are orthodox Trinitarians. (viz. the Sabellian Priscilliantists of the 4th and 5th centuries AD who purported to worship "Christ God").
 
Last edited:
cjab said:
Fred is a not-so-secret Sabellian.
Click to expand...
No need to read further when this was garbage from the very beginning.

You need help too.

What did Jesus mean ?

The name/authority of Jesus they were baptized into was the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. They literally called on the name of Jesus when baptizing. Acts 22: 16 And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord
forums.carm.org
 
Fred said:
No need to read further when this was garbage from the very beginning.

You need help too.

What did Jesus mean ?

The name/authority of Jesus they were baptized into was the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. They literally called on the name of Jesus when baptizing. Acts 22: 16 And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord
forums.carm.org
Click to expand...
I don't take lectures from you. Don't even bother to reply to my posts, theological ignoramus.
 
Fred said:
Yes, you do.



You mentioned my name so I will reply. If you don't like it, you can lump it.
Click to expand...
Since you don't know anything about Greek grammar, nor anything of the Greek language, stop disrupting this thread. If you don't stop posting, I will report you for spamming.
 
cjab said:
Since you don't know anything about Greek grammar, nor anything of the Greek language, stop disrupting this thread. If you don't stop posting, I will report you for spamming.
Click to expand...

Go ahead, because this thread has to do with whether or not Jesus is God the Son. It is known that "God the Son" is not found in the Bible, but the teaching of it mostly certainly is.
This was also pointed out by Crowcross in post 9. In fact, the Original Poster even challenged me on the merits of the information I provided that Jesus is YHWH. He did not say they were off topic. He affirmed (wrongly) that it was biblical eisegesis.

So go whimper on someone else's shoulder cjab.
 
The Real John Milton said:
If it is true that Jesus Christ is God and also the Son, why doesn’t the GNT use the expression “God the Son” but only Trinitarians do so, in post-biblical writings ? Clearly your first assertion ( that Jesus is God) seems to me to be suspect.
Click to expand...
Let me say it again...."It's pretty basic....Jesus Christ is God. Jesus Christ is the Son....that would mean Jesus Christ is God the son."
 
Fred said:
Go ahead, because this thread has to do with whether or not Jesus is God the Son. It is known that "God the Son" is not found in the Bible, but the teaching of it mostly certainly is.
This was also pointed out by Crowcross in post 9. In fact, the Original Poster even challenged me on the merits of the information I provided that Jesus is YHWH. He did not say they were off topic. He affirmed (wrongly) that it was biblical eisegesis.

So go whimper on someone else's shoulder cjab.
Click to expand...
This thread has to do with the fact that the bible does not use the expression "God the Son."
 
Fred said:
See post 3 and then learn how to read with understanding.
Click to expand...
Post 3 contains no allusion to the Greek language. Why should we take lectures from a gnostic who knows no Greek? When will you start to formulate an argument using Greek? THIS IS THE BIBLICAL LANGUAGES FORUM (not the gnostic forum). I see you have nothing to contribute to our knowledge of Greek.

You're only making yourself look stupid. "God the Son" is a betrayal of the baptismal formula: "in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." There is no God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, or even God the Father in the baptismal formula. No-one was baptized into "God the Son." If that is your baptism, it isn't valid.

As to the identity of "God," the apostle is clear:
1Co 8:6 "But to us there is but one God, the Father"

So the apostles (John and Paul and the rest were all united on this point) assert you to be a liar.
 
cjab said:
Post 3 contains no allusion to the Greek language.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant, because there is more than one way to express a truth claim in other languages.

No need for me for me to read the rest of your drivel when the above was so easy to refute.
 
cjab said:
+++++++++ THIS IS THE BIBLICAL LANGUAGES FORUM +++++++++++++
Click to expand...

No kidding, Sherlock!

And since I referred earlier that to call upon the name of the Lord means the Lord Jesus is YHWH I saved this one especially for you:

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT): What is said of the kurios in the OT is said of the Kurios Iesous Christos in the NT. In some verses the object of epikaleisthai is God the Father (Ac. 2:21; 1 Pt. 1:17; and 2 C. 1:23 is almost a prayer); but in other verses it is God the Son (Ac. 7:59; 9:14, 21; 22:16; R. 10:12-14; 1 C. 1:2; 2 Tm. 2:22) (3:500, epikaleō , K. L. Schmidt).

I see that your whimpering on someone else's shoulder did you no good.

It would be better for you to actually study what the words of the Bible really mean.
 
Last edited:
John the Baptist is called a “son of God” (see 1 John 3:1). He is also called “God” ( see John 10:34). So the bible teaches that he is “ God the Son.” The bible does not have to explicitly state this fact. It is clearly implied. Next!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top