Jesus pierced, YHWH pierced.

Greetings again Towerwatchman,

I understand Peter is describing the situation as it appeared to him during the Transfiguration. Jesus appeared in glory, a brilliant white, but when God spoke he describes Him as "the excellent glory". I consider that this has some element of comparison.

I understand Philippians 2:6 is alluding to Genesis 1:26-27, and the comparison after this is the fact that Jesus did not grasp at equality with God, as did Adam and Eve.

I was comparing the teaching of Peter in the other part of the chapter, that Peter was not teaching the Trinity. You mentioned 2 Peter 1:1 and how you interpret this:

My response to this was the following:

You have not responded to the above, and verse 2 disproves your claim. Also you have not responded to ALL the other verses that I quoted that distinguish between the One God, the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

As far as the title of your thread is concerned, I would compare "Jesus pierced, YHWH pierced" with the following:
Acts 9:1–5 (KJV): 1 And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest, 2 And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem. 3 And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: 4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? 5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
Yes when Jesus was pierced, Yahweh, God the Father in heaven was so identified and sympathetic with Jesus and his sufferings, that He felt pierced.

Kind regards
Trevor
NO Yahweh in The NT.
The Father was NOT pierced; ONLY The Son was.
Jesus did not grasp(the prep. at is a fictional addition)the equality He had with God.
The Lord is God and vice versa. Acts 17:24.
 
Greetings johnny guitar,
Jesus Christ was The Son of God and The Lord at conception, thus He was The Son of God and The Lord AT birth, NOT by birth.
I was using the word "birth" as a summary of the conception / birth process. We do not usually say that an embryo is our son or daughter, except in an anticipatory sense.
NO Yahweh in The NT.
But Psalm 110:1 is quoted and expounded extensively in the NT. One occasion is Peter's speech in Acts 2 and I doubt that he only spoke Greek on that occasion. What problem do you have concerning the Yahweh Name? Do you accept the expression "God the Father" which is the NT equivalent?
The Father was NOT pierced; ONLY The Son was.
I agree. The One God, Yahweh, God the Father was in heaven. Jesus, the Son of God was pierced. I reject the shallow, faulty and erroneous syllogism implied by this thread title.
Jesus did not grasp(the prep. at is a fictional addition)the equality He had with God.
I disagree with your assessment of Philippians 2.
The Lord is God and vice versa. Acts 17:24.
Not sure what this one line statement is actually claiming, and the real relevance of your citation of Acts 17:24, but the following starting with the verse you suggested shows the distinction between God the Father, the Lord of heaven and earth and the man, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

Acts 17:24–31 (KJV): 24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; 25 Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; 26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; 27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: 28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. 29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device. 30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: 31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

Psalm 8:1–3 (KJV): 1 O LORD our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth! who hast set thy glory above the heavens. 2 Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength because of thine enemies, that thou mightest still the enemy and the avenger.
3 When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;

Matthew 11:25–30 (KJV): 25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. 26 Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight. 27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him. 28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.


Kind regards
Trevor
 
Last edited:
Greetings johnny guitar,

I was using the word "birth" as a summary of the conception / birth process. We do not usually say that an embryo is our son or daughter, except in an anticipatory sense.

But Psalm 110:1 is quoted and expounded extensively in the NT. One occasion is Peter's speech in Acts 2 and I doubt that he only spoke Greek on that occasion. What problem do you have concerning the Yahweh Name? Do you accept the expression "God the Father" which is the NT equivalent?

I agree. The One God, Yahweh, God the Father was in heaven. Jesus, the Son of God was pierced. I reject the shallow, faulty and erroneous syllogism implied by this thread title.

I disagree with your assessment of Philippians 2.

Not sure what this one line statement is actually claiming, and the real relevance of your citation of Acts 17:24, but the following starting with the verse you suggested shows the distinction between God the Father, the Lord of heaven and earth and the man, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

Acts 17:24–31 (KJV): 24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; 25 Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; 26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; 27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: 28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. 29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device. 30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: 31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

Psalm 8:1–3 (KJV): 1 O LORD our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth! who hast set thy glory above the heavens. 2 Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength because of thine enemies, that thou mightest still the enemy and the avenger.
3 When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;

Matthew 11:25–30 (KJV): 25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. 26 Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight. 27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him. 28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.


Kind regards
The ONE Lord IS The Lord of heaven and earth.
So Jesus was The Lord, Christ, Son of God as an embryo.
 
Greetings again Towerwatchman,

I understand Peter is describing the situation as it appeared to him during the Transfiguration.
It’s the introduction. Compare it to other introductions in other epistles and you will notice it’s a statement of praise.
Nothing in the text is speaking of the transfiguration.
Jesus appeared in glory, a brilliant white, but when God spoke he describes Him as "the excellent glory". I consider that this has some element of comparison.
I don’t see excellent in the passage. Plse post you verses
I understand Philippians 2:6 is alluding to Genesis 1:26-27, and the comparison after this is the fact that Jesus did not grasp at equality with God, as did Adam and Eve.
Where in the passage does it hint at Genesis
I was comparing the teaching of Peter in the other part of the chapter, that Peter was not teaching the Trinity.
Yes Peter was not teaching the trinity and that is irrelevant. Peter stated literally and explicitly that Jesus is God. That is 2 it of 3.
My response to this was the following:

You have not responded to the above, and verse 2 disproves your claim.
Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord,

How?
Because he identifies Jesus as Lord?
Also you have not responded to ALL the other verses that I quoted that distinguish between the One God, the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
I prefer to keep it simple. Three passages is enough.
 
Greetings again Andreas,

My point is that I consider that a man is limited and has various attributes which are less than God. Jesus is not an ordinary man, but a special man, prepared by God for the special work of salvation, and I confess that Jesus is a man, a human, the Son of God by birth, character and resurrection.

I have in part already given an answer to your claim. To use an example, in understanding any subject there is a starting point, then a gradual development and then a more thorough knowledge. If you want to fully understand a specialised part of mathematics, you need to start with the basics and gradually understand the full development. You need to understand basic Algebra before you can solve "Ordinary Differential Equations", and if you start with ODE then it looks very complicated and difficult, but a complex subject can be understood. There were two classes when I did ODE about 30 students in each class, and our lecturer seemed very confusing. One of my classmates suggested that we purchase a book something like Teach Yourself ODEs. Both of us passed the final exam, and none of the rest of our class passed. All of the other class passed.

You have written here in these paragraphs much rhetoric, and that is acceptable as you feel strongly about this subject, but I do not not feel that it really helps to convince me. If anything, like with the ODE teacher, I am more confused.

I suggest that a good starting point is Exodus 3 and the revelation by the Angel of the LORD in the bush, starting with Exodus 3:1 and going down to say Exodus 3:15. Another starting point could be Matthew 1:20-21 and Luke 1:34-35 as we would start with our junior Sunday School students, and these teach that Jesus is a human, The Son of God by birth. I should imagine most Trinitarians start with John 1:1,14, 8:58, 10:30 and then jump to Revelation 1, the first and the last. I learnt about the subject of the Yahweh Name when I was 19, and I remember it because we went to a Young Peoples' weekend in the Southern Highlands, and I also started courting my future wife. That was 60 years ago, and both of these I like to label my "first love" and I have grown and been enriched by my understanding and association with both of these.

One of my favourite OT/NT developments of this subject is where Jesus quotes/alludes/expounds Psalm 8:
Psalm 8:1–3 (KJV): 1 O LORD our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth! who hast set thy glory above the heavens. 2 Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength because of thine enemies, that thou mightest still the enemy and the avenger.
3 When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;

Matthew 11:25–30 (KJV): 25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. 26 Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight. 27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him. 28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.


I have quoted the Matthew passage in full, as it such a delight, but what I want to emphasise is that Jesus addresses Yahweh, the Creator of heaven and earth of Psalm 8, as "O Father, Lord of heaven and earth". Like many subjects, Jesus in one sentence summarises and clarifies what at first seems a complicated subject. The NT is clear that there is One God, Yahweh, God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ is a human, the Son of God by birth, character and resurrection. The NT equivalent of the Yahweh Name is that there is One God, the Father and that He has had a Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, and we do not need to understand Hebrew to appreciate this development and this NT concept completely simplifies the subject and this expression "God the Father" is able to be translated and understood in every language of the Gentiles. Like many aspects, Jesus condenses in a few words profound truths.

Concerning the NT usage of the word God as applied to Jesus, I suggest that we would need to discuss Jesus' answer to the Jews who objected to his statement of John 10:30. He includes a reference to Psalm 82:6 which I believe is speaking about the fact that the Judges in Israel are called "gods" or "Elohim", and Jesus also answers in John 10:36 that he was claiming to be the Son of God. Another line to consider is why with the many appearances of Angels they are addressed as "Elohim", in the English "God". Is the NT usage any different, for example John 20:28?

Towerwatchman asked a similar question, and he has not replied to the long list of references that I supplied in Post #9 that distinguish between the One God, the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ. How do you understand these verses?

Seeing Towerwatchman likes quoting from 2nd Peter chapter 1, another aspect is the subject of the transfiguration, when Jesus was revealed in glory. I find it interesting the expression that Peter uses concerning what Peter heard, and how he describes the source of this:
2 Peter 1:16–18 (KJV): 16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.
Peter had witnessed the glory of Jesus, but he describes the glory of the Father as "the excellent glory". The "Excellent Glory" stated that Jesus is the Son of God, and as such he is not God the Son and is not equal in glory.

Kind regards
Trevor

It seems like you are a good student and you can read well, so what do you do with Jesus as THE FIRST and all the other scriptures that teach that he is God? I'm not Trinitarian, but Oneness and believe in one God and that Jesus is this one God manifested in the flesh. If you are represented with further truth would you accept it?


God is omnipotent, but to be truly omnipotent God must be able to choose to limit His power otherwise He is not omnipotent. When He became man, God became a real man with the limitations and perception as a man. This is why when you give out verses that show how Christ was limited, I USE THE SAME VERSES to show He was limited.

A couple notes: Yes, elohim is used for a false god or judge etc, BUT it is ALSO used of God Himself.

Do you consider Jesus to be GOOD?

Does it make you wonder how Jesus could be a mere man when the many titles of God are His?
 
The Bible identifies Jesus as a man with a God who received the Holy Spirit of God immediately after his water baptism of repentance. Being led by the Holy Spirit of God into the wilderness, Jesus was tempted by the devil and God can't be tempted. God also cannot die, but Jesus died and was resurrected again by Jesus' Father who Jesus referred to as his God. God also cannot sin, but Jesus took our sins upon himself and effectually became sin for our sake. Anything Jesus did, he said that we can do as well.

You can't make Jesus a supreme God who has a supreme God without introducing polytheism into the Bible. The only way to keep monotheism is to have one God known as the Father who has a Spirit. God delegated authority and power to Jesus to be a high priest, Messiah, and Savior to mankind in order to show them "the way, the truth, and the life" that leads to God. Jesus successfully followed the way to God and Jesus is trying to show others the way, too. Jesus is God's Son; we, too, can be God's son or daughter.
 
Last edited:
The Bible identifies Jesus as a man with a God who received the Holy Spirit of God immediately after his water baptism of repentance. Being led by the Holy Spirit of God into the wilderness, Jesus was tempted by the devil and God can't be tempted. God also cannot die, but Jesus died and was resurrected again by Jesus' Father who Jesus referred to as his God. God also cannot sin, but Jesus took our sins upon himself and effectually became sin for our sake. Anything Jesus did, he said that we can do as well.

You can't make Jesus a supreme God who has a supreme God without introducing polytheism into the Bible. The only way to keep monotheism is to have one God known as the Father who has a Spirit. God delegated authority and power to Jesus to be a high priest, Messiah, and Savior to mankind in order to show them "the way, the truth, and the life" that leads to God. Jesus successfully followed the way to God and Jesus is trying to show others the way, too. Jesus is God's Son; we, too, can be God's son or daughter.
Titus 2:13
Paul states that Jesus is God
2peter 1:1Peter states that Jesus is God.
Both explicit and literal. Nothing figurative or relative
 
Titus 2:13
Paul states that Jesus is God
2peter 1:1Peter states that Jesus is God.
Both explicit and literal. Nothing figurative or relative

Please pay attention to the grammar in those supplied verses. They are talking about two distinct persons and I will prove it.

First, let's look at Titus 2:13:

13as we await the blessed hope and glorious appearance of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.

Waiting for the appearance of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.

Now let's look at when our great God and Savior Jesus Christ appear and you decide if this is two persons or one:

1 Thessalonians 4
14For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, we also believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in Him.
 
Jesus pierced, YHWH pierced.

The following was recorded by the Apostle John. At the crucifixion Jesus was pierced through the side with a spear. John identifies this as fulfilled prophecy, by quoting from the prophet Zachariah.

Jn 19:34 But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out. 35 And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe. 36 For these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, “Not one of His bones shall be broken.” 37 And again another Scripture says, “They shall look on Him whom they pierced.”

John is quoting Zech 12:10

Zec 12:10 “And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.

Who is “Me” in the text? [First person singular]. Vs 1 identifies who is speaking, ‘Thus says the Lord “YHWH”.

Zec12:1 The burden of the word of the LORD {YHWH} against Israel. Thus says the LORD {YHWH}, who stretches out the heavens, lays the foundation of the earth, and forms the spirit of man within him:

Rev 1:7 Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen.

In the OT it is YHWH who states He will be pierced. In the NT John identifies Jesus as the one who is pierced and ties Jesus back to Zechariah. By doing this John is stating that Jesus is YHWH.
I see here that you continue to hash out the same arguments over and over again and therefore end up "ever learning and never being able to come to a knowledge of the truth" as well.

In whatever way the Jews would have originally understood Yahweh being pierced in this verse, is how it should be understood by us also and therefore Yahweh is only pierced in a figurative and spiritual sense in his soul when the other person of the verse is also literally pierced.

By the way, the Bible clearly reveals that Yahweh is a Soul but that he is Spirit in nature and not possessing a physical body.

There what is being stated in Zechariah 12:10, is very similar to what was prophesied of Mary Jesus' other parent as well and as per the prophecy given her in Luke 2 and as seen below.

Luke 2:34 Then Simeon blessed them and said to Mary, his mother: “This child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be spoken against, 35 so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed. And a sword will pierce your own soul too.”

Notice, that this reveals very clearly that it can be said that a persons "soul can be pierced" and this is what is being revealed in Zechariah 12:10, that Yahweh's soul would be pierced by the Jews piercing his Son to death and that Israel would eventually mourn because of him for doing it also.
 
Please pay attention to the grammar in those supplied verses. They are talking about two distinct persons and I will prove it.

First, let's look at Titus 2:13:

13as we await the blessed hope and glorious appearance of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.

Waiting for the appearance of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.

Now let's look at when our great God and Savior Jesus Christ appear and you decide if this is two persons or one:
Your are right. Let' look at the grammar and apply the rules used by the original author.

Granville Sharp's rule states that when you have two nouns, which are not proper names (such as Cephas, or Paul, or Timothy), which are describing a person, and the two nouns are connected by the word "and," and the first noun has the article ("the") while the second does not, *both nouns are referring to the same person*. In our texts, this is demonstrated by the words "God" and "Savior" at Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1. "God" has the article, it is followed by the word for "and," and the word "Savior" does not have the article. Hence, both nouns are being applied to the same person, Jesus Christ. This rule is exceptionless. One must argue solely on theological grounds against these passages. There is truly no real grammatical objection that can be raised. Not that many have not attempted to do so, and are still trying. However, the evidence is overwhelming in favor of the above interpretation. Lets look at some of the evidence from the text itself.
1 Thessalonians 4
14For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, we also believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in Him.
Does not disagree with Trinitarian doctrine.
 
There what is being stated in Zechariah 12:10, is very similar to what was prophesied of Mary Jesus' other parent as well and as per the prophecy given her in Luke 2 and as seen below.

Luke 2:34 Then Simeon blessed them and said to Mary, his mother: “This child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be spoken against, 35 so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed. And a sword will pierce your own soul too.”

Notice, that this reveals very clearly that it can be said that a persons "soul can be pierced" and this is what is being revealed in Zechariah 12:10, that Yahweh's soul would be pierced by the Jews piercing his Son to death and that Israel would eventually mourn because of him for doing it also.
That is a huge leap of faith. Sorry I do not possess such blind faith. I rely solely on what God plainly communicated in Scripture.
 
That is a huge leap of faith. Sorry I do not possess such blind faith. I rely solely on what God plainly communicated in Scripture.
Not at all, for the prophecy given to Mary proves that the word "pierced" can be viewed in a figurative and spiritual sense just as easily as it can a literal and physical sense and then we have the fact that no Jew would have viewed it as meaning that Yahweh would be literally and physical pierced either.

Your whole doctrine is based on blind faith and neither do you always "rely solely on what God plainly communicated in scripture either" and that becomes very apparent to anyone who has had discussions with you and is being honest about what as been argued by you.
 
Not at all, for the prophecy given to Mary proves that the word "pierced" can be viewed in a figurative and spiritual sense just as easily as it can a literal and physical sense and then we have the fact that no Jew would have viewed it as meaning that Yahweh would be literally and physical pierced either.

Your whole doctrine is based on blind faith and neither do you always "rely solely on what God plainly communicated in scripture either" and that becomes very apparent to anyone who has had discussions with you and is being honest about what as been argued by you.
Typical of you. Grasping at straws, making irrelevant connections, and finally attacking personally.
 
Your are right. Let' look at the grammar and apply the rules used by the original author.

Granville Sharp's rule states that when you have two nouns, which are not proper names (such as Cephas, or Paul, or Timothy), which are describing a person, and the two nouns are connected by the word "and," and the first noun has the article ("the") while the second does not, *both nouns are referring to the same person*. In our texts, this is demonstrated by the words "God" and "Savior" at Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1. "God" has the article, it is followed by the word for "and," and the word "Savior" does not have the article. Hence, both nouns are being applied to the same person, Jesus Christ. This rule is exceptionless. One must argue solely on theological grounds against these passages. There is truly no real grammatical objection that can be raised. Not that many have not attempted to do so, and are still trying. However, the evidence is overwhelming in favor of the above interpretation. Lets look at some of the evidence from the text itself.

Does not disagree with Trinitarian doctrine.

God and Jesus are two separate persons hence why God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep when they appear. This is indisputable and I will briefly explain why at the end of this comment.

The other alleged proof you mentioned is 2 Peter 1:1, but look at verse two; they are two separate persons.

1Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,
To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:
2Grace and peace be multiplied to you through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord.

When the verses you referred to say "God and Jesus Christ" it doesn't necessarily mean they are referring to the same persons especially if other verses clearly make a distinction between God and Jesus.

For example, here is 1 Peter 1:3 where God and Jesus are clearly two distinct persons. They don't suddenly become the same person at any point.

3Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! By His great mercy He has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
 
God and Jesus are two separate persons hence why God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep when they appear. This is indisputable and I will briefly explain why at the end of this comment.

The other alleged proof you mentioned is 2 Peter 1:1, but look at verse two; they are two separate persons.

1Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,
To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:
2Grace and peace be multiplied to you through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord.

When the verses you referred to say "God and Jesus Christ" it doesn't necessarily mean they are referring to the same persons especially if other verses clearly make a distinction between God and Jesus.

For example, here is 1 Peter 1:3 where God and Jesus are clearly two distinct persons. They don't suddenly become the same person at any point.

3Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! By His great mercy He has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,

Titus 2:13 calls Jesus God.
 
Greetings again Towerwatchman,
It’s the introduction. Compare it to other introductions in other epistles and you will notice it’s a statement of praise.
Nothing in the text is speaking of the transfiguration. I don’t see excellent in the passage. Plse post you verses
Possibly you missed what I said and quoted at the end of one of my long posts.
Seeing Towerwatchman likes quoting from 2nd Peter chapter 1, another aspect is the subject of the transfiguration, when Jesus was revealed in glory. I find it interesting the expression that Peter uses concerning what Peter heard, and how he describes the source of this:
2 Peter 1:16–18 (KJV): 16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.
Peter had witnessed the glory of Jesus, but he describes the glory of the Father as "the excellent glory". The "Excellent Glory" stated that Jesus is the Son of God, and as such he is not God the Son and is not equal in glory.
Where in the passage does it hint at Genesis
I understand the expression "form of God" to be similar to "let us make man in the image and after the likeness of God" of Genesis 1:26-27. This is also the same as "made a little lower than the Angels" of Psalm 8:5. Jesus was "made" when he was conceived and born, and as such he is the Son of God by birth. There was no shrinking of God the Son into the womb of Mary.
Because he identifies Jesus as Lord?
God the Father, who is Lord of heaven and earth has exalted Jesus to the position of Lord over God's creation.

Kind regards
Trevor
 
Greetings again Andreas,
It seems like you are a good student and you can read well, so what do you do with Jesus as THE FIRST and all the other scriptures that teach that he is God? I'm not Trinitarian, but Oneness and believe in one God and that Jesus is this one God manifested in the flesh. If you are represented with further truth would you accept it?
I accept that Jesus is the One God manifested in flesh, but possibly not in the way that you claim. I have explained my perspective in the thread "The Yahweh Name" and the translation of this Name as "I will be/become" and "He who will be/become" Exodus 3:14, 6:1-8. Another way that the Scriptures reveal this concept is that God the Father gave conception and birth to Jesus, a human, the Son of God. I have only ever been once in a Pentecostal Church meeting and it was Oneness. A very unusual experience. They were most probably a faction, as they thought their leader who died in a shooting accident was somehow Elijah. I did not accept this when I read his literature. I have not examined the Oneness concept, and if this is "further truth" then I still consider Oneness as more difficult than the strange Trinitarian concept. One simple question, "Was God the Father in heaven, when Jesus, the Son of God prayed to Him in Matthew 11:25: "O, Father, Lord of Heaven and Earth" ".
A couple notes: Yes, elohim is used for a false god or judge etc, BUT it is ALSO used of God Himself.
Do you consider Jesus to be GOOD?
Does it make you wonder how Jesus could be a mere man when the many titles of God are His?
Yes, Jesus is good, but not in the sense that he discussed with the rich young man. Jesus was not a mere man, he was the Son of God by birth and character. He fully represented God as did the Angels and Judges, and as such he shared many of the titles and the Name of God in both the OT and NT. Have you considered why mortal Judges were addressed as "Elohim"?

Kind regards
Trevor
 
The Bible identifies Jesus as a man with a God who received the Holy Spirit of God immediately after his water baptism of repentance. Being led by the Holy Spirit of God into the wilderness, Jesus was tempted by the devil and God can't be tempted. God also cannot die, but Jesus died and was resurrected again by Jesus' Father who Jesus referred to as his God. God also cannot sin, but Jesus took our sins upon himself and effectually became sin for our sake. Anything Jesus did, he said that we can do as well.

You can't make Jesus a supreme God who has a supreme God without introducing polytheism into the Bible. The only way to keep monotheism is to have one God known as the Father who has a Spirit. God delegated authority and power to Jesus to be a high priest, Messiah, and Savior to mankind in order to show them "the way, the truth, and the life" that leads to God. Jesus successfully followed the way to God and Jesus is trying to show others the way, too. Jesus is God's Son; we, too, can be God's son or daughter.
Jesus Christ IS our God and Savior and He IS the WAY, the TRUTH, the LIFE.
And you and I CANNOT become THE SON of God.
 
Back
Top