Jesus pierced, YHWH pierced.

[Photine]

You missed the point. What you wrote does not make enough sense for me to conclude from what you wrote that it does not make sense.

Prove that it doesn't make sense. Don't just say it. I didn't write much. Only like two sentences.

 

[johnny guitar]

Jesus said we can know the only one true God.

John 17
3Now this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent.

So eternal life is knowing The Father and Son.
Can't know one without knowing The other.

 

[Towerwatchman]

That's exactly what Isaiah 40:18,25;46:5, says and why Jesus referenced it in Mat 16:17.

Your grasping for straws. If that was what Jesus was referring to I believe the author would have clarified. The Bible is not a book of mysticism or subjectivity. Flesh and blood did not reveal this = man did not reveal this. We can make a conclusion from that, but to state that "Flesh and blood did not reveal this" equates to the Father is wrong. The angels, demons, and Satan are not flesh and blood also. Notice Jesus identified who it was. Following your logic, He had no need to.

It carries the same meaning. Your father + my father = our father.

Imaginary theological mathematics.. Notice Jesus did not say that.
When you talk to your neighbor, do you say 'your house', +'my house' = 'our house'? Then why not 'our father'. Notice he never said our father and included Himself in the 'our'.
When Jesus repeats Himself He is being emphatic. Notice how He emphatically states that we do not have the same relationship with the Father as He does.

Gen 4:1 translates "et" as with. There are exceptions as in this case.

So what, what matters is Zec 12:10

Yep, use the with. You've already agreed God is spirit, so you can't pierce spirit.

Don't play dumb. You are using the wrong version of et.
In the verse et is not a conjunction [with] but an object marker 'the one' WHICH IS NOT TRANSLATED.

There's one person as God, alone, Neh 9:6, etc.

Titus 2:13, 2 Pe 1:1, John 20:28 all state that Jesus is God emphatically and literally.

Acts 28:25 The Holy Spirit was right in saying to your fathers through Isaiah the prophet: 26 "Go to this people, and say, You shall indeed hear but never understand, and you shall indeed see but never perceive. 27 For this people's heart has grown dull, and their ears are heavy of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest they should perceive with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn for me to heal them.'

In Isa 6 it was YHWH that spoke the above to Isaiah. Luke states that it was the HS who spoke the same to Isaiah.

That makes three.

Actually never happened. Isaiah shows this as well as Jesus own words.

Phil 2:6 Being in the form of God ...equality with God. equality translates from isos which means equal in quality and quantity. Jesus whose being was equal with God's in quality and quantity took on the form of a bondservant. [human]

Limited to perfection. Ironically, the NT says Jesus was less than God in the flesh. So, your Jesus is limited.

Not according to the above.

Also, Jesus states he can only do what he sees the Father do. Well, the Father never became flesh so Jesus never did as God either. John 5:19

That is just poor. Anthropomorphisms and metaphors are used to describe the spiritual. Have you heard of Arm of God, Face of God, Armor of God.
Let me do your homework for you.

First the complete text.

Jn 5:19 Then Jesus answered and said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do; for whatever He does, the Son also does in like manner. 20 For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself does; and He will show Him greater works than these, that you may marvel.

The Son can do nothing of himself—that is, apart from and in rivalry of the Father, as they supposed. The meaning is, “The Son can have no separate interest or action from the Father.”

likewise ὁμοίως [homoios /hom·oy·oce/] likewise, equally, in the same way. Better, as Rev., in like manner. Likewise is popularly understood as equivalent to also; but as to “working” the word indicates identity of action based upon identity of nature. Claim to absolute equality with the Father could exceed this: not only to do “the same things,” but to do them as the Father does them?

Jesus explains that He is not independent or in opposition to the Father. Jesus told them that the man was cured by Him and the Father. The Son imitates the Father and the Two work together. If they want to blame Jesus of breaking the Sabbath they can blame the Father also. Jesus says that He and the Father have a special relationship of continuous love, and that through the Son the Father will do more amazing work than physical healing.

Actually, that's false as shown above.

For your god it might be, not mine.

There's God and someone else. God isn't the one beaten, etc. It's pretty clear. Psalm 22:19-20.

David prayed to the Lord for strength. And? You need a better argument.

 

[Towerwatchman]

Prove that it doesn't make sense. Don't just say it. I didn't write much. Only like two sentences.

The gibberish you posted does not make sense.
Similar to something I heard earlier.
Something about the significance of time.

 

[Runningman]

So eternal life is knowing The Father and Son.
Can't know one without knowing The other.

Fine. As long as you agree that the one and only true God is the Father, like Jesus said, then I’ll call that acceptable.

 

[johnny guitar]

Fine. As long as you agree that the one and only true God is the Father, like Jesus said, then I’ll call that acceptable.

Cannot know, approach, or have any relationship with The Father without The Son.
He who has The Son has LIFE.

 

[Jewjitzu]

Your grasping for straws. If that was what Jesus was referring to I believe the author would have clarified. The Bible is not a book of mysticism or subjectivity. Flesh and blood did not reveal this = man did not reveal this.

Rotfl... Jesus clearly references the Father immediately afterwards.

We can make a conclusion from that, but to state that "Flesh and blood did not reveal this" equates to the Father is wrong.

Jesus says so immediately afterwards. No guesswork.

The angels, demons, and Satan are not flesh and blood also. Notice Jesus identified who it was. Following your logic, He had no need to.

Of course he did because Jesus didn't.

Imaginary theological mathematics.. Notice Jesus did not say that.
When you talk to your neighbor, do you say 'your house', +'my house' = 'our house'? Then why not 'our father'. Notice he never said our father and included Himself in the 'our'.
When Jesus repeats Himself He is being emphatic. Notice how He emphatically states that we do not have the same relationship with the Father as He does.

He doesn't have to because he's stated "our" elsewhere in the our Father in heaven prayer. Same relationship. If anything, he's clearly saying he isn't God.

So what, what matters is Zec 12:10

What matters is YHWH doesn't have flesh as proven elsewhere.

Don't play dumb. You are using the wrong version of et.
In the verse et is not a conjunction [with] but an object marker 'the one' WHICH IS NOT TRANSLATED.

Looks like it is. I'm not limited by Strong's.

Titus 2:13, 2 Pe 1:1, John 20:28 all state that Jesus is God emphatically and literally.

And Tanakh emphatically states he ain't. Several men like Moses, Ex 7:1, judges, Ex 21:6;22:8-9, etc., are called God and we don't confuse it with divinity.

Acts 28:25 The Holy Spirit was right in saying to your fathers through Isaiah the prophet: 26 "Go to this people, and say, You shall indeed hear but never understand, and you shall indeed see but never perceive. 27 For this people's heart has grown dull, and their ears are heavy of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest they should perceive with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn for me to heal them.'

Rotfl... and yet Jesus tells the Samaritan woman Jews know God and make-believe Jews don't.

In Isa 6 it was YHWH that spoke the above to Isaiah. Luke states that it was the HS who spoke the same to Isaiah.

That makes three.

Actually the only spirit is the Father, Neh 9:6, that makes one.

Phil 2:6 Being in the form of God ...equality with God. equality translates from isos which means equal in quality and quantity. Jesus whose being was equal with God's in quality and quantity took on the form of a bondservant. [human]

Actually the form spoken of is the same related to the house of David being Gods, Zech 12:8. Being that he was Messiah and should have reigned, he temporarily set it aside to suffer. That's the idea ?.

Not according to the above.

Sure it is. True God doesn't lose His essence. Jesus did.

That is just poor. Anthropomorphisms and metaphors are used to describe the spiritual. Have you heard of Arm of God, Face of God, Armor of God.
Let me do your homework for you.

I think you're application of John 5:19 is a poor application of anthropomorphisms. Not even close. The NT describes God as never seen. You can do your own homework.

First the complete text.

Jn 5:19 Then Jesus answered and said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do; for whatever He does, the Son also does in like manner. 20 For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself does; and He will show Him greater works than these, that you may marvel.

The Son can do nothing of himself—

Which shows the son is less than the Father, not God.

that is, apart from and in rivalry of the Father, as they supposed. The meaning is, “The Son can have no separate interest or action from the Father.”

And the Father had no interest in being flesh, so...

likewise ὁμοίως [homoios /hom·oy·oce/] likewise, equally, in the same way. Better, as Rev., in like manner. Likewise is popularly understood as equivalent to also; but as to “working” the word indicates identity of action based upon identity of nature. Claim to absolute equality with the Father could exceed this: not only to do “the same things,” but to do them as the Father does them?

Which the Father never did, nor can.

Jesus explains that He is not independent or in opposition to the Father. Jesus told them that the man was cured by Him and the Father. The Son imitates the Father and the Two work together. If they want to blame Jesus of breaking the Sabbath they can blame the Father also.

Actually, God doesn't have a need to keep the physical commandments, Jesus does.

Jesus says that He and the Father have a special relationship of continuous love, and that through the Son the Father will do more amazing work than physical healing.

Hardly continuous as the son takes many nappy times. Besides, Jesus was abandoned at the cross. That isn't continuous love.

For your god it might be, not mine.

Well, my God can't be caught in a genie bottle, bleed and die. Those are imperfections.

Jesus in the flesh was limited. There's no way around this. He ain't God.

You've admitted YHWH isn't flesh and blood. So, YHWH didn't bleed, but someone's flesh did.

David prayed to the Lord for strength. And? You need a better argument.

Prayer to another for strength is an indication of a mortal. There are plenty of examples of Jesus doing just that. And don't forget that all knees and tongues will confess the true God. Jesus is no exception. It was sworn.

 

[Runningman]

The ONE Lord CANNOT have A Lord.

Wrong again Johnny.

Matthew 22
43Jesus said to them, “How then does David in the Spirit call Him ‘Lord’? For he says:

44‘The Lord said to my Lord,

“Sit at My right hand
until I put Your enemies
under Your feet.” ’

45So if David calls Him ‘Lord,’ how can He be David’s son?”

The icing on the cake is that the two Lords mentioned above aren’t both God. One is the Lord God and the other is Lord Jesus. This is in the Hebrew translation of Psalm 110.

1The LORD said to my Lord:
“Sit at My right hand
until I make Your enemies
a footstool for Your feet.”

 

[Andreas]

Phil 2 and Jn 1 state that Jesus existed as his own center of self consciousness before the incarnation. So when we said, God was manifested in the flesh, it was Jesus who pre-existed as God , taking on human form now fully God and fully man. The father center self-consciousness never abided in Jesus’ body.

Ok

Ok

Your points are vague. So far I can agree but no commitment,

For clarification about omnipresence... when "God the Son" was manifested in the flesh, did He also retain His omnipresence or was the entirety of God the Son contained within the human body of Jesus?

 

[Towerwatchman]

For clarification about omnipresence... when "God the Son" was manifested in the flesh, did He also retain His omnipresence or was the entirety of God the Son contained within the human body of Jesus?

Kept all the attributes of God, and was fully man

 

[Andreas]

Kept all the attributes of God, and was fully man

That would mean that retained his omnipresence while simultaneously being fully man, correct? It's not a trick question. y/n

 

[Towerwatchman]

That would mean that retained his omnipresence while simultaneously being fully man, correct? It's not a trick question. y/n

Correct

 

[Photine]

The gibberish you posted does not make sense.

Prove it

 

[Jewjitzu]

Kept all the attributes of God, and was fully man

That's false just based on Phil 2 and Jesus' own admissions, going to the Father, John 20:17, God abandoning him at the cross, etc.

 

[Photine]

Kept all the attributes of God, and was fully man

It's not true.

Eph 4:10
He that descended is the same also that aascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.

He had to ascend in order to "fill all things".

 

[Andreas]

Jewjitzu and Photine. Your responses are interesting in that it shows a glaring inconsistency in your theologies. You haven't thought things through very well.

 

[Photine]

Jewjitzu and Photine. Your responses are interesting in that it shows a glaring inconsistency in your theologies. You haven't thought things through very well.

Why would Jesus need to ascend in or to fill all things if He was already omnipresent?

 

[Jewjitzu]

Jewjitzu and Photine. Your responses are interesting in that it shows a glaring inconsistency in your theologies. You haven't thought things through very well.

Not really considering that I'm Jewish and not a Christian. Photine and I have disagreed on many things previously.

 

[Photine]

Not really considering that I'm Jewish and not a Christian.

The New Testament is Jewish.

 

[Towerwatchman]

Prove it

This is this is what’s so dumb about this. All you have to do is reword it so I can understand it. Not everything has to become a fight.