Yes or No (or It's Complicated)

OldShepherd

Well-known member
[1]And how is that different from Luke 8:21: "and he (Jesus) answering said to them (the multitude), `the mother of me and the brothers of me!"
[2]Just because "he answered and said to him" doesn't mean he was addressing him as such. (Compare 1 Samuel 20:12: "And Jonathan saith unto David, `Jehovah, God of Israel -- when I search my father...")


Matthew 26:63.
#1 And you don't know the answer to your own question? Do we or do we not know that the multitude was not literally Jesus' mother and brothers? There is an old maxim about interpreting the Bible "If the plain sense makes good sense it is nonsense to seek any other sense."
#2 Context, context, context. This is a good example of heterodox yanking partial verses out-of-context desperately trying to support their false teaching. While the words were directed to David the context of the verse clearly shows Jonathan was praying to God. But context seems to be a foreign concept to you.
.....1 Samuel 20:12-13
.....12 And Jonathan said unto David: 'The LORD, the God of Israel - when I have sounded my father about this time
....to-morrow, or the third day, behold, if there be good toward David, shall I not then send unto thee, and disclose it unto
.....thee?
.....13 The LORD do so to Jonathan, and more also, should it please my father to do thee evil, if I disclose it not unto thee,
.....and send thee away, that thou mayest go in peace; and the LORD be with thee, as He hath been with my father.
And the we have the fact that we know beyond any question that David is NOT God. And unlike Jesus, in the 36 vss. I listed, David is not called or referred to as God any other time.
 

Yahweh will increase

Well-known member
#1 And you don't know the answer to your own question? Do we or do we not know that the multitude was not literally Jesus' mother and brothers? There is an old maxim about interpreting the Bible "If the plain sense makes good sense it is nonsense to seek any other sense."
#2 Context, context, context. This is a good example of heterodox yanking partial verses out-of-context desperately trying to support their false teaching. While the words were directed to David the context of the verse clearly shows Jonathan was praying to God. But context seems to be a foreign concept to you.
.....1 Samuel 20:12-13
.....12 And Jonathan said unto David: 'The LORD, the God of Israel - when I have sounded my father about this time
....to-morrow, or the third day, behold, if there be good toward David, shall I not then send unto thee, and disclose it unto
.....thee?
.....13 The LORD do so to Jonathan, and more also, should it please my father to do thee evil, if I disclose it not unto thee,
.....and send thee away, that thou mayest go in peace; and the LORD be with thee, as He hath been with my father.
And the we have the fact that we know beyond any question that David is NOT God. And unlike Jesus, in the 36 vss. I listed, David is not called or referred to as God any other time.
So then, why do you not understand that although in John 20:28 when Thomas was directing his words "the Lord of me AND the God of me" unto Jesus, that he was not speaking to Jesus alone but rather also unto the Father God who was dwelling within Jesus as well?

Which by the way, was the only reason why he was standing in his presence and alive from the dead also.


For if Thomas was only speaking to Jesus alone, why didn't he just say "the Lord God of me" instead of "the Lord of me and the God of me" like he did?

For here we see another example in your passage above where Jonathan was directing his words to David but actual speaking to God and very similar to what Thomas was doing also in speaking to Jesus and confessing him as his Lord and also to the Father within Jesus as his God.


By the way, as you have stated that David was never called God by any other human being in any other passage of the OT, this is also true of Jesus never being addressed by any of his disciples as being God at any other time in the gospel narratives either.

Or suppose you show us where when Jesus was living among his disciples, that any of them ever addressed him as God and which is a valid point here also from what you are arguing from the above and I will bet that you never even considered that did you OS?

Notice also the definite article repeated, "The Lord of me" and "The God of me", instead of "The Lord God of me" or "The Lord and God of me".


I would say that this is sufficient to reveal to anyone who is not bias, that Thomas was speaking to two person even though directing his words to Jesus alone and especially when Jesus is the image of the invisible God and God the Father was dwelling within him permanently now.

For Jesus revealed this to his disciples in John 14:8-10 also and that 10th verse revealed why when they saw him, they saw the Father also and which is also whose words he was speaking when he said to Philip, "have I been so long a time with you and yet you do not know me"?

Very clearly, the Jesus was speaking the Father's words unto them at this point and notice, the Father was with them because he was dwelling within his human Son Jesus Christ, and who is the human image of the invisible God and Father.
 
Last edited:

OldShepherd

Well-known member
So then, why do you not understand that although in John 20:28 when Thomas was directing his words "the Lord of me AND the God of me" unto Jesus, that he was not speaking to Jesus alone but rather also unto the Father God who was dwelling within Jesus as well?

Which by the way, was the only reason why he was standing in his presence and alive from the dead also.

For if Thomas was only speaking to Jesus alone, why didn't he just say "the Lord God of me" instead of "the Lord of me and the God of me" like he did?

For here we see another example in your passage above where Jonathan was directing his words to David but actual speaking to God and very similar to what Thomas was doing also in speaking to Jesus and confessing him as his Lord and also to the Father within Jesus as his God.

By the way, as you have stated that David was never called God by any other human being in any other passage of the OT, this is also true of Jesus never being addressed by any of his disciples as being God at any other time in the gospel narratives either.

Or suppose you show us where when Jesus was living among his disciples, that any of them ever addressed him as God and which is a valid point here also from what you are arguing from the above and I will bet that you never even considered that did you OS?

Notice also the definite article repeated, "The Lord of me" and "The God of me", instead of "The Lord God of me" or "The Lord and God of me".

I would say that this is sufficient to reveal to anyone who is not bias, that Thomas was speaking to two person even though directing his words to Jesus alone and especially when Jesus is the image of the invisible God and God the Father was dwelling within him permanently now.

For Jesus revealed this to his disciples in John 14:8-10 also and that 10th verse revealed why when they saw him, they saw the Father also and which is also whose words he was speaking when he said to Philip, "have I been so long a time with you and yet you do not know me"?


Very clearly, the Jesus was speaking the Father's words unto them at this point and notice, the Father was with them because he was dwelling within his human Son Jesus Christ, and who is the human image of the invisible God and Father.
Did you even read post? About David I said more than he was not called or addressed as God anywhere else. I'm not going to repeat it here. I underlined where it was clear Jonathan was praying. But I guess that doesn't fit your narrative.
As for Jesus I previously posted 36 verses, in this thread, https://forums.carm.org/threads/yes-or-no-or-its-complicated.340/post-18941 post 20 and 21, where Jesus is either addressed or referred to as God.
See also.
225 BC LXX 1 Samuel 20:12
12 And Jonathan said to David, the Lord God of Israel knows that I will sound my father as I have an opportunity, three several times, and, behold, if good should be determined concerning David, and I do not send to thee to the field,
John Gill commentary 1 Samuel 20:12
And Jonathan said unto David, O Lord God of Israel,.... Or by the Lord God of Israel, I swear unto thee; for this is the form of the oath, as Jarchi and Kimchi observe:
Keil and Delitsch commentary 1Sa_20:12-15
1Sa_20:12 and 1Sa_20:13 are connected. Jonathan commences with a solemn invocation of God: “Jehovah, God of Israel!” and thus introduces his oath. … “When I inquire of my father about this time to-morrow, the day after to-morrow (a concise mode of saying 'to-morrow or the day after'), and behold it is (stands) well for David, and then I do not send to thee and make it known to thee, Jehovah shall do so to Jonathan,” etc. (“The Lord do so,” etc., the ordinary formula used in an oath: see 1Sa_14:44)..
 
Last edited:
#1 And you don't know the answer to your own question? Do we or do we not know that the multitude was not literally Jesus' mother and brothers? There is an old maxim about interpreting the Bible "If the plain sense makes good sense it is nonsense to seek any other sense."
Of course we know the multitude was not literally Jesus' "mother and brothers". Yet, Jesus "answered and said to them: "my mother and my brothers!".
#2 Context, context, context. This is a good example of heterodox yanking partial verses out-of-context desperately trying to support their false teaching. While the words were directed to David the context of the verse clearly shows Jonathan was praying to God. But context seems to be a foreign concept to you.
.....1 Samuel 20:12-13
.....12 And Jonathan said unto David: 'The LORD, the God of Israel - when I have sounded my father about this time
....to-morrow, or the third day, behold, if there be good toward David, shall I not then send unto thee, and disclose it unto
.....thee?
.....13 The LORD do so to Jonathan, and more also, should it please my father to do thee evil, if I disclose it not unto thee,
.....and send thee away, that thou mayest go in peace; and the LORD be with thee, as He hath been with my father.
Exactly my point!!! Just because "Jonathon said to David: 'YHWH God of Israel..." did not mean he was calling David YHWH.

Likewise, just because "Thomas answered and said to him: 'my Lord and my God'" does not mean he was calling Jesus his Lord and his God. Context shows that Thomas wasn't calling Jesus "God", which is why Jesus doesn't address Thomas' "my Lord and my God" phrase, but addresses Thomas' change from disbelief to belief regarding his resurrection.)
And the we have the fact that we know beyond any question that David is NOT God. And unlike Jesus, in the 36 vss. I listed, David is not called or referred to as God any other time.
We also know beyond any question that Jesus is not God. Jesus is never called or referred to as God. How? Because he is referred to as the "son of God" (eg Mark 15:39).
 

Yahweh will increase

Well-known member
Did you even read post? About David I said more than he was not called or addressed as God anywhere else. I'm not going to repeat it here. I underlined where it was clear Jonathan was praying. But I guess that doesn't fit your narrative.
As for Jesus I previously posted 36 verses, in this thread, https://forums.carm.org/threads/yes-or-no-or-its-complicated.340/post-18941 post 20 and 21, where Jesus is either addressed or referred to as God.
See also.
225 BC LXX 1 Samuel 20:12
12 And Jonathan said to David, the Lord God of Israel knows that I will sound my father as I have an opportunity, three several times, and, behold, if good should be determined concerning David, and I do not send to thee to the field,
John Gill commentary 1 Samuel 20:12
And Jonathan said unto David, O Lord God of Israel,.... Or by the Lord God of Israel, I swear unto thee; for this is the form of the oath, as Jarchi and Kimchi observe:
Keil and Delitsch commentary 1Sa_20:12-15
1Sa_20:12 and 1Sa_20:13 are connected. Jonathan commences with a solemn invocation of God: “Jehovah, God of Israel!” and thus introduces his oath. … “When I inquire of my father about this time to-morrow, the day after to-morrow (a concise mode of saying 'to-morrow or the day after'), and behold it is (stands) well for David, and then I do not send to thee and make it known to thee, Jehovah shall do so to Jonathan,” etc. (“The Lord do so,” etc., the ordinary formula used in an oath: see 1Sa_14:44)..
That wasn't even the point dude but rather the fact that just because Thomas spoke to Jesus and said unto him, "The Lord of me and The God of me", doesn't mean that he was calling Jesus God anymore than Jonathon was calling David God either.


Furthermore the fact still remains that you can search the 4 gospels until you are blue in the face and you will never see any other instance where any of Jesus' disciples ever called him God and that speaks volumes against your false doctrine that Thomas was calling Jesus God in John 20:28 also.

For Jesus was the permanent Temple of God and that is also why in John 14:8-10, Jesus revealed that when they say him, they also saw the Father.

For he explained himself in verse 10 when he said in answer to this, "The words that I speak unto you, I speak not of myself, it is the Father who dwells within me, he is doing the works".

Therefore after Philip asked Jesus, "show us the Father and it will be sufficient for us", Jesus answered not with his own words but with God's words back to Philip, "have I been so long with you Philip and still you don't know me".

For in verse 10, Jesus told them the words that he spoke when he said that, were not his own words but rather those of the Father's who dwelt within him.

He said nothing about himself being God the Son but only that God the Father was dwelling within him and giving him the words to speak and also manifesting himself through Jesus and doing the miracles through him likewise.


Notice also in the verses below, Jesus said almost the same thing exactly as he does after this in John 14:8-10..

John 12:44-49
44 Then Jesus cried out, “Whoever believes in me does not believe in me only, but in the one who sent me. 45 The one who looks at me is seeing the one who sent me. 46 I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness.

47 “If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. 48 There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day. 49 For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken. 50 I know that his command leads to eternal life. So whatever I say is just what the Father has told me to say.”


I will also submit this unto you also and even though you will not acknowledge it, for when Paul told us in Philippian 2:6, that Jesus emptied himself, he meant that he emptied himself of himself as the man born in the form of God and in order that the Father alone would be revealed through him

In other words, he chose to lose his own identity and allow the Father's identity instead to be manifested through him because the Father was dwelling within Jesus in all of his Divine fullness and that is what Paul was speaking of in Philippians 2:5-8.

For many kings and emperors who didn't have anything close to the authority that God gave to Jesus, let it go to their head and claimed to be equal unto God because of their lesser authority, but Jesus took no thought of a robbery to attempt to make himself equal unto God like them.

However, instead Jesus emptied himself of himself to be the servant of men even though he was born in the form of God to rule all nations with a rod of iron and fulfilling God's promise to David's anointed line of descendants and also to Israel but the majority rejected him.


A good, example of a ruler like this, would be Donald J. Trump, for there is no doubt from what continually comes out of his mouth that he is a narcissist sociopath and you probably voted for him just like the majority apostate churches likewise, didn't you OS?
 

Tanachreader

Active member
That wasn't even the point dude but rather the fact that just because Thomas spoke to Jesus and said unto him, "The Lord of me and The God of me", doesn't mean that he was calling Jesus God anymore than Jonathon was calling David God either.


Furthermore the fact still remains that you can search the 4 gospels until you are blue in the face and you will never see any other instance where any of Jesus' disciples ever called him God and that speaks volumes against your false doctrine that Thomas was calling Jesus God in John 20:28 also.

For Jesus was the permanent Temple of God and that is also why in John 14:8-10, Jesus revealed that when they say him, they also saw the Father.

For he explained himself in verse 10 when he said in answer to this, "The words that I speak unto you, I speak not of myself, it is the Father who dwells within me, he is doing the works".

Therefore after Philip asked Jesus, "show us the Father and it will be sufficient for us", Jesus answered not with his own words but with God's words back to Philip, "have I been so long with you Philip and still you don't know me".

For in verse 10, Jesus told them the words that he spoke when he said that, were not his own words but rather those of the Father's who dwelt within him.

He said nothing about himself being God the Son but only that God the Father was dwelling within him and giving him the words to speak and also manifesting himself through Jesus and doing the miracles through him likewise.



Notice also in the verses below, Jesus said almost the same thing exactly as he does after this in John 14:8-10..

John 12:44-49
44 Then Jesus cried out, “Whoever believes in me does not believe in me only, but in the one who sent me. 45 The one who looks at me is seeing the one who sent me. 46 I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness.

47 “If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. 48 There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day. 49 For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken. 50 I know that his command leads to eternal life. So whatever I say is just what the Father has told me to say.”


I will also submit this unto you also and even though you will not acknowledge it, for when Paul told us in Philippian 2:6, that Jesus emptied himself, he meant that he emptied himself of himself as the man born in the form of God and in order that the Father alone would be revealed through him

In other words, he chose to lose his own identity and allow the Father's identity instead to be manifested through him because the Father was dwelling within Jesus in all of his Divine fullness and that is what Paul was speaking of in Philippians 2:5-8.

For many kings and emperors who didn't have anything close to the authority that God gave to Jesus, let it go to their head and claimed to be equal unto God because of their lesser authority, but Jesus took no thought of a robbery to attempt to make himself equal unto God like them.

However, instead Jesus emptied himself of himself to be the servant of men even though he was born in the form of God to rule all nations with a rod of iron and fulfilling God's promise to David's anointed line of descendants and also to Israel but the majority rejected him.


A good, example of a ruler like this, would be Donald J. Trump, for there is no doubt from what continually comes out of his mouth that he is a narcissist sociopath and you probably voted for him just like the majority apostate churches likewise, didn't you OS?
Trump is blessed. You swine
 

Yahweh will increase

Well-known member
Trump is blessed. You swine
The man is a compulsive liar, totally dishonest and also cares nothing about anyone else but himself and he is playing you and the apostate churches who voted for him likewise.

However, it figures that you are being deceived by him, for the majority of the apostate church is also and their voting for him only proves that they shouldn't even be voting to start with because they don't know what they are doing.

What it proves also, is that your apostate churches would vote for the man of sin also and they may have even done that in voting for Trump, for only time will tell whether he is or not.


. For if you think that Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 would ever speak of a future event concerning the Temple of God as being a replica of the brick and mortal made by man built Temple of the OT, you are more deceived than I originally thought you were.

The Temple of God post Jesus Christ is now the church and will never be a building made by the hands of men ever again either and Paul was the one who revealed this and in many of his letters also.
 
Sorry, meant 1 Corinthians 11:3.

Where do you see Jesus(or God's Son) in these verses?

1 Timothy 3:15-16 ESV

15 if I delay, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth. 16 Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness:

He[a] was manifested in the flesh,
vindicated[b] by the Spirit,[c]
seen by angels,
proclaimed among the nations,
believed on in the world,
taken up in glory.
Highlighting "God" in the previous verse doesn't mean God is the referent of 1 Timothy 3:16, especially considering (first and foremost) that the Word--the one who with God in the beginning (John 1:2)--was made flesh per John 1:14.
 

OldShepherd

Well-known member
...

For many kings and emperors who didn't have anything close to the authority that God gave t
o Jesus, let it go to their head and claimed to be equal unto God because of their lesser authority, but Jesus took no thought of a robbery to attempt to make himself equal unto God like them.
I was going to respond to this complete post until I saw this rubbish in the middle. To support your false doctrine you have twisted Philp 2:6 until it is unrecognizable.
I suggest you find some real Greek scholars instead of the internet "experts" you seem to be following.

.....Jesus existed in one form, Philippians 2, vs. 6, but took upon himself another form, vs. 7.
What was Jesus’ form before? If he was literally, actually a man afterward what was he literally, actually before?
Philippians 2:6-11 6. Who, being [continual existence] in the form [μορφη of God, thought it not robbery [something to be used to his own advantage] to be equal with God:
(Greek Interlinear) Philippians 2:6-11 ος {who,} εν {in [the]} μορφη {form} θεου {of god} υπαρχων {subsisting,} ουχ {not} αρπαγμον {something to be used to his own advantage} ηγησατο το {esteemed it} ειναι {the being} ισα {equal} θεω {with god;}​
color].....The verb ειναι, translated ”to be,” in the KJV, which appears to be a future tense in English, is a present infinitive, not a future tense. “the being equal with god,” was a, then, present reality not something considered and rejected.
7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him[self] the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:​
.....Jesus’ earthly ministry occurred between verses, 7 and 8. Where the one who was equal with God, vs. 6, the one who, acting upon himself, became flesh, cf. John 1:14, made himself of no reputation, vs. 7, cf. Heb 2:17, took upon himself the form of a servant, and was in the likeness of men, vs. 7. After which God, not merely exalted him, but “highly exalted” him, and glorified him with the same glory he had with the Father before the world existed (John 17:5)
It was here where all the things anti-Trinitarians cannot comprehend happened, e.g. “If Jesus was God, why didn’t he know the hour of his return?” etc., etc., etc.
8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.​
If Jesus was only a mere human being, how does a human being, “humble himself and become obedient unto death?” All mankind is appointed to death, no obedience or humbling involved! Heb 9:27. Were the criminals who were crucified with Jesus also obedient, did they also humble themselves unto death on the cross?
9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, cf. [יהוה/YHWH, Isa 45:23] of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, cf. יהוה/YHWH, Isa 45:23] to the glory of God the Father.​
In verses 10,11 Paul applies Isaiah 45:23, which refers to יהוה/YHWH], to Jesus as I have shown above!
 

Yahweh will increase

Well-known member
I was going to respond to this complete post until I saw this rubbish in the middle. To support your false doctrine you have twisted Philp 2:6 until it is unrecognizable.
I suggest you find some real Greek scholars instead of the internet "experts" you seem to be following.

.....Jesus existed in one form, Philippians 2, vs. 6, but took upon himself another form, vs. 7.
What was Jesus’ form before? If he was literally, actually a man afterward what was he literally, actually before?

Philippians 2:6-11 6. Who, being [continual existence] in the form [μορφη of God, thought it not robbery [something to be used to his own advantage] to be equal with God:

(Greek Interlinear) Philippians 2:6-11 ος {who,} εν {in [the]} μορφη {form} θεου {of god} υπαρχων {subsisting,} ουχ {not} αρπαγμον {something to be used to his own advantage} ηγησατο το {esteemed it} ειναι {the being} ισα {equal} θεω {with god;}
color].....The verb ειναι, translated ”to be,” in the KJV, which appears to be a future tense in English, is a present infinitive, not a future tense. “the being equal with god,” was a, then, present reality not something considered and rejected.
7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him[self] the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
.....Jesus’ earthly ministry occurred between verses, 7 and 8. Where the one who was equal with God, vs. 6, the one who, acting upon himself, became flesh, cf. John 1:14, made himself of no reputation, vs. 7, cf. Heb 2:17, took upon himself the form of a servant, and was in the likeness of men, vs. 7. After which God, not merely exalted him, but “highly exalted” him, and glorified him with the same glory he had with the Father before the world existed (John 17:5)
It was here where all the things anti-Trinitarians cannot comprehend happened, e.g. “If Jesus was God, why didn’t he know the hour of his return?” etc., etc., etc.
8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
If Jesus was only a mere human being, how does a human being, “humble himself and become obedient unto death?” All mankind is appointed to death, no obedience or humbling involved! Heb 9:27. Were the criminals who were crucified with Jesus also obedient, did they also humble themselves unto death on the cross?
9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, cf. [יהוה/YHWH, Isa 45:23] of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, cf. יהוה/YHWH, Isa 45:23] to the glory of God the Father.
In verses 10,11 Paul applies Isaiah 45:23, which refers to יהוה/YHWH], to Jesus as I have shown above!
 

Yahweh will increase

Well-known member
I was going to respond to this complete post until I saw this rubbish in the middle. To support your false doctrine you have twisted Philp 2:6 until it is unrecognizable.
I suggest you find some real Greek scholars instead of the internet "experts" you seem to be following.

.....Jesus existed in one form, Philippians 2, vs. 6, but took upon himself another form, vs. 7.
What was Jesus’ form before? If he was literally, actually a man afterward what was he literally, actually before?

Philippians 2:6-11 6. Who, being [continual existence] in the form [μορφη of God, thought it not robbery [something to be used to his own advantage] to be equal with God:

(Greek Interlinear) Philippians 2:6-11 ος {who,} εν {in [the]} μορφη {form} θεου {of god} υπαρχων {subsisting,} ουχ {not} αρπαγμον {something to be used to his own advantage} ηγησατο το {esteemed it} ειναι {the being} ισα {equal} θεω {with god;}
color].....The verb ειναι, translated ”to be,” in the KJV, which appears to be a future tense in English, is a present infinitive, not a future tense. “the being equal with god,” was a, then, present reality not something considered and rejected.
7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him[self] the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
.....Jesus’ earthly ministry occurred between verses, 7 and 8. Where the one who was equal with God, vs. 6, the one who, acting upon himself, became flesh, cf. John 1:14, made himself of no reputation, vs. 7, cf. Heb 2:17, took upon himself the form of a servant, and was in the likeness of men, vs. 7. After which God, not merely exalted him, but “highly exalted” him, and glorified him with the same glory he had with the Father before the world existed (John 17:5)
It was here where all the things anti-Trinitarians cannot comprehend happened, e.g. “If Jesus was God, why didn’t he know the hour of his return?” etc., etc., etc.
8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
If Jesus was only a mere human being, how does a human being, “humble himself and become obedient unto death?” All mankind is appointed to death, no obedience or humbling involved! Heb 9:27. Were the criminals who were crucified with Jesus also obedient, did they also humble themselves unto death on the cross?
9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, cf. [יהוה/YHWH, Isa 45:23] of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, cf. יהוה/YHWH, Isa 45:23] to the glory of God the Father.
In verses 10,11 Paul applies Isaiah 45:23, which refers to יהוה/YHWH], to Jesus as I have shown above!
My post got screwed up like is usual with this CARM forum but it is not important to me to re type it anyhow, for I personally think that you will never believe in the truth from your bias bent no matter what is proven to you from the scriptures and it certainly isn't any concern of mine whether you do or not anyhow.

Now if you were ignorant of the word like someone who just got involved with your bias nonsense, that would be different but the hardliners like yourself have certainly seen the contradictions in your beliefs many times over and therefore you are without excuse.

For you have chosen to cover them up with your twisting of the scripture in order to remain comfortable with your false doctrines and rather than to face up to them in honesty before God and to seek God for the correct understanding and which you so obviously don't have either.

Sorry but there is nothing in the context of Philippians 2:5-8 that reveals that Jesus was pre existing as God and then became a man, but that is what you and your trin cult has concocted from your carnal human reasoning being you do not receive discernment from the Holy Spirit like you are told to in the scriptures that you profess to believe in.
 

OldShepherd

Well-known member
My post got screwed up like is usual with this CARM forum but it is not important to me to re type it anyhow, for I personally think that you will never believe in the truth from your bias bent no matter what is proven to you from the scriptures and it certainly isn't any concern of mine whether you do or not anyhow.

Now if you were ignorant of the word like someone who just got involved with your bias nonsense, that would be different but the hardliners like yourself have certainly seen the contradictions in your beliefs many times over and therefore you are without excuse.

For you have chosen to cover them up with your twisting of the scripture in order to remain comfortable with your false doctrines and rather than to face up to them in honesty before God and to seek God for the correct understanding and which you so obviously don't have either.

Sorry but there is nothing in the context of Philippians 2:5-8 that reveals that Jesus was pre existing as God and then became a man, but that is what you and your trin cult has concocted from your carnal human reasoning being you do not receive discernment from the Holy Spirit like you are told to in the scriptures that you profess to believe in.
I twisted NOTHING. I went through the verse word by word. All you have done is argue the same thing over and over. Nothing but "I'm right and you are wrong! Am too! Nuh huh!. Now if you could show me grammatical, lexical, historical etc. evidence that anything I said was wrong I might be convinced. Unfortunately that seems to be beyond your comprehension. Here it is again for those who cannot comprehend.
Philippians 2:6-11 6. Who, being [continual existence] in the form [μορφη of God, thought it not robbery [something to be used to his own advantage] to be equal with God:

(Greek Interlinear) Philippians 2:6-11 ος {who,} εν {in [the]} μορφη {form} θεου {of god} υπαρχων {subsisting,} ουχ {not} αρπαγμον {something to be used to his own advantage} ηγησατο το {esteemed it} ειναι {the being} ισα {equal} θεω {with god;}

The Committee on Bible Translation worked at updating the New International Version of the Bible to be published in 2011.
In it's notes under "Progress in Scholarship" it discusses the following change:
When the NIV was first translated, the meaning of the rare Greek word αρπαγμον /harpagmos, rendered ‟something to be grasped,” in Philippians 2:6 was uncertain. But further study has shown that the word refers to something that a person has in their possession but chooses not to use to their own advantage. The updated NIV reflects this new information, making clear that Jesus really was equal with God when he determined to become a human for our sake: ‟[Christ Jesus], being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage.”​
See full translators notes at: Bible Gateway NIV Translator’s Notes
 

Yahweh will increase

Well-known member
I twisted NOTHING. I went through the verse word by word. All you have done is argue the same thing over and over. Nothing but "I'm right and you are wrong! Am too! Nuh huh!. Now if you could show me grammatical, lexical, historical etc. evidence that anything I said was wrong I might be convinced. Unfortunately that seems to be beyond your comprehension. Here it is again for those who cannot comprehend.
Philippians 2:6-11 6. Who, being [continual existence] in the form [μορφη of God, thought it not robbery [something to be used to his own advantage] to be equal with God:

(Greek Interlinear) Philippians 2:6-11 ος {who,} εν {in [the]} μορφη {form} θεου {of god} υπαρχων {subsisting,} ουχ {not} αρπαγμον {something to be used to his own advantage} ηγησατο το {esteemed it} ειναι {the being} ισα {equal} θεω {with god;}


The Committee on Bible Translation worked at updating the New International Version of the Bible to be published in 2011.

In it's notes under "Progress in Scholarship" it discusses the following change:
When the NIV was first translated, the meaning of the rare Greek word αρπαγμον /harpagmos, rendered ‟something to be grasped,” in Philippians 2:6 was uncertain. But further study has shown that the word refers to something that a person has in their possession but chooses not to use to their own advantage. The updated NIV reflects this new information, making clear that Jesus really was equal with God when he determined to become a human for our sake: ‟[Christ Jesus], being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage.”

See full translators notes at: Bible Gateway NIV Translator’s Notes
Sure you did but I will let God himself bring that to light at the Great White Throne Judgment, for I am a patient man being I know the truth from the source of the truth and am therefore totally confident in it like a rock and just like Peter was when he received the truth from that same source also.

Yep, Jesus was in continual existence beginning at this birth and when he was given the name and title Christ Jesus, and which is where Paul starts off speaking of him as also in Philippians 2:5, as a man in the form of God and given the name and title of Jesus Christ.

Hey is that kind of like your idea on this, naner. naner, naner, I have knowledge of the Greek and you don't and so I am right and you are wrong and so there OS?
 
Last edited:

OldShepherd

Well-known member
Sure you did but I will let God himself bring that to light at the Great White Throne Judgment, for I am a patient man being I know the truth from the source of the truth and am therefore totally confident in it like a rock and just like Peter was when he received the truth from that same source also.

Yep, Jesus was in continual existence beginning at this birth and when he was given the name and title Christ Jesus, and which is where Paul starts off speaking of him as also in Philippians 2:5, as a man in the form of God and given the name and title of Jesus Christ.

Hey is that kind of like your idea on this, naner. naner, naner, I have knowledge of the Greek and you don't and so I am right and you are wrong and so there OS?
You have yet to show me exactly where and how I twisted anything. Yeah you are confident, so is every heterodox group around e.g. LDS, JW, WWCG, OP, UPCI, INC etc. Although most don't know an aorist from apple. If you have any knowledge of the Greek you certainly have not demonstrated it. I quoted from a lengthy study by a Harvard scholar which you ignored. I OTOH started learning to speak Greek the year of Sputnik 1 when I was stationed in Germany and studied both languages at the graduate level about 2 decades after that.
 

Yahweh will increase

Well-known member
You have yet to show me exactly where and how I twisted anything. Yeah you are confident, so is every heterodox group around e.g. LDS, JW, WWCG, OP, UPCI, INC etc. Although most don't know an aorist from apple. If you have any knowledge of the Greek you certainly have not demonstrated it. I quoted from a lengthy study by a Harvard scholar which you ignored. I OTOH started learning to speak Greek the year of Sputnik 1 when I was stationed in Germany and studied both languages at the graduate level about 2 decades after that.
For starters your misrepresentation of the word "huparchon", for it has built right into its meaning and by definition the idea of a beginning and that is also why it is never used of God except in verses like Acts 17:24 below.

Acts 17:24​

New International Version​

24 “The God who made the world and everything in it is "huparchon" the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands.



For in the above, God only began to be the Lord of heaven and earth after he made heaven and earth first and just like I said and will again, the word "huparchon" never refers to anything that has no beginning and that is why it is never used to just simple speak of God period.

The word is used 60 times and therefore one doesn't need to have a rocket science degree in Greek to know that it always refers to things that have a beginning, for all one needs is an Englishman's concordance like what you can access on the online Bible hub to prove this out.

How about you show me how the context of Philippians 2:7-8 or the Greek wording used reveals that God actually became a man in those verses OS? For it Paul never actually says this at all in verse 7-8.

Don't bother with your crafty uses of the full Greek sentences however, for I am fully aware that you use this to your advantage but it wont work on me.

For neither the word "homoimai" nor the word "schema" can be misrepresented in the context to be saying that Paul was revealing in verses 7-8 that Jesus became a man from being God first, for "homiomai" means a likeness of "anthropos" and not "anthropos" and the "schema" means the appearance or fashion of the characteristics of a man.

For Paul starts everything he says with these words "Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus" and the Logos was never called Christ Jesus until it was made flesh and dwelt among us as the human being and human heir of God or Son of God.

So this is just for starters.


So then where in what Paul says in Philippians 2:7-8 do you find Paul telling us that God became a man.


That isn't what it says but what it does say is that Jesus began his existence as a man in the form of God and which means that he was not born like all other men but that right from his birth he had authority that no other man before him or after him ever had been given.

In regards to his ontology he was a true man but he wasn't like any other man in regards to his position purpose and authority with God and therefore when he took the form of a servant, he made himself like other men by doing this and that is all that Paul was saying in this passage.


Furthermore, there is no "it" in Philippians 2:6 "consider it not robbery to be equal with God" as if to say that Jesus began as God's equal.

For what it does say, is more like this, "who being in the form of God, took no thought of robbery (noun) to be equal unto God but emptied himself" and most of the other translations basically put it something like this also and even though they are also trinitarian bias like you are OS.

When it says he emptied himself, it is not at all referring to attributes as being God, but rather it is speaking of his identity as a man in the form of God and with God given and God like authority and which men of much less authority had claimed equality with God because of it and which Jesus took no thought to do.

It means he never let it enter into his mind although I am sure that the Devil tempted him with a passing thought on it and of which Jesus rejected completely because of his love for the Father and also us and in order to finish his course in becoming a perfect sacrifice for our sins.
 

OldShepherd

Well-known member
For starters your misrepresentation of the word "huparchon", for it has built right into its meaning and by definition the idea of a beginning and that is also why it is never used of God except in verses like Acts 17:24 below.

Acts 17:24​

New International Version​

24 “The God who made the world and everything in it is "huparchon" the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands.



For in the above, God only began to be the Lord of heaven and earth after he made heaven and earth first and just like I said and will again, the word "huparchon" never refers to anything that has no beginning and that is why it is never used to just simple speak of God period.

The word is used 60 times and therefore one doesn't need to have a rocket science degree in Greek to know that it always refers to things that have a beginning, for all one needs is an Englishman's concordance like what you can access on the online Bible hub to prove this out.

How about you show me how the context of Philippians 2:7-8 or the Greek wording used reveals that God actually became a man in those verses OS? For it Paul never actually says this at all in verse 7-8.

Don't bother with your crafty uses of the full Greek sentences however, for I am fully aware that you use this to your advantage but it wont work on me.

For neither the word "homoimai" nor the word "schema" can be misrepresented in the context to be saying that Paul was revealing in verses 7-8 that Jesus became a man from being God first, for "homiomai" means a likeness of "anthropos" and not "anthropos" and the "schema" means the appearance or fashion of the characteristics of a man.

For Paul starts everything he says with these words "Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus" and the Logos was never called Christ Jesus until it was made flesh and dwelt among us as the human being and human heir of God or Son of God.

So this is just for starters.


So then where in what Paul says in Philippians 2:7-8 do you find Paul telling us that God became a man.


That isn't what it says but what it does say is that Jesus began his existence as a man in the form of God and which means that he was not born like all other men but that right from his birth he had authority that no other man before him or after him ever had been given.

In regards to his ontology he was a true man but he wasn't like any other man in regards to his position purpose and authority with God and therefore when he took the form of a servant, he made himself like other men by doing this and that is all that Paul was saying in this passage.


Furthermore, there is no "it" in Philippians 2:6 "consider it not robbery to be equal with God" as if to say that Jesus began as God's equal.

For what it does say, is more like this, "who being in the form of God, took no thought of robbery (noun) to be equal unto God but emptied himself" and most of the other translations basically put it something like this also and even though they are also trinitarian bias like you are OS.

When it says he emptied himself, it is not at all referring to attributes as being God, but rather it is speaking of his identity as a man in the form of God and with God given and God like authority and which men of much less authority had claimed equality with God because of it and which Jesus took no thought to do.

It means he never let it enter into his mind although I am sure that the Devil tempted him with a passing thought on it and of which Jesus rejected completely because of his love for the Father and also us and in order to finish his course in becoming a perfect sacrifice for our sins.
Thank you for this uninformed attempt to make a grammatical argument. When you quote from an accredited Greek grammar and Lexicon then I will accept your opinion.
 
Last edited:

Yahweh will increase

Well-known member
Thank you for this uninformed attempt to make a grammatical argument. When you quote from an accredited Greek grammar and Lexicon then I will accept your opinion.
First off, I could care less whether or not you accept the truth, for that is your problem and not mine.

However the 60 times the word "huparchon" is used in the NT is sufficient enough to reveal what the word means and what it doesn't mean and it is never used of God to express his eternal nature and which speaks volumes being you falsely believe that Paul was revealing that Jesus was the eternal God who became a man in Philippians 2:5-8.

Surely you are not a simple man are you OT, for if Paul wanted to express that Jesus was the eternal God and then became a human being, he certainly would have used the simplier and correct wording to do so.

For if Paul was, there was no need for him to use the word "morphe" and neither was there a need for him to use "homoiomai" which only refers to a likeness and "schema" which only refers to a fashion or appearance, as in what are normal characteristics of a man.

For you know as well as I do, that the Greek language has words that would have expressed way more simply and more perfectly your idea that Jesus was the eternal God and then became a man but Paul didn't use them because that was never his intended meaning in Philippians 2:5-8.


For instance if Paul wanted to say that Jesus was existing as God, he would have used the very words always associated and applied to God as existing eternally and not "huparchon" that never is used this way.



Also, he would have just said that he became a man, rather than being made in the likeness of men, which isn't anywhere near the same thing as being made a man., for being made in the likeness, doesn't mean the same thing as being made a man and you know it also.


So you can resist the truth about this all you want OS but you will be brought to face up to it soon enough no matter how you try and avoid it now and so you are without excuse.
 

OldShepherd

Well-known member
First off, I could care less whether or not you accept the truth, for that is your problem and not mine.
However the 60 times the word "huparchon" is used in the NT is sufficient enough to reveal what the word means and what it doesn't mean and it is never used of God to express his eternal nature and which speaks volumes being you falsely believe that Paul was revealing that Jesus was the eternal God who became a man in Philippians 2:5-8.
Surely you are not a simple man are you OT, for if Paul wanted to express that Jesus was the eternal God and then became a human being, he certainly would have used the simplier and correct wording to do so.
For if Paul was, there was no need for him to use the word "morphe" and neither was there a need for him to use "homoiomai" which only refers to a likeness and "schema" which only refers to a fashion or appearance, as in what are normal characteristics of a man.
For you know as well as I do, that the Greek language has words that would have expressed way more simply and more perfectly your idea that Jesus was the eternal God and then became a man but Paul didn't use them because that was never his intended meaning in Philippians 2:5-8.
For instance if Paul wanted to say that Jesus was existing as God, he would have used the very words always associated and applied to God as existing eternally and not "huparchon" that never is used this way.
Also, he would have just said that he became a man, rather than being made in the likeness of men, which isn't anywhere near the same thing as being made a man., for being made in the likeness, doesn't mean the same thing as being made a man and you know it also.
So you can resist the truth about this all you want OS but you will be brought to face up to it soon enough no matter how you try and avoid it now and so you are without excuse.
You are without excuse, leaning on your own understanding.
Philippians 2:6 He who existed in the form of God did not consider equality with God as something to be taken by force.
Cleenewerck, L. (Ed.). (2011). The Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible: New Testament (Php 2:6). Laurent A. Cleenewerck.​
2000+ years of Greek scholarship vs. amateurish attempts to make grammatical arguments.
A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity. [A.D. 210-280.] Chap. XXII.
Wherefore also God hath highly exalted Him, and hath given Him a name which is above every name; that in the name of Jesus every knee should be bent, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and every tongue should confess that Jesus is Lord, in the glory of God the Father?” (Phi_2:6-11) “Who, although He was in the form of God,” he says. If Christ had been only man, He would have been spoken of as in “the image” of God, not “in the form” of God. … He is - as we have declared - in the form of God the Father. And He is reasonably affirmed to be in the form of God, in that He Himself, being above all things, and having the divine power over every creature, is also God after the example of the Father.​
 

SteveB

Well-known member
Christianity is Monotheistic just like Judaism and Islam who believe in One God.

hope this helps !!!
Yeah, except that Islam believes that Allah is God, and the bible says that YHVH is God.
And ironically, YHVH says that all the other gods are actually demons. Deuteronomy 32:17.
 

Yahweh will increase

Well-known member
You are without excuse, leaning on your own understanding.
Philippians 2:6 He who existed in the form of God did not consider equality with God as something to be taken by force.

Cleenewerck, L. (Ed.). (2011). The Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible: New Testament (Php 2:6). Laurent A. Cleenewerck.
2000+ years of Greek scholarship vs. amateurish attempts to make grammatical arguments.
A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity. [A.D. 210-280.] Chap. XXII.

Wherefore also God hath highly exalted Him, and hath given Him a name which is above every name; that in the name of Jesus every knee should be bent, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and every tongue should confess that Jesus is Lord, in the glory of God the Father?” (Phi_2:6-11) “Who, although He was in the form of God,” he says. If Christ had been only man, He would have been spoken of as in “the image” of God, not “in the form” of God. … He is - as we have declared - in the form of God the Father. And He is reasonably affirmed to be in the form of God, in that He Himself, being above all things, and having the divine power over every creature, is also God after the example of the Father.
Well then you go right ahead and keep on buying into it and to your own eventual ruin and even though both Jesus and Paul very clearly told us the correct way to learn and which you and your trin friends have substituted for your own flesh and blood human reasoning and wisdom instead.

Remember, Jesus blessed Peter because he received the truth the correct way and this is why Jesus also said that he would build his church upon it as well.

"You are blessed Simon, for flesh and blood (neither his own human reasoning or that of other men) has not revealed this unto you but rather my Father in Heaven and I say unto you, you are Peter (a piece from the Rock) and upon this Rock (revelation from God in heaven) I will build my church and the gates of Hell will not be able to prevail against it.

The gates of haydes (the grave) will not prevent his true church built upon the revelation from God in heaven from rising from the grave unto eternal life in God's Heavenly kingdom.



1 Corinthians 2:13-16​

New International Version​

13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words.

14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.

15 The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments,

16 for, “Who has known the mind of the Lord
so as to instruct him?” But we (who are led of the Spirit) have the mind of Christ.


1 Corinthians 3:1-2​

New International Version​

The Church and Its Leaders​

3 Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly—mere infants in Christ. 2 I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready.


Many of your so called Trin scholars would like to argue that the divisions that the church of Corinth was experiencing, were not doctrinal divisions and this is absolute rubbish and the above words of Paul prove that the divisions were over doctrine.


It is also a fact, that the divisions in doctrinal positions in your churches today, make the church at Corinth pale in comparison and Paul gave the reason why the church of Corinth had the divisions and it is the same reason why your churches have them likewise.

Paul called them carnal because of it and the cause was the same as today also, for they substituted the correct way of learning the truth from the discernment of the Holy Spirit with their own carnal human reasoning and wisdom in place of it and just like your trin churches have done also.


Matthew 11:25-26​

New International Version​

25 At that time Jesus said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. 26 Yes, Father, for this is what you were pleased to do.
 
Top