A Question for Jehovah's Witnesses

[The Learner]

Genesis 1:1 says that “God created the heavens and the earth.” Then, Colossians 1:16 gives the added detail that God created “all things” through Jesus Christ. The plain teaching of Scripture, therefore, is that Jesus is the Creator of the universe.

The mystery of the triune God is difficult to understand yet is one of the doctrines revealed in Scripture. In the Bible, both God the Father and Jesus are called Shepherd, Judge, and Savior. Both are called the Pierced One—in the same verse (Zechariah 12:10). Christ is the exact representation of God the Father, having the same nature (Hebrews 1:3). There is some sense in which everything the Father does, the Son and Spirit also do, and vice versa. They are always in perfect agreement at every moment, and all three equal only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4). Knowing that Christ is God and has all the attributes of God aids our understanding of Jesus as the Creator.

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). There are three important things in this passage about Jesus and the Father: 1) Jesus was “in the beginning”—He was present at creation. Jesus had existed eternally with God. 2) Jesus is distinct from the Father—He was “with” God. 3) Jesus is the same as God in nature—He “was God.”

Hebrews 1:2 says, “In these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.” Christ is the agent of God’s creation; the world was created “through” Him. The Father and the Son had two distinct functions in creation yet worked together to bring about the cosmos. John says, “All things were made through [Jesus], and without [Jesus] was not anything made that was made” (John 1:3, ESV). The apostle Paul reiterates: “There is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live” (1 Corinthians 8:6).

The Holy Spirit, the third Person of the Trinity, was also an agent in creation (Genesis 1:2). Since the Hebrew word for “spirit” is often translated as “wind” or “breath,” we can see the activity of all three persons of the Trinity in one verse: “By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, their starry host by the breath of his mouth” (Psalm 33:6). After a thorough study of Scripture, we can conclude that God the Father is the Creator (Psalm 102:25), and He created through Jesus, God the Son (Hebrews 1:2).

 

[tigger 2]

..............................................................

Tertullian

Trinitarian Boer (as do most trinitarians) wants us to believe that Origen’s and Tertullian’s doctrines of God and the Son of God were actually leading to trinitarianism. But is this true? What did Tertullian actually intend? What about Tertullian’s “one nature (substantia in Latin) and two persons (persona in Latin)”? Did it really mean what later Church “scholars” wanted it to mean? Well, here is the admission of another highly-respected trinitarian scholar:
{Tertullian} therefore proposed to say that God is ‘one substance {substantia in Latin - compares to homoousios in Greek} consisting in three persons {persona}.’ The precise meaning of the Latin words substantia and persona is not easy to determine in Tertullian’s usage. {‘In Tertullian substantia could be used in the sense of character or nature [among other things].’ - p. 90, Chadwick.} - p. 89, The Early Church, Prof. Henry Chadwick (trinitarian), 1986 ed., Dorset Press, New York.

And the trinitarian, Catholic work Trinitas - A Theological Encyclopedia of the Holy Trinity notes that, even though later writers used some of Tertullian’s terminology (e.g., substantia) to describe the Trinity, it appears that Tertullian did not use them in that sense:

“hasty conclusions cannot be drawn from [Tertullian’s] usage, for he does not apply the words to Trinitarian theology.”
For example, even many trinitarian NT Greek language experts admit that since John used the neuter form of the word “one” at John 10:30, he intended the meaning of “one in will or purpose”! That this is true is proved by the same usage at John 17:11, 22 (see the study entitled ‘ONE’). Tertullian, when making the same point, tells us that John writes at Jn 10:30 -
‘We are one thing’ Unum, not ‘one person’ Unus. .... He accordingly says Unum, a neuter term, which does not imply singularity of number, but unity of essence, likeness, conjunction, affection on the Father’s part, who loves the Son, and submission on the Son’s, who obeys the Father's will. - ANF, 3:618, ‘Against Praxeas.’

Here we see Tertullian using “one” in “essence” (as did Origen above) to mean both individuals having the same will or purpose. And that will is the Father’s which the Son obeys perfectly. They are “one” then in “essence” (will) only because one of them is completely, perfectly subordinate to the will of the other! But over 100 years later trinitarians began insisting that the renowned Tertullian and Origen had stated trinitarian truths by their uses of “substance/essence,” etc.

From the very beginning {of the proposal of the trinitarian creed at the Nicene Council, 325 A.D., which used such terms as homoousios}, however, people like Eusebius of Caesarea {renowned scholar and historian who headed the majority of bishops at the Nicene council - and a non-trinitarian!} had doubts about the creed, doubts that focused on the word homoousios. This was, to be sure, a vague and non-technical term which was capable of a fairly wide range of senses. .... the term was non-Scriptural, it had a very doubtful theological history, and it was open to what, from Eusebius’s {non-trinitarian} point of view, were some dangerous misinterpretations indeed. - p. 135, A History of the Christian Church, Williston Walker (trinitarian), Scribner’s, 1985.

Tertullian, too, like the other Ante-Nicene Fathers, taught that Prov. 8:22-30 relates the words of the Son of God, Christ (speaking as “Wisdom”):
“‘At first the Lord {Jehovah} created me as the beginning of His ways, with a view to His own works, before He made the earth, before the mountains were settled; moreover, before all the hills did He beget me;’ that is to say, He created and generated me in His own intelligence.” - ANF, 3:601, ‘Against Praxeas’.

And,
Scripture in other passages teaches us of the creation of the individual parts. You have Wisdom {the Son of God} saying, ‘But before the depths was I brought forth,’ in order that you may believe that the depths were also ‘brought forth’ - that is created just as we create sons also, though we ‘bring them forth.’ It matters not whether the depth {like Wisdom itself} was made or born, so that a beginning be accorded to it - ANF, 3:495, ‘Against Hermogenes.’

Of course, the eternal, only true, Most High God had no beginning. (Rev. 3:14)

..........................................................

Clement of Alexandria

(c. 150-213 A.D.)
“Clement himself was undoubtedly the most significant Alexandrian apologist” – p. 179, Robert M. Grant, Greek Apologists of the Second Century, Westminster Press, 1988.
Clement of Alexandria (c. 150 - c. 213), wrote, in a discussion of God:

“This discourse respecting God is most difficult to handle. For since the first principle of everything is difficult to find out, the absolutely first and oldest principle, which is the cause of all other things being and having been, is difficult to exhibit. …. No one can rightly express Him wholly. For on account of His greatness He is ranked as the All, and is the Father of the universe. Nor are any parts to be predicated of Him For the One is indivisible.” – pp. 463-4, vol. 2, The Ante-Nicene Fathers [ANF], Eerdmans Publishing, 1989.

Clement, as with most (if not all) of the Ante-Nicene Fathers, also believed and taught that Prov. 8:22-30 presented the words of the Son of God (speaking as “Wisdom”) in his pre-human existence. He wrote:


Wisdom, which was the first of the creation of God. (Cf. Rev. 3:14) - ANF 2:465, ‘The Stromata.’
And to make it perfectly clear, Clement writes:

To know God is, then, the first step of faith [see the early baptismal questions above] .... But the nature of the Son, which is nearest to Him who is alone the Almighty One, is most perfect ... which orders all things in accordance with the Father's will - ANF 2:524, ‘The Stromata.’

The Ante-Nicene Fathers recognized the Scriptural use of the terms elohim and theos which could be understood as either “a god” or “God” and applied to both the Most High (“God”) and to men and angels (“gods” - see the BOWGOD study). This is one of the areas where trinitarian translators may choose the meaning that best brings out their trinitarian interpretation in both scripture and the early writings. For example, when Clement writes: “I say, the Word of God became man, that thou mayest learn from man how man may become God {theos}” - ANF 2:174, ‘Exhortation to the Heathen’ - it is clear that the trinitarian translators of ANF have mistranslated “God” for “a god” (possibly because they don't wish to point out other, even more important, mistranslations when theos has been similarly applied to the Christ). But the very context of this writing tells us that Clement must mean “man may become a god {theos}” since he simply cannot become God!

Even the Encyclopedia Britannica has rendered this statement by Clement as “a god”: Clement of Alexandria taught that the object of Christ's incarnation and death

“was to free man from sin ... and thus in the end elevate him to the position of a god.” - p. 799, Vol. 5, Britannica., 14th ed.

 

[The Learner]

Jesus Claimed To Be Divine
John 6:38 “For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me.”
John 8:42 “Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.”
John 8:58 “Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.”
John 10:38 “But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.”
John 14:9 “Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?” 10 “Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.”

 

[The Learner]

The Apostles Taught that Jesus Was Divine
Matthew 1:23 “Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.”
Matthew 16:26 “For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?”
Mark 1:1 “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;”
Luke 1:35 “And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”
John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
John 1:14 “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.”
John 20:31 “But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.”
Philippians 2:6 “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:”
Colossians 1:16 “For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:”
Colossians 2:9 “For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.”



The Confession Of Others Concerning Christ’s Deity

Isaiah 9:6 “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be
upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.”
Matthew 27:54 “Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.”
Luke 4:41 “And devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, Thou art Christ the Son of God. And he rebuking them suffered them not to speak: for they knew that he was Christ.”

The Sacred Title of God Applied to Christ Proves His Divinity
Jesus is called Emmanuel in Matthew 1:23
“Who can forgive sins but God alone?” Mark 2:7
Jesus is called God in John 20:28 Thomas answered Him, “My Lord and my God!”
Jesus is called the Alpha and Omega in Revelation 1:11
Jesus is called the King of kings and Lord of lords in 1 Timothy 6:15

 

[The Learner]

No more than you believe that both John in Jn 1:1, 1:4, and Jesus in the following lied:
Heb 1:6, Mt 2:2, 11, 14:33, 28:9, 17, Lk 24:52, Jn 9:38, 20:28-29 -- where Jeusus prescribed and accepted worship of himself as God, without correction or reprimand (as in Mt 4:10, Ac 10:25-26, 14:14-15, Rev 19:10, 22:9);

Jn 5:23, 14:1 prescribing worship of himself, which was prophesied in Da 7:13-14.

 

[tigger 2]

..........................................................

Clement of Alexandria

(c. 150-213 A.D.)
“Clement himself was undoubtedly the most significant Alexandrian apologist” – p. 179, Robert M. Grant, Greek Apologists of the Second Century, Westminster Press, 1988.
Clement of Alexandria (c. 150 - c. 213), wrote, in a discussion of God:

“This discourse respecting God is most difficult to handle. For since the first principle of everything is difficult to find out, the absolutely first and oldest principle, which is the cause of all other things being and having been, is difficult to exhibit. …. No one can rightly express Him wholly. For on account of His greatness He is ranked as the All, and is the Father of the universe. Nor are any parts to be predicated of Him For the One is indivisible.” – pp. 463-4, vol. 2, The Ante-Nicene Fathers [ANF], Eerdmans Publishing, 1989.

....

Hippolytus

(c. 160-235 A.D.)

Hippolytus, “the most important 3rd century theologian of the Roman Church” (p. 652, The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, F. L. Cross, Oxford University Press, 1990 reprint) wrote:
Chapter xxviii - The Doctrine of the Truth
The first and only (one God), both Creator and Lord of all, had nothing coeval {‘of the same age or duration’} with Himself .... But He was One, alone in Himself. By an exercise of His will He created things that are, which antecedently had no existence, except that He willed to make them ....
Therefore this solitary and supreme Deity, by an exercise of reflection, brought forth the Logos {the Word, the Son of God} first ....{Prov. 8:22, 24, 25}
For simultaneously with His procession from His Progenitor, inasmuch as He is this Progenitor's first-born, He has, as a voice in Himself, the ideas conceived in the Father. And so it was, that when the Father ordered the world to come into existence, the Logos one by one completed each object of creation, thus pleasing God. .... God, who is the source of all authority, wished that the Logos might render assistance in accomplishing a production of this kind. - ANF, 5:150, 151, ‘The Refutation of All Heresies’.
Such is the true doctrine in regard of the divine nature .... in order that you may hasten and by us may be taught who the true God is .... And by means of this knowledge you shall escape the approaching threat of the fire of judgment {2 Thess. 1:7-9} - ANF 5:152, 153, ‘Refutation’.

....
Equally trinitarian and highly respected The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church admits that we cannot honestly say that Hippolytus definitely taught that the Logos (the pre-existent Christ) was even a person before being born on earth. This, of course, would mean that Hippolytus certainly didn't consider him to be the always-existent, second Person of the orthodox trinity doctrine. This trinitarian publication also tells us that Hippolytus did not even consider the Holy Spirit as a person (let alone a person who is God!). So much for the trinity doctrine being taught by “the most important 3rd century theologian of the Roman Church”! - p. 652, F. L. Cross, Oxford University Press, 1990 reprint. - - Also see the PHIL study (f.n. #13).

 

[The Learner]

prophecies fullfilled by Jesus

351 Old Testament Prophecies Fulfilled In Jesus Christ | New Testament Christians.Com

55 Old Testament Prophecies about Jesus - Jesus Film Project

Some scholars believe there are more than 300 prophecies about Jesus in the Old Testament. These prophecies are specific enough that the mathematical

www.jesusfilm.org

Prophecies Fulfilled by Jesus

Studying the prophecies fulfilled by Christ’s first coming can fill us with anticipation for His Second Coming. Find renewed hope for tomorrow in Scripture.

davidjeremiah.blog

https://parish.rcdow.org.uk/swisscottage/wp-content/uploads/sites/52/2014/11/44-Prophecies-Jesus-Christ-Fulfilled.pdf

List of Old Testament prophecies fulfilled by Jesus

Chart shows a list of Old Testament prophecies or predictions that were fulfilled by Jesus Christ the Messiah, showing the Bible passage and fulfillment

www.about-jesus.org

 

[MonoBiblical]

The mishna stated: Torah scrolls are written in any language. And the Gemara raises a contradiction from a baraita: A Torah scroll containing a Hebrew verse in the Bible that one wrote in Aramaic translation, or a verse written in Aramaic translation that one wrote in the Hebrew of the Bible, or that was written in the ancient Hebrew script and not in Ashurit, renders the hands impure only if one writes it in Ashurit script, on a parchment scroll, and in ink. Apparently, contrary to the mishna, a scroll written in a language other than Hebrew is not sacred.


אָמַר רָבָא: לָא קַשְׁיָא
Rava said: This is not difficult.

9a

כָּאן בְּגּוֹפָן שֶׁלָּנוּ, כָּאן בְּגּוֹפָן שֶׁלָּהֶן.
Here, the mishna is referring to Torah scrolls written in another language in our script, i.e., in Hebrew letters. There, the baraita is referring to Torah scrolls written in another language in their script, in the letters of another alphabet.


אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: בְּמַאי אוֹקֵימְתָּא לְהַהִיא? בְּגּוֹפָן שֶׁלָּהֶן, מַאי אִירְיָא מִקְרָא שֶׁכְּתָבוֹ תַּרְגּוּם וְתַרְגּוּם שֶׁכְּתָבוֹ מִקְרָא? אֲפִילּוּ מִקְרָא שֶׁכְּתָבוֹ מִקְרָא וְתַרְגּוּם שֶׁכְּתָבוֹ תַּרְגּוּם נָמֵי. דְּהָא קָתָנֵי: עַד שֶׁיִּכְתְּבֶנּוּ אַשּׁוּרִית עַל הַסֵּפֶר בִּדְיוֹ!
Abaye said to Rava: How did you establish that baraita, i.e., that it is referring to Torah scrolls written in another language in their script? If it is so, why did the baraita specifically teach that the legal status of a Hebrew verse in the Bible that one wrote in Aramaic translation, or a verse written in Aramaic translation that one wrote in the Hebrew of the Bible, is not that of sacred writings? The legal status of even a Hebrew verse in the Bible that one wrote in the Hebrew of the Bible and a verse written in Aramaic translation that one wrote in Aramaic translation are also not that of sacred writings, as it is taught at the end of the baraita: A Torah scroll renders the hands impure only if one writes it in Ashurit script, on a parchment scroll, and in ink.


אֶלָּא, לָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא רַבָּנַן, הָא רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל.
Rather, the matter must be explained differently. This is not difficult. This ruling in the mishna is according to the Rabbis, who permit writing Torah scrolls in any language, and that ruling in the baraita is according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel.


אִי רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הָא אִיכָּא יְוָנִית! אֶלָּא, לָא קַשְׁיָא: כָּאן בִּסְפָרִים, כָּאן בִּתְפִלִּין וּמְזוּזוֹת.
The Gemara asks: If the baraita is according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, in addition to Ashurit, isn’t there Greek in which the Torah may also be written? Rather, say this is not difficult. Here, the mishna is referring to Torah scrolls, which may be written in any language; there, the baraita is referring to phylacteries and mezuzot, which may be written only in Hebrew, using Hebrew script.


תְּפִלִּין וּמְזוּזוֹת מַאי טַעְמָא? מִשּׁוּם דִּכְתִיב בְּהוּ: ״וְהָיוּ״ — בַּהֲוָיָיתָן יְהוּ, מַאי תַּרְגּוּם שֶׁכְּתָבוֹ מִקְרָא אִיכָּא? בִּשְׁלָמָא תּוֹרָה — אִיכָּא ״יְגַר שָׂהֲדוּתָא״, אֶלָּא הָכָא מַאי תַּרְגּוּם אִיכָּא?
The Gemara asks: With regard to phylacteries and mezuzot, what is the reason that they must be written in Hebrew? The Gemara explains: It is because it is written with regard to them: “And these words shall be” (Deuteronomy 6:6), indicating that as they are so shall they be, without change. The Gemara raises a difficulty: If the baraita is referring to phylacteries and mezuzot, what Aramaic translation that one wrote in the Hebrew of the Bible is there? Granted, in the Torah there is a verse written in Aramaic translation: “Yegar sahaduta” (Genesis 31:47); however, here, in phylacteries and mezuzot, what verses in Aramaic translation are there that could be written in Hebrew?


אֶלָּא, לָא קַשְׁיָא: כָּאן בִּמְגִילָּה, כָּאן בִּסְפָרִים. מְגִילָּה מַאי טַעְמָא, דִּכְתִיב בַּהּ: ״כִּכְתָבָם וְכִלְשׁוֹנָם״. מַאי תַּרְגּוּם שֶׁכְּתָבוֹ מִקְרָא אִיכָּא?
Rather, say this is not difficult. Here, the baraita is referring to the Megilla, the Scroll of Esther, which must be written in Hebrew; there, the mishna is referring to Torah scrolls, which may be written in any language. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that the Megilla must be written in Hebrew? It is due to the fact that it is written with regard to the Megilla: “According to their writing, and according to their language” (Esther 8:9), without change. The Gemara asks: But if the baraita is referring to the Megilla, what Aramaic translation that one wrote in the Hebrew of the Bible is there? The entire Megilla is written in Hebrew.

Megillah 8b:14

Abaye said to him: However, if that is so, then also with regard to the verse: “All the days during which the plague shall be in him [bo] he shall be impure”...

www.sefaria.org

Wrong chapter!!

 

[The Learner]

Wrong chapter!!

scroll down

 

[MonoBiblical]

Pay close attention Aunty. Thomas called Jesus "My Lord and my God"! Even your JW bible says so. You're not a Bible language expert no matter what the Governing Body told you. All of our English Bibles say you're WRONG!

Actually he called YHWH his God, not Jesus.

 

[The Learner]

Acts 1:24 (Lord)
Acts 2:20 (Lord)
Acts 2:21 (Lord)
Acts 2:25 (Lord)
Acts 2:47 (Lord)
Acts 5:9 (Lord)
Acts 5:41 (Name)
Acts 7:60 (Lord)
Acts 8:22 (Lord
Acts 8:24 (Lord)
Acts 9:1 (Lord)
Acts 9:28 (Lord)
Acts 9:31 (Lord)
Acts 9:35 (Lord)
Acts 9:42 (Lord)
Acts 10:14 (Lord)
Acts 10:33 (Lord)
Acts 11:21 (Lord X2)
Acts 11:23 (Lord)
Acts 11:24 (Lord)
Acts 12:11 (Lord; His)
Acts 13:2 (Lord)
Acts 14:3 (Lord)
Acts 14:23 (Lord)
Acts 15:40 (Lord)
Acts 16:14 (Lord)
Acts 21:14 (Lord)

Romans 8:27 (He who searches the hearts)
Romans 9:33 (Him)
Romans 10:11 (Him)
Romans 10:12 (Him)
Romans 10:13 (Lord)
Romans 10:14 (Him X2)
Romans 12:11 (Lord)

1 Corinthians 1:31 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 2:16 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 4:4 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 4:5 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 4:19 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 6:17 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 10:9 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 10:21 (Lord X2)
1 Corinthians 10:22 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 10:26 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 11:32 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 14:37 (Lord's)
1 Corinthians 15:58 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 16:7 (Lord)

2 Corinthians 3:16 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 3:17 (Lord X2)
2 Corinthians 3:18 (Lord X 2)
2 Corinthians 5:11 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 8:5 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 8:19 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 8:21 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 10:8 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 10:17 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 10:18 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 12:1 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 12:8 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 13:10 (Lord)

Galatians 2:8 (He)

Ephesians 2:21 (Lord)
Ephesians 6:9 (Master)
Ephesians 6:10 (Lord)

Colossians 1:10 (Lord)
Colossians 1:22 (Him)
Colossians 1:29 (His)
Colossians 3:22 (Lord)
Colossians 4:1 (Master)

1 Thessalonians 4:6 (Lord)
1 Thessalonians 5:24 (He X2)
1 Thessalonians 5:27 (Lord)

2 Thessalonians 3:1 (Lord)
2 Thessalonians 3:3 (Lord)
2 Thessalonians 3:4 (Lord)
2 Thessalonians 3:5 (Lord)
2 Thessalonians 3:16 (Lord X2)

1 Timothy 1:14 (Lord)
1 Timothy 6:15 (Lord)

2 Timothy 1:12 (He; Him)
2 Timothy 1:16 (Lord)
2 Timothy 1:18 (Lord X2)
2 Timothy 2:7 (Lord)
2 Timothy 2:11 (Him X2)
2 Timothy 2:12 (Him X2; He)
2 Timothy 2:13 (He X2; Himself)
2 Timothy 2:19 (Lord X2)
2 Timothy 2:21 (Master)
2 Timothy 2:22 (Lord)
2 Timothy 2:24 (Lord)
2 Timothy 3:11 (Lord)
2 Timothy 4:8 (Lord)
2 Timothy 4:14 (Lord)
2 Timothy 4:17 (Lord)
2 Timothy 4:18 (Lord)

Titus 2:14 (Himself X2; His)

Hebrews 1:10 (Lord)
Hebrews 10:37 (He)
Hebrews 12:14 (Lord)

James 2:7 (Name)
James 4:10 (Lord)
James 4:12 (Lawgiver and Judge)
James 4:15 (Lord)
James 5:7 (Lord)
James 5:8 (Lord)
James 5:9 (Judge)
James 5:10 (Lord)
James 5:11 (Lord's; Lord)
James 5:14 (Lord)
James 5:15 (Lord)

1 Peter 2:6 (Him)
1 Peter 2:25 (Shepherd and Guardian)
1 Peter 3:12 (Lord X2)
1 Peter 3:15 (Lord)
1 Peter 4:5 (Him)

2 Peter 2:1 (Master)
2 Peter 2:9 (Lord)
2 Peter 2:11 (Lord)
2 Peter 3:8 (Lord)
2 Peter 3:9 (Lord)
2 Peter 3:10 (Lord)
2 Peter 3:14 (Him)
2 Peter 3:15 (Lord)

1 John 2:3 (Him; His)
1 John 2:4 (Him; His)
1 John 2:5 (His; Him)
1 John 2:6 (Him; He)
1 John 2:8 (Him)
1 John 2:12 (His)
1 John 2:13 (Him)
1 John 2:14 (Him)
1 John 2:20 (Holy One)
1 John 2:25 (He)
1 John 2:27 (Him; His; Him)
1 John 2:28 (Him; He; Him; His)
1 John 2:29 (He; Him)
1 John 3:2 (He; Him X2; He)
1 John 3:3 (Him; He)
1 John 3:5 (He; Him)
1 John 3:6 (Him X3)
1 John 3:7 (He)
1 John 3:24 (His; Him; He X3)
1 John 4:4 (He)
1 John 4:13 (Him; He X2; His)
1 John 4:17 (He)
1 John 4:19 (He)
1 John 4:21 (Him)
1 John 5:14 (Him; His; He)
1 John 5:15 (He; Him)
1 John 5:20 (Him X2; He)

3 John 7 (Name)

Jude 4 (Master; Lord)
Jude 5 (Lord)
Jude 14 (Lord)

Revelation 1:6 (Him)
Revelation 6:10 (Master)
Revelation 11:15 (He)
Revelation 14:13 (Lord)
Revelation 18:4 (My)
Revelation 20:6 (Him)
Revelation 22:3 (His; Him)
Revelation 22:4 (His; His)
Revelation 22:12 (To whom do the pronouns refer to?)
Revelation 22:13 (To whom do the appellations refer to?)

 

[MonoBiblical]

scroll down

You should take the Talmud seriously. Many Barkochbas were named Jesus.

 

[MonoBiblical]

Acts 1:24 (Lord)
Acts 2:20 (Lord)
Acts 2:21 (Lord)
Acts 2:25 (Lord)
Acts 2:47 (Lord)
Acts 5:9 (Lord)
Acts 5:41 (Name)
Acts 7:60 (Lord)
Acts 8:22 (Lord
Acts 8:24 (Lord)
Acts 9:1 (Lord)
Acts 9:28 (Lord)
Acts 9:31 (Lord)
Acts 9:35 (Lord)
Acts 9:42 (Lord)
Acts 10:14 (Lord)
Acts 10:33 (Lord)
Acts 11:21 (Lord X2)
Acts 11:23 (Lord)
Acts 11:24 (Lord)
Acts 12:11 (Lord; His)
Acts 13:2 (Lord)
Acts 14:3 (Lord)
Acts 14:23 (Lord)
Acts 15:40 (Lord)
Acts 16:14 (Lord)
Acts 21:14 (Lord)

Romans 8:27 (He who searches the hearts)
Romans 9:33 (Him)
Romans 10:11 (Him)
Romans 10:12 (Him)
Romans 10:13 (Lord)
Romans 10:14 (Him X2)
Romans 12:11 (Lord)

1 Corinthians 1:31 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 2:16 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 4:4 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 4:5 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 4:19 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 6:17 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 10:9 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 10:21 (Lord X2)
1 Corinthians 10:22 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 10:26 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 11:32 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 14:37 (Lord's)
1 Corinthians 15:58 (Lord)
1 Corinthians 16:7 (Lord)

2 Corinthians 3:16 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 3:17 (Lord X2)
2 Corinthians 3:18 (Lord X 2)
2 Corinthians 5:11 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 8:5 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 8:19 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 8:21 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 10:8 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 10:17 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 10:18 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 12:1 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 12:8 (Lord)
2 Corinthians 13:10 (Lord)

Galatians 2:8 (He)

Ephesians 2:21 (Lord)
Ephesians 6:9 (Master)
Ephesians 6:10 (Lord)

Colossians 1:10 (Lord)
Colossians 1:22 (Him)
Colossians 1:29 (His)
Colossians 3:22 (Lord)
Colossians 4:1 (Master)

1 Thessalonians 4:6 (Lord)
1 Thessalonians 5:24 (He X2)
1 Thessalonians 5:27 (Lord)

2 Thessalonians 3:1 (Lord)
2 Thessalonians 3:3 (Lord)
2 Thessalonians 3:4 (Lord)
2 Thessalonians 3:5 (Lord)
2 Thessalonians 3:16 (Lord X2)

1 Timothy 1:14 (Lord)
1 Timothy 6:15 (Lord)

2 Timothy 1:12 (He; Him)
2 Timothy 1:16 (Lord)
2 Timothy 1:18 (Lord X2)
2 Timothy 2:7 (Lord)
2 Timothy 2:11 (Him X2)
2 Timothy 2:12 (Him X2; He)
2 Timothy 2:13 (He X2; Himself)
2 Timothy 2:19 (Lord X2)
2 Timothy 2:21 (Master)
2 Timothy 2:22 (Lord)
2 Timothy 2:24 (Lord)
2 Timothy 3:11 (Lord)
2 Timothy 4:8 (Lord)
2 Timothy 4:14 (Lord)
2 Timothy 4:17 (Lord)
2 Timothy 4:18 (Lord)

Titus 2:14 (Himself X2; His)

Hebrews 1:10 (Lord)
Hebrews 10:37 (He)
Hebrews 12:14 (Lord)

James 2:7 (Name)
James 4:10 (Lord)
James 4:12 (Lawgiver and Judge)
James 4:15 (Lord)
James 5:7 (Lord)
James 5:8 (Lord)
James 5:9 (Judge)
James 5:10 (Lord)
James 5:11 (Lord's; Lord)
James 5:14 (Lord)
James 5:15 (Lord)

1 Peter 2:6 (Him)
1 Peter 2:25 (Shepherd and Guardian)
1 Peter 3:12 (Lord X2)
1 Peter 3:15 (Lord)
1 Peter 4:5 (Him)

2 Peter 2:1 (Master)
2 Peter 2:9 (Lord)
2 Peter 2:11 (Lord)
2 Peter 3:8 (Lord)
2 Peter 3:9 (Lord)
2 Peter 3:10 (Lord)
2 Peter 3:14 (Him)
2 Peter 3:15 (Lord)

1 John 2:3 (Him; His)
1 John 2:4 (Him; His)
1 John 2:5 (His; Him)
1 John 2:6 (Him; He)
1 John 2:8 (Him)
1 John 2:12 (His)
1 John 2:13 (Him)
1 John 2:14 (Him)
1 John 2:20 (Holy One)
1 John 2:25 (He)
1 John 2:27 (Him; His; Him)
1 John 2:28 (Him; He; Him; His)
1 John 2:29 (He; Him)
1 John 3:2 (He; Him X2; He)
1 John 3:3 (Him; He)
1 John 3:5 (He; Him)
1 John 3:6 (Him X3)
1 John 3:7 (He)
1 John 3:24 (His; Him; He X3)
1 John 4:4 (He)
1 John 4:13 (Him; He X2; His)
1 John 4:17 (He)
1 John 4:19 (He)
1 John 4:21 (Him)
1 John 5:14 (Him; His; He)
1 John 5:15 (He; Him)
1 John 5:20 (Him X2; He)

3 John 7 (Name)

Jude 4 (Master; Lord)
Jude 5 (Lord)
Jude 14 (Lord)

Revelation 1:6 (Him)
Revelation 6:10 (Master)
Revelation 11:15 (He)
Revelation 14:13 (Lord)
Revelation 18:4 (My)
Revelation 20:6 (Him)
Revelation 22:3 (His; Him)
Revelation 22:4 (His; His)
Revelation 22:12 (To whom do the pronouns refer to?)
Revelation 22:13 (To whom do the appellations refer to?)

This proves absolutely nothing other than that you can't prove anything using the Greek word for the Hebrew Adoni.

 

[MonoBiblical]

Well, we could marshal arguments and experts on both sides of this debate until the cows come home. And leave again. Disgusted. But as I said in Post # 1,076, I'll say again: Let’s stop the haggling over John 1:1, and just all concede that the Greek is inconclusive, i.e., it might be translated either as “the Word was God” or “the Word was a god.” We have to look for John’s meaning another way.

I suggest "And the God it was" and that it is conclusive.

 

[The Learner]

wife is kicking me off good night all

 

[RedFan]

..................................................................

Origen

Origen was probably the most accomplished Biblical scholar produced by the early Church - p. 6346, Vol. 17, Universal Standard Encyclopedia (Funk and Wagnalls), 1956.

The character of Origen is singularly pure and noble; for his moral qualities are as remarkable as his intellectual gifts. - The Ante-Nicene Fathers, p. 229, Vol. IV, Eerdmans.

Origen was a great scholar as well as a great theologian. …. His work on the words of Scripture has a value quite independently of his theological views. Some of the most important qualifications of the worthy interpreter of Scripture he possesses in a supreme degree. His knowledge of Scripture is extraordinary both for its range and its minute accuracy. He had no concordance to help him; but he was himself a concordance. Whatever word occurs he is able to bring from every part of Scripture the passages in which it is used. …. a knowledge of all parts of the Bible as is probably without parallel. It has to be added that he is strong in grammar, and has a true eye for the real meaning of his text; the discussions in which he does this often leave nothing to be desired. – p. 293, Vol. 10, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Eerdmans, 1990 printing.

Yes, even respected trinitarian scholars admit not only the stellar scholarship and knowledge of Origen, but also his outstanding moral qualities and pure character. This man simply would not lie nor distort.

Origen actually taught: The agent of redemption as of all creation is the Divine Logos {‘the Word’} or Son of God, who is the perfect image or reflection of the eternal Father. Though a being distinct, derivative, and subordinate. - p. 551, An Encyclopedia of Religion, Ferm (ed.), 1945.Origen believed that ‘the Son can be divine only in a lesser sense than the Father; the Son is qeoV (god), but only the Father is autoqeoV (Absolute God, God in Himself).’ - p. 1009, The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (trinitarian), ed. F. L. Cross (trinitarian), Oxford University Press, 1990 printing.

Ardent trinitarian Murray J. Harris likewise admits:
‘Origen, too, drew a sharp distinction between qeoV and oJ qeoV. As qeoV, the Son is not only distinct from ('numerically distinct') but also inferior to the Father who is oJ qeoV and autoqeoV (i.e. God in an absolute sense).’ - p. 36, Jesus as God, Baker Book House (trinitarian), 1992.

The trinitarian The Encyclopedia of Religion says:
“Origen himself will downgrade the Logos [‘downgraded’ in relation to God only] in calling it ‘second god’ (Against Celsus, 5.39, 6.61, etc.) or again in writing ‘god’ (theos) without the article, whereas he calls the Father ho theos [oJ qeoV], ‘the God’ [with the article].” - p. 15, Vol. 9, Macmillan Publ., 1987.

In fact, Origen specifically commented on John 1:1c which modern English-speaking trinitarians often translate as: “And the Word was God.” Yes, Origen, whose knowledge of NT Greek (“the language of the New Testament was his mother tongue”) was probably greater than any other Bible scholar (and certainly quantum levels above the speculations of any modern scholar), shows us that this verse should be properly rendered: “And the Word was a god.” ! - ANF, 10:323. (A thirteenth century manuscript seems to be the earliest extant source of Origen’s Commentary on John.)

Remember, this man is not only the best expert on NT Greek, but his great honesty and Christian character are not questioned even by his severest opponents!

Trinitarian Latourette also says that “Origen held that God is one, and is the Father” - p. 49, Christianity Through the Ages, Harper ChapelBook, 1965.

Well, I've seen this before, word for word. (CREEDS) And it mischaracterizes Origen's teaching on the subject. If you want to know that teaching, go directly to his writing on the subject in CHURCH FATHERS: Commentary on John, Book II (Origen) Read it carefully. There is no question that Origen thought of the Son as God.

As to Latourette's conclusion that “Origen held that God is one, and is the Father” -- well, the Nicene Creed opens the same way! ("We believe in One God, the Father Almighty . . .")

 

[The Learner]

This proves absolutely nothing other than that you can't prove anything using the Greek word for the Hebrew Adoni.

before my boss, wife kicks me off.

The Hebrew “adoni” occurs 195 times. In every occurrence but two “adoni” is translated with the pronoun “my”. The translation of the related words (i.e. “Adonai: and the root “Adon”) never includes the pronoun “my”. The two verses where it does not appear that way in the KJV are Gen. 43:20 where it is translated “O sir” and II Kings 6:5 where it is translated “Alas master”. But in the NIV Hebrew English Interlinear it is “sir of me”, i.e. “my sir” or “my lord” in Gen. 43:20. And the NIV Hebrew English Interlinear has “my lord”. Because the meaning of any word is determined by usage, and because “adoni” is almost always translated “my lord” we know that “adoni” means “my lord”.

• the suffix "-îm" is the masculine plural, so adonîm translates to "lords"
• the prefix "ha-" adds definiteness to the word, so ha-adon translates to "the lord"
• the suffix "-î" adds the meaning of possession, specifically first-person singular, so adoni translates to "my lord"

Psalm 110:1, l'adoni (using the first-person singular possessive suffix and the prefix "le" which means "to") translates to "to my lord."

best explanations here:

Adonai

Recently, a reader left a request, asking me to write my views on the difference between “Adonai,” “Lord” and “adoni,” “my lord”. He also asked me to explain how “adoni” is used in Psalm 110:1 and …

claudemariottini.com

https://www.biblicaltheology.com/Research/ManettiR01.pdf

Adonai-Lord-The Name of God | Precept Austin

www.preceptaustin.org

What the Bible says about Adonai

YHWH : The Eternal first introduced His name as YHWH (L ORD ) in Exodus 3 where Moses records the account of receiving his commission from God . In …

www.bibletools.org

Adonai | Reformed Bible Studies & Devotionals at Ligonier.org | Reformed Bible Studies & Devotionals at Ligonier.org

Humanity’s most basic sin is the desire to throw off the Lord’s external authority and become a law unto ourselves. Even we who have been transformed by His gra

www.ligonier.org

being kicked off now

 

[Runningman]

none before arius that I know of.

I didn't mention all of the Gnostic writers. I don't believe in Gnosticism, but for all intents and purposes they were not Trinitarian. There is plenty of evidence they were right around there at the beginning of the early church.

 

[Runningman]

and ignore all the other texts? John 1 Col 1

There is good evidence that John 1 and Col 1 are being misunderstood. For example, in Acts 4:24-27, it's evident that John and Peter did not believe Jesus was involved in creation, by their prayer to God, the Creator of heaven and earth who is the Sovereign Lord. They only briefly mentioned Jesus was His servant. That's it.

 

[Runningman]

before my boss, wife kicks me off.

The Hebrew “adoni” occurs 195 times. In every occurrence but two “adoni” is translated with the pronoun “my”. The translation of the related words (i.e. “Adonai: and the root “Adon”) never includes the pronoun “my”. The two verses where it does not appear that way in the KJV are Gen. 43:20 where it is translated “O sir” and II Kings 6:5 where it is translated “Alas master”. But in the NIV Hebrew English Interlinear it is “sir of me”, i.e. “my sir” or “my lord” in Gen. 43:20. And the NIV Hebrew English Interlinear has “my lord”. Because the meaning of any word is determined by usage, and because “adoni” is almost always translated “my lord” we know that “adoni” means “my lord”.

• the suffix "-îm" is the masculine plural, so adonîm translates to "lords"
• the prefix "ha-" adds definiteness to the word, so ha-adon translates to "the lord"
• the suffix "-î" adds the meaning of possession, specifically first-person singular, so adoni translates to "my lord"

Psalm 110:1, l'adoni (using the first-person singular possessive suffix and the prefix "le" which means "to") translates to "to my lord."

best explanations here:

Adonai

Recently, a reader left a request, asking me to write my views on the difference between “Adonai,” “Lord” and “adoni,” “my lord”. He also asked me to explain how “adoni” is used in Psalm 110:1 and …

claudemariottini.com

https://www.biblicaltheology.com/Research/ManettiR01.pdf

Adonai-Lord-The Name of God | Precept Austin

www.preceptaustin.org

What the Bible says about Adonai

YHWH : The Eternal first introduced His name as YHWH (L ORD ) in Exodus 3 where Moses records the account of receiving his commission from God . In …

www.bibletools.org

Adonai | Reformed Bible Studies & Devotionals at Ligonier.org | Reformed Bible Studies & Devotionals at Ligonier.org

Humanity’s most basic sin is the desire to throw off the Lord’s external authority and become a law unto ourselves. Even we who have been transformed by His gra

www.ligonier.org

being kicked off now

The Lord in Psalm 110:1, la·ḏō·nî as you rightly pointed out, refers to a human. This is one of those very rare words where there isn't a single exception to it being used of anyone other than humans in all of Scripture.

The LORD speaking to the Lord in Psalm 110:1 is God speaking to the Son in Hebrews 1:13:

13But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?