Jesus!

[bbyrd009]

God is One, and you are called to be elohim too! This Trinity,

forwards that Trinity, and the Bible was written to deceive them, just like It says It would

 

[Oddawll2]

Greeting Oddawll2 and welcome to this forum. And welcome also to the family of God. It is wonderful that you are reading the Bible in a manner and with a motive to cover truth, rather than as an exercise to discredit or malign.... That of itself is sufficient evidence of your genuine conversion.
Now at the risk of raising the ire of other members here who may disagree, I would like to propose one or three basic principles that may help you to understand the scriptures, at least in the basics. No-one expects you to earn a doctorate in divinity... Ever... so don't sweat not getting it.
First point. The Bible is not word inspired. There are some minor discrepancies between the eye witness accounts we read of Jesus life in the gospels... Which is to be expected because you have different people seeing the same things but from different perspectives. This is all in God's order in order that we may gain greater insight into the events thus described. Police love this when presenting a case. 10 witnesses giving exactly the same evidence creates suspicion of collusion... so slight differences in the gospels give more credence to their validity and truthfulness. So, not word inspired, but most assuredly thought inspired. Inspired by the holy Spirit the writers of scripture, including the prophets of the Old testament, wrote in their own words the thoughts and principles that God revealed to them.
Secondly, about the Trinity. The Trinity, as a word, is not found in scripture. Scripture uses the word Godhead... Which is my preference. God is God. He is unexplainable, except in those areas He has been pleased to reveal. What we know is what we are told. When people attempt to explain the term Trinity, they invariably need to use expressions and concepts that are not found in the Bible. To my mind, if a concept itself in unexplainable, and those promoting it cannot adequately explain it in a way any else can understand, it is best left alone.
What we are told, in its most basic fundamental form is adequate. That God is a Father. That Jesus is His Son. God says Jesus is worthy of worship... Obviously because of His Sonship. The holy Spirit is described in the scripture as being the Spirit of God, and the Spirit of Jesus, sometimes in the same sentence. The scripture also says Jesus was the vessel through Whom God the Father created all things... Therefore the Sonship of Jesus goes back to a time before creation. We are not told how long. Nor are we told the Son is as old as the Father as the Trinity attempts to teach us. A Son the same age as His Father is simply not logical. And God is logical, and has described his identity in ways that are logical and in harmony with our admittedly finite minds. It is dangerous to go beyond that. I could go a little deeper, but the above I think is sufficient to give you somewhat of a broader perspective of what you are getting yourself into. The Trinity, despite the creeds etc that demand it is a doctrine all Christians must accept to avoid being labelled heretics or non Christians, is an essence an assumed doctrine. Assumed doctrines should never be doctrines.

Well, I think you have it right about the first point. Witnesses often disagree on the details. In thirty-five years in industry and another two decades as a public school employee, when I collected information about an incident, witnesses usually differed on the details.

I understand that people disagree about the Trinity. I listened to a lecture that explained how the Bible refers to God in many ways, three of which are Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, which are all different, but all are God. The grammar seems a bit bizarre, but that is the way the Bible says it. Then a door-to-door missionary came to my house. We talked about the Trinity, and he took a completely opposite point of view. He even quoted some of the same Bible verses, which I had learned as supporting the Trinity, but he used them to deny the Trinity.

As near as I can tell, Christians don't all agree on much. Maybe just one thing. Sin is bad. Or two things? Jesus cures sin.

 

[justbyfaith]

That's way off target. Jesus wasn't talking about Bible versions.

However, the Holy Spirit would apply what he was saying in Matthew 7:13-14, to them, today. See Acts 15:18 (kjv).

 

[Oddawll2]

Earlier in this thread, we had some discussion about missing verses in modern Bible translations. For example, 1 john 5:7-8 in the NIV has fewer words (or you might say "two phrases missing") compared to the KJV.

A similar situation exists with John 8:1-11. Early manuscripts do not have these verses. Or so says Bible Gateway at

Bible Gateway passage: John 7 - New International Version

and they explain that situation.

So I want to ask, do the printed copies of the NIV leave out John 8:1-11, or do they do it like on the Bible Gateway website where they included the traditional information, but with a footnote?

 

[justbyfaith]

Earlier in this thread, we had some discussion about missing verses in modern Bible translations. For example, 1 john 5:7-8 in the NIV has fewer words (or you might say "two phrases missing") compared to the KJV.

A similar situation exists with John 8:1-11. Early manuscripts do not have these verses. Or so says Bible Gateway at

Bible Gateway passage: John 7 - New International Version

and they explain that situation.

So I want to ask, do the printed copies of the NIV leave out John 8:1-11, or do they do it like on the Bible Gateway website where they included the traditional information, but with a footnote?

It depends on what Bible you purchase. Some of them have it in a footnote, others don't have it at all.

 

[Deborah_]

Earlier in this thread, we had some discussion about missing verses in modern Bible translations. For example, 1 john 5:7-8 in the NIV has fewer words (or you might say "two phrases missing") compared to the KJV.

A similar situation exists with John 8:1-11. Early manuscripts do not have these verses. Or so says Bible Gateway at

Bible Gateway passage: John 7 - New International Version

and they explain that situation.

So I want to ask, do the printed copies of the NIV leave out John 8:1-11, or do they do it like on the Bible Gateway website where they included the traditional information, but with a footnote?

In the latest edition of the NIV both John 8:1-11 and Mark 16:9-20 are in the main text, but printed in italics. We need to be aware that they probably aren't "original" (and so shouldn't be used as "proof-texts"), but most people still regard them as part of the Bible. Preachers still preach on them, and they are discussed in commentaries.

 

[justbyfaith]

I believe that they can indeed be used as "proof texts".

Of course it takes some extensive contending back and forth in order to prove that they are authoritative.

However, it is written in 1 Corinthians that "tongues are a sign to unbelievers"

and therefore all that is needed is for me to operate in my sign gift of speaking in tongues; and for some this will be sufficient to prove that the latter end of Mark 16 (and the other contested scripture passages) is valid.

Of course, this is not easily done over the internet.

 

[Deborah_]

I believe that they can indeed be used as "proof texts".

Of course it takes some extensive contending back and forth in order to prove that they are authoritative.

However, it is written in 1 Corinthians that "tongues are a sign to unbelievers"

and therefore all that is needed is for me to operate in my sign gift of speaking in tongues; and for some this will be sufficient to prove that the latter end of Mark 16 (and the other contested scripture passages) is valid.

Of course, this is not easily done over the internet.

Well, you can use them as proof-texts - but the risk is that your opponent will just say that they are not valid. It's better to use other texts - and there are other texts to use. We don't need I John 5 to establish the Trinity, or Mark 16 to validate speaking in tongues.

 

[Frank Lee]

The KJV and NASB are widely regarded as the most dependable translations. NIV among others are very questionable in many many places.

Personally I wouldn't have a commentary Bible under any circumstances. Another man's views are meaningless to me placed in a Bible. The Holy Spirit will, if you are baptized with/filled with him, teach and guide you in the word. To wit;

As for you, the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you; but as His anointing teaches you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you abide in Him.
1 John 2:27 NASB

 

[Frank Lee]

Have I been born again. Who knows? I'm involved in this because I want to support my children's decisions on this.

Dear Oddy, your reaching out for answers is a good thing. If/when you have indeed been born again you will mosf certainly know.

God will change you into a different person. Your likes and want toos will be turned around. You will know in your knower that you have been recreated.

As you seek to learn of Jesus, God's first name, he will deal with you as you search for him with the whole heart.

You will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. I will be found by you,' declares the Lord , 'and I will restore your fortunes and will gather you from all the nations and from all the places where I have driven you,' declares the Lord , 'and I will bring you back to the place from where I sent you into exile.'
Jeremiah 29:13‭-‬14 NASB

May you come to find that at some point you have indeed become a new creature in Christ Jesus. Prayers for you in your quest.

 

[justbyfaith]

Well, you can use them as proof-texts - but the risk is that your opponent will just say that they are not valid.

At that point I might tell them that in their heart, they are taking away from the word of the Lord...and are therefore in danger of having their name removed from the Book of Life and their part taken out of the holy city, according to Revelation 22:18-19.

While this will often bring about a hateful response, it is speaking the truth in love; and their response usually indicates whether they are truly in the faith or not...since if anyone hates their brother they are a murderer, and we know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him. And this can be a sounding board for the conviction of the Holy Spirit to operate, showing them that they are sinners in need of a Saviour...that recognition being necessary before they can come to a real and saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.

 

[bbyrd009]

Earlier in this thread, we had some discussion about missing verses in modern Bible translations. For example, 1 john 5:7-8 in the NIV has fewer words (or you might say "two phrases missing") compared to the KJV.

A similar situation exists with John 8:1-11. Early manuscripts do not have these verses. Or so says Bible Gateway at

Bible Gateway passage: John 7 - New International Version

and they explain that situation.

So I want to ask, do the printed copies of the NIV leave out John 8:1-11, or do they do it like on the Bible Gateway website where they included the traditional information, but with a footnote?

read from a Lex and that all goes away fwiw,
Acts 3:1 Lexicon: Now Peter and John were going up to the temple at the ninth hour, the hour of prayer.

 

[101G]

Yes, I know. The Trinity only restates the Bible. If fact it seems like such a reasonable idea, one wonders why people argue about it.

However, if Jesus is the Holy Spirit, he should have no need to receive the Holy Spirit. Or is he the Holy Spirit because he received the Holy Spirit. Is it a question even worth asking?

Good question, but the Lord Jesus is the Holy Spirit in flesh. the question HOW? scripture,
Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
made lower for the suffering of death. ok, so how was that done?
Phil 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men.

that word "reputation" is the Greek word,
G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') v.
1. to make empty.
2. (figuratively) to abase, neutralize, falsify.
[from G2756]
KJV: make (of none effect, of no reputation, void), be in vain
Root(s): G2756

other words God's shared himself in flesh as a man, so he could be subject to "NATURAL" death. and that was done through G2758 κενόω kenoo.

like, or as a human, (Phil 2:8), he is the example as to be A. taught of the Spirit, which the first Adam's refused to do. and B. be lead of the Spirit. this is where a teacher and a consultant/counselor/Comforter come into play. this is why the Lord Jesus made himself, (the equal share), the example, by G2758 κενόω kenoo himself, that we must follow. how by allowing the Spirit to LEAD, and or Govern our lives, by teaching and consulting, and or counselling us. this is better know as feed his sheep. this is why he is called the Governor.

hope that helped.

 

[Oddawll2]

I want to thank the folks who had tried to help with this subject.

So far as near as I can tell, Jesus was born (Luke 2). Then Joseph and Mary consummated their marriage. (Matthew 1). That seems like an odd detail to include.

For a while, he lived in Egypt until after Herod's death. (Matthew 2)

He lived in Nazareth (Matthew 2), but he may have gone to Jerusalem every year for for the Passover holiday. (Luke 2) For a while I worked for an Oil Company. I worked in a laboratory where the scientists had a party every December. They called it Passover because they had been passed over for the Nobel Prize.

John Baptized Jesus. (Mark 1, Matthew 3, Luke 3). The Gospels don't say when, but they more or less imply that Jesus was an adult.

Jesus had a conversation with Satan. Daniel Webster did not participate. (Mark 1, Matthew 4, Luke 4)

He spoke at a synagogue in Nazareth, where people became so enraged that they almost threw him from a cliff. Must have been something he said.

Jesus goes to a wedding. No mention of AK 47's. (John 2).

Jesus went to Jerusalem for Passover as he must have done ever year. "In the temple courts he found people selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables." (John 2)

Jesus returned to Galilee through Samaria. (John 4) Samaritans appear to have been another kind of Jew. The Gospels also mention Galileans, Teachers of the Law, Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herodians. They must have been something like Catholics and Protestants or Republicans or Democrats.

Back in Galilee, Jesus healed a boy's fever. (John 4) John's Gospel calls it "the second sign Jesus performed after coming from Judea to Galilee."

Then John went to prison (Mark 1, Matthew 4). This appears to have been the spark the ignited Jesus' ministry. He began speaking in synagogues. He drove out an impure spirit. Mark's Gospel says that news about that event "spread quickly over the whole region of Galilee."

Things haven't changed much in 2000 years. We still have street people who wander around like they have an impure spirit, but the medical profession has begun to catch up with the kind of healing that Jesus appears to have provided.

 

[justbyfaith]

Then Joseph and Mary consummated their marriage. (Matthew 1). That seems like an odd detail to include.

The virgin birth is an important fact of scripture.

Jesus had a conversation with Satan. Daniel Webster did not participate.

?????

Jesus goes to a wedding. No mention of AK 47's.

Again, ?????

Jesus returned to Galilee through Samaria. (John 4) Samaritans appear to have been another kind of Jew.

Samaritans were halfbreeds, they were part Jewish and part Gentile.

We still have street people who wander around like they have an impure spirit, but the medical profession has begun to catch up with the kind of healing that Jesus appears to have provided.

Jesus said that He gives His peace to us, not as the world gives. The world gives by offering a low drug high (the medical profession's solution to mental illness). Jesus gives by providing the Holy Spirit, a well of living waters that does not run dry.

 

[farouk]

The virgin birth is an important fact of scripture.

Exactly; such an important doctrine in Scripture, linked with the fact the Lord Jesus is indeed Divine and sinless.

 

[bbyrd009]

actually a useful construct that contains an essential deception in order to hide wisdom from the wise, but suffice it to say for now that we are called to be elohim too, Priests along with a High Priest, that you may certainly worship if you like, at least until you break up Nehushtan

 

[Oddawll2]

????? Again, ?????

Samaritans were halfbreeds, they were part Jewish and part Gentile.

And Faust didn't have his say either?

Just as a matter of grammar, it should be are "part Jewish and part Gentile." If I ask a Samaritan, will he agree with that?

 

[Oddawll2]

actually a useful construct that contains an essential deception in order to hide wisdom from the wise, but suffice it to say for now that we are called to be elohim too, Priests along with a High Priest, that you may certainly worship if you like, at least until you break up Nehushtan

I think maybe you intend to be helpful, but so far I have not understood anything you have written.

 

[justbyfaith]

I think maybe you intend to be helpful, but so far I have not understood anything you have written.

I pray that the Lord will give you understanding as time progresses.