A SCRIPTURE based discussion of the Trinity

[Deleted User]

And now, Father, you glorify me [at your side] * with the glory that I had [at your side] ** before the world existed. (John 17:5 LEB)

* Literally “by the side of yourself” παρὰ σεαυτῷ

** Literally “by the side of you” τοῦ => παρὰ σοί

• “Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was. (NASB)
• And now, Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was (ASV)
• And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you cbefore the world existed. (ESV)
• And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. (KJV)
• ‘And now, glorify me, Thou Father, with Thyself, with the glory that I had before the world was, with Thee;

There is nothing about Jesus having been alive and living in glory before the world was ... There us nothing about Jesus having been living and present "at God's side" ....

Actually, quite a few verses point out that Jesus was given the exalted glorious position at God's right side only AFTER he had suffered, been crucified, been raised from the dead and been received up into the presence of God.

Truth is very simple and plain and many times - as also in this case - does not need any display of fancy Greek study ... careful reading what the text does say and observing context and overall scope of scripture reveals the true meaning of the text.

[Deleted User]

To me, יהוה (yhwh) and אֱלֹהִים (ʾělō·hîm) describe the same Holy Living Most High God. Grammatical spelling of יהוה and contextual usage at times match while at other times are different: (reads to me as One plural unique God)

Thus says יהוה Yahweh, the king of Israel, and its redeemer, יהוה Yahweh of hosts: “I am the first, and I am the last, and there is no אלהים god besides me. (Isaiah 44:6 LEB with two Hebrew lemmas) has two subjects for "I am ..." (unique יהוה unity) 

“For thus says יהוה Yahweh: ‘We have heard a sound of trembling, terror, and there is no peace. (Jeremiah 30:5 LEB)

Truth does NOT depend on what something means to you, or to me or anyone else.

Truth is what a text meant to the author / writer ... not what reader makes of it. If a readers opinion is in contradiction to what the content of a text in its context and scope declares, the reader's opinion is worthless in regards to learning and knowing the truth of a text.

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus August 20 And now, Father, you glorify me [at your side] * with the glory that I had [at your side] ** before the world existed. (John 17:5 LEB)

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus August 20 * Literally “by the side of yourself” παρὰ σεαυτῷ

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus August 20 ** Literally “by the side of you” τοῦ => παρὰ σοί

@Wolfgang August 20 * “Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was. (NASB)

@Wolfgang August 20 * And now, Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was (ASV)

@Wolfgang August 20 * And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you cbefore the world existed. (ESV)

@Wolfgang August 20 * And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. (KJV)

@Wolfgang August 20 * ‘And now, glorify me, Thou Father, with Thyself, with the glory that I had before the world was, with Thee;

@Wolfgang August 20 There is nothing about Jesus having been alive and living in glory before the world was ... There us nothing about Jesus having been living and present "at God's side" ....

Your idea "There is nothing about Jesus having been alive and living in glory before the world was" reads to me as a tautalogy of your faith belief that One God only has One Voice (One Person) => believes idea of Jesus could only have been part of One God's plan before the world existed => your faith believes the text cannot mean what Jesus prayed (your interpretation does NOT want to believe Jesus existed with The Father before the world existed => "There is nothing ..." simply lacks scriptural textual basis).

Is Jesus a liar (deceiver), lunatic (deluded), OR truly יהוה Lord (Holy One Redeemer, who can deliver humans from sin) ?

@Wolfgang August 20 Actually, quite a few verses point out that Jesus was given the exalted glorious position at God's right side only AFTER he had suffered, been crucified, been raised from the dead and been received up into the presence of God.

Think this in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, existing in the form of God, did not consider being equal with God something to be grasped, but emptied himself by taking the form of a slave, by becoming in the likeness of people. And being found in appearance like a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, that is, death on a cross. Therefore also God exalted him and graciously granted him the name above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven and of those on earth and of those under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:5-11 LEB)

@Wolfgang August 19 Rest of your post continues with more of the same ... not worth my time to point out those details, as that would be - as has been in the past - a waste of time since at this point in time you seemingly simply can't see (realize) what the Biblical text actually says nor what you are actually doing to the text. 😪

To me reads as an excuse for evading rest of my post, which included points about Jesus truly being unique: Jesus is different than all other prophets as Jesus knew what Old Testament prophecies applied to Jesus as described on the road to Emmaus in Luke 24:13-35 and Jesus is unique from other prophets in physical resurrection of human body from the dead. No other prophet (messenger of God) has raised their own human body from death unto life (followed by ascension return to being right hand ruler on God's throne)

@Wolfgang August 20 Truth is very simple and plain and many times - as also in this case - does not need any display of fancy Greek study ... careful reading what the text does say and observing context and overall scope of scripture reveals the true meaning of the text.

Personal faith belief about nature of God interprets (filters) what scripture text says. If faith belief about nature of God is truly correct, then we agree "observing context and overall scope of scripture reveals the true meaning of the text". Contrast is if faith belief about nature of God is incorrect, we also agree about "seemingly simply can't see (realize) what the Biblical text actually says nor what you are actually doing to the text. 😪" (e.g. your idea "There is nothing about Jesus having been alive and living in glory before the world was" implies & infers Jesus lied when requesting The Father to glorify Jesus with God's Glory that Jesus had with The Father before the world existed). Each person chooses what to believe & Love ❤️ the most. Holy God truly judges human words & actions resulting from personal belief. Loving Holy God first with all of my heart, my mind, my soul, & my strength results in my ongoing communion with Holy God (enables Holy Righteous Love of God to Love me as God Loves me so can Love my neighbor as myself). Thankful Holy God specifically convicted me about my sins with Holy God & myself forgiving me (not forgiving myself would have me loving myself more than Holy God: simplier to trust words of Holy God, which also includes Holy God forgiving me as I forgive others).

Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another with all wisdom, with psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, singing with thankfulness in your hearts to God, and everything whatever you do in word or in deed, giving thanks for all things in the name of the יהוה Lord Jesus to God the Father through him. (Colossians 3:16-17 LEB) has powerfully different meaning based on personal faith belief: to me, "the word of Christ" is truthfully the word of יהוה so dwelling in me is יהוה Holy Righteous Love ❤️ (now want to Be Holy as God is Holy, am a work in progress that includes daily discussions with Holy God: journaling is helpful for sorting out Thanks & thoughts with Holy God)

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus August 20 To me, יהוה (yhwh) and אֱלֹהִים (ʾělō·hîm) describe the same Holy Living Most High God. Grammatical spelling of יהוה and contextual usage at times match while at other times are different: (reads to me as One plural unique God)

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus August 20 Thus says יהוה Yahweh, the king of Israel, and its redeemer, יהוה Yahweh of hosts: “I am the first, and I am the last, and there is no אלהים god besides me. (Isaiah 44:6 LEB with two Hebrew lemmas) has two subjects for "I am ..." (unique יהוה unity) 

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus August 20 “For thus says יהוה Yahweh: ‘We have heard a sound of trembling, terror, and there is no peace. (Jeremiah 30:5 LEB)

@Wolfgang August 20 Truth does NOT depend on what something means to you, or to me or anyone else.

@Wolfgang August 20 Truth is what a text meant to the author / writer ... not what reader makes of it. If a readers opinion is in contradiction to what the content of a text in its context and scope declares, the reader's opinion is worthless in regards to learning and knowing the truth of a text.

For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ. (John 1:17 LEB)

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (John 14:6 LEB)

Then Pilate entered again into the governor’s residence and summoned Jesus and said to him, “Are you the king of the Jews?” Jesus replied, “Do you say this from yourself, or have others said this to you about me?” Pilate replied, “I am not a Jew, am I? Your people and the chief priests handed you over to me! What have you done?” Jesus replied, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews. But now my kingdom is not from here.” Then Pilate said to him, “So then you are a king!” Jesus replied, “You say that I am a king. For this reason I was born, and for this reason I have come into the world: in order that I can testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears my voice.” Pilate said to him, “What is truth?” And when he had said this, he went out again to the Jews and said to them, “I find no basis for an accusation against him. (John 18:33-38 LEB)

But you did not learn Christ in this way, if indeed you have heard about him, and you were taught by him (just as truth is in Jesus), that you take off, according to your former way of life, the old man, who is being destroyed according to deceitful desires, be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new man (in accordance with God), who is created in righteousness and holiness from the truth. (Ephesians 4:20-24 LEB)

Keep Smiling 😊

[Deleted User]

Is Jesus a liar (deceiver), lunatic (deluded), OR truly יהוה Lord (Holy One Redeemer, who can deliver humans from sin) ?

Neither Jesus a liar (deceiver), nor Jesus a lunatic (deluded), nor Jesus יהוה Lord (God) can deliver from sin!!

The "second Adam", the MAN Jesus, the righteous one, who remained obedient to his Father -- the יהוה Lord God -- (contrary to what the "first Adam" had done ) through the sacrifice of his life can deliver humans from sin . (cp. Rom 5:12ff - comparison of the man Adam and his doing with the man Jesus and his doings)

[Deleted User]

Personal faith belief about nature of God interprets (filters) what scripture text says. If faith belief about nature of God is truly correct, then we agree "observing context and overall scope of scripture reveals the true meaning of the text". Contrast is if faith belief about nature of God is incorrect, we also agree about "seemingly simply can't see (realize) what the Biblical text actually says nor what you are actually doing to the text.

Should not belief about God and about nature of God be learned and ascertained from Scripture via observing what context and overall scope of Scripture reveals ??

YOU seem to have this most basic principle for ascertaining truth BACKWARDS .... as you make your faith belief about the nature of God the measure by which you look at Scripture !! Finally, you admit it ... while evading it for a long time (such as when Bill C. tried to point it out when he emphasized over and over that your arguments were not based on what the text actually has).

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Is Jesus a liar (deceiver), lunatic (deluded), OR truly יהוה Lord (Holy One Redeemer, who can deliver humans from sin) ?

@Wolfgang August 24 Neither Jesus a liar (deceiver), nor Jesus a lunatic (deluded), nor Jesus יהוה Lord (God) can deliver from sin!!

@Wolfgang August 24 The "second Adam", the MAN Jesus, the righteous one, who remained obedient to his Father -- the יהוה Lord God -- (contrary to what the "first Adam" had done ) through the sacrifice of his life can deliver humans from sin . (cp. Rom 5:12ff - comparison of the man Adam and his doing with the man Jesus and his doings)

To me, phrase "the MAN Jesus" emphasizes your faith belief idea that Jesus cannot be God, which disagrees with Scripture synopsis about Jesus:

Jesus is truly unique: human biological father is Holy אלהים God so human birth of Jesus is described => “Behold, the virgin will become pregnant and will give birth to a son, and they will call his name Emmanuel,” which is translated, “אלהים God with us.” (Matthew 1:23 LEB) that was preceeded by Holy אלהים God's message to Mary => Now in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent from אלהים God to a town of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin legally promised in marriage to a man named Joseph of the house of David. And the name of the virgin was Mary. And he came to her and said, “Greetings, favored one! The יהוה Lord is with you.” But she was greatly perplexed at the statement, and was pondering what sort of greeting this might be. And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with אלהים God. And behold, you will conceive in the womb and will give birth to a son, and you will call his name Jesus. This one will be great, and he will be called the Son of the Most High, and the יהוה Lord אלהים God will give him the throne of his father David. And he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end. (Luke 1:26-33 LEB) so Mary knew Holy son in her womb is Holy אלהים God's Messiah, The Christ.

At age 12, Jesus knew his human father is Holy אלהים God (yet choose to go with Joseph, adoptive father, & Mary, human mother, to Nazareth) => And his parents went every year to Jerusalem for the feast of the Passover. And when he was twelve years old, they went up according to the custom of the feast. And after the days were completed, while they were returning, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem. And his parents did not know it, but believing him to be in the group of travelers, they went a day’s journey. And they began searching for him among their relatives and their acquaintances, and when they did not find him, they returned to Jerusalem to search for him. And it happened that after three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting in the midst of the teachers and listening to them and asking them questions. And all who heard him were amazed at his insight and his answers. And when they saw him, they were astounded and his mother said to him, “Child, why have you done this to us? Look, your father and I have been searching for you anxiously!” And he said to them, “Why were you searching for me? Did you not know that it was necessary for me to be in the house of my Father?” And they did not understand the statement that he spoke to them. And he went down with them and came to Nazareth, and was submitting to them. And his mother treasured all these things in her heart. And Jesus was advancing in wisdom and stature and in favor with אלהים God and with people. (Luke 2:41-52 LEB) that has me wondering about אלהים God The Father involvement in the human growth & development of Holy King Jesus (very unique & special human childhood).

Jewish hearers of Jesus recognized אלהים God's authority in The Words of Jesus => And it happened when Jesus finished these words the crowds were amazed at his teaching, because he was teaching them like one who had authority, and not like their scribes. (Matthew 7:28-29 LEB)

Relative to human life is יהוה Lord Jesus knowing who He was/is/will be Bread of Life (after miraculously feeding 5,000 men plus their families) => On the next day, the crowd that was on the other side of the sea saw that other boats were not there (except one), and that Jesus had not entered with his disciples into the boat, but his disciples had departed alone. Other boats from Tiberias came near the place where they had eaten the bread after the יהוה Lord had given thanks. So when the crowd saw that Jesus was not there, nor his disciples, they themselves got into the boats and came to Capernaum seeking Jesus. And when they found him on the other side of the sea, they said to him, “Rabbi, when did you get here?” Jesus replied to them and said, “Truly, truly I say to you, you seek me not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were satisfied! Do not work for the food that perishes, but the food that remains to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For אלהים God the Father has set his seal on this one.” So they said to him, “What shall we do that we can accomplish the works of אלהים God?” Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of אלהים God: that you believe in the one whom that one sent.” So they said to him, “Then what sign will you perform, so that we can see it and believe you? What will you do? Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, just as it is written, ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’ Then Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly I say to you, Moses did not give you bread from heaven, but my Father is giving you the true bread from heaven! For the bread of אלהים God is the one who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” So they said to him, “Sir, always give us this bread!” Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life. The one who comes to me will never be hungry, and the one who believes in me will never be thirsty again. But I said to you that you have seen me and do not believe. Everyone whom the Father gives to me will come to me, and the one who comes to me I will never throw out, because I have come down from heaven not that I should do my will, but the will of the one who sent me. Now this is the will of the one who sent me: that everyone whom he has given me, I would not lose any of them, but raise them up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks at the Son and believes in him would have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” Now the Jews began to grumble about him because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven,” and they were saying, “Is this one not Jesus the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” Jesus answered and said to them, “Do not grumble among yourselves! No one is able to come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up on the last day. It is written in the prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by אלהים God.’ Everyone who hears from the Father and learns comes to me. (Not that anyone has seen the Father except the one who is from אלהים God—this one has seen the Father.) Truly, truly I say to you, the one who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness and they died. This is the bread that comes down from heaven so that someone may eat from it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats from this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” So the Jews began to quarrel among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” Then Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life in yourselves! The one who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. The one who eats my flesh and drinks my blood resides in me and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so also the one who eats me—that one will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven, not as the fathers ate and died. The one who eats this bread will live forever.” (John 6:22-38 LEB)

יהוה Lord Jesus knew His spiritual existence predated Abraham with Jesus knowing He was not from this world (from אלהים God in Heaven) & correctly predicted manner of death => So he said to them again, “I am going away, and you will seek me and will die in your sin. Where I am going you cannot come!” Then the Jews began to say, “Perhaps he will kill himself, because he is saying, ‘Where I am going you cannot come.’ ” And he said to them, “You are from below; I am from above. You are from this world; I am not from this world. Thus I said to you that you will die in your sins. For if you do not believe that I am he, you will die in your sins.” So they began to say to him, “Who are you?” Jesus said to them, “What I have been saying to you from the beginning. I have many things to say and to judge concerning you, but the one who sent me is true, and the things which I heard from him, these things I say to the world.” (They did not know that he was speaking to them about the Father.) Then Jesus said, “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will recognize that I am he, and I do nothing from myself, but just as the Father taught me, I say these things. And the one who sent me is with me. He has not left me alone, because I always do the things that are pleasing to him.” While he was saying these things, many believed in him. Then Jesus said to those Jews who had believed him, “If you continue in my word you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” They replied to him, “We are descendants of Abraham and have not been enslaved to anyone at any time. How do you say, ‘You will become free’?” Jesus replied to them, “Truly, truly I say to you, that everyone who commits sin is a slave of sin. And the slave does not remain in the household forever; the son remains forever. So if the son sets you free, you will be truly free. I know that you are descendants of Abraham. But you are seeking to kill me, because my word makes no progress among you. I speak the things that I have seen with the Father; so also you do the things that you have heard from the Father.” They answered and said to him, “Abraham is our father!” Jesus said to them, “If you are children of Abraham, do the deeds of Abraham! But now you are seeking to kill me, a man who spoke to you the truth which I heard from אלהים God. This Abraham did not do. You are doing the deeds of your father!” They said to him, “We were not born from sexual immorality! We have one father, אלהים God!” Jesus said to them, “If אלהים God were your father, you would love me, for I have come forth from אלהים God and have come. For I have not come from myself, but that one sent me. Why do you not understand my way of speaking? Because you are not able to listen to my message. You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father! That one was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand firm in the truth, because truth is not in him. Whenever he speaks the lie, he speaks from his own nature, because he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I am telling the truth, you do not believe me. Who among you convicts me concerning sin? If I am telling the truth, why do you not believe me? The one who is from אלהים God listens to the words of אלהים God. Because of this you do not listen—because you are not of אלהים God.” The Jews answered and said to him, “Do we not correctly say that you are a Samaritan and have a demon?” Jesus replied, “I do not have a demon, but I honor my Father, and you dishonor me! But I do not seek my own glory. There is one who seeks and judges! Truly, truly I say to you, if anyone keeps my word, he will never experience death forever.” The Jews said to him, “Now we know that you have a demon! Abraham and the prophets died, and you say, ‘If anyone keeps my word, he will never taste death forever.’ You are not greater than our father Abraham who died, are you? And the prophets died! Who do you make yourself to be?” Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. The one who glorifies me is my Father, about whom you say, ‘He is our אלהים God.’ And you have not known him, but I know him. And if I were to say that I do not know him, I would be a liar like you! But I know him and I keep his word. Abraham your father rejoiced that he would see my day, and he saw it and was glad.” So the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?” Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly I say to you, before Abraham was, I am!” Then they picked up stones in order to throw them at him. But Jesus was hidden and went out of the temple courts. (John 8:21-59 LEB)

Thankful for the Son of אלהים God, יהוה Lord Jesus setting me free from my sins against אלהים God for Holy cleansing 😍

יהוה Lord's Supper reminds about Holy אלהים God's desire to forgive sin => Now while they were eating Jesus took bread and, after giving thanks, he broke it, and giving it to the disciples, he said, “Take, eat, this is my body.” And after taking the cup and giving thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. (Matthew 26:26-28 LEB)

King Jesus truthfully knew why here => Then Pilate entered again into the governor’s residence and summoned Jesus and said to him, “Are you the king of the Jews?” Jesus replied, “Do you say this from yourself, or have others said this to you about me?” Pilate replied, “I am not a Jew, am I? Your people and the chief priests handed you over to me! What have you done?” Jesus replied, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews. But now my kingdom is not from here.” Then Pilate said to him, “So then you are a king!” Jesus replied, “You say that I am a king. For this reason I was born, and for this reason I have come into the world: in order that I can testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears my voice.” Pilate said to him, “What is truth?” And when he had said this, he went out again to the Jews and said to them, “I find no basis for an accusation against him. (John 18:33-38 LEB)

Also Jesus is unique from other human prophets in physical resurrection of his own human body from the dead => Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me, even if he dies, will live, and everyone who lives and believes in me will never die forever. Do you believe this?” (John 11:25-26 LEB) is truthfully consistent with "You believe in God; believe also in me." in John 14:1 (literal translation is: "Be Ye Believing in/to The God and/also in/to Me Be Ye Believing"). One Holy יהוה God = יהוה Father & יהוה Jesus & יהוה Breath The Holy (three distinct voices in One plural אלהים God, who is alone to be worshipped).

Jesus is different than all other human prophets (messengers for אלהים God) as יהוה Jesus knew what Old Testament prophecies applied to יהוה Jesus as described on the road to Emmaus => And behold, on that same day, two of them were traveling to a village named Emmaus that was sixty stadia distant from Jerusalem, and they were conversing with one another about all these things that had happened. And it happened that while they were conversing, and discussing, Jesus himself also approached and began to go along with them, but their eyes were prevented from recognizing him. And he said to them, “What are these matters that you are discussing with one another as you are walking along?” And they stood still, looking sad. And one of them, named Cleopas, answered and said to him, “Are you the only one living near Jerusalem and not knowing the things that have happened in it in these days?” And he said to them, “What things?” So they said to him, “The things concerning Jesus the Nazarene, a man who was a prophet, powerful in deed and word before אלהים God and all the people, and how our chief priests and rulers handed him over to a sentence of death, and crucified him. But we were hoping that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. But in addition to all these things, this is the third day since these things took place. But also some women from among us astonished us, who were at the tomb early in the morning, and when they did not find his body, they came back saying they had seen even a vision of angels, who said that he was alive! And some of those with us went out to the tomb and found it like this, just as the women had also said, but him they did not see.” And he said to them, “O foolish and slow in heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ suffer these things and enter into his glory?” And beginning from Moses and from all the prophets, he interpreted to them the things concerning himself in all the scriptures. And they drew near to the village where they were going, and he acted as though he was going farther. And they urged him strongly, saying, “Stay with us, because it is getting toward evening, and by this time the day is far spent.” And he went in to stay with them. And it happened that when he reclined at the table with them, he took the bread and gave thanks, and after breaking it, he gave it to them. And their eyes were opened, and they recognized him, and he became invisible to them. And they said to one another, “Were not our hearts burning within us while he was speaking with us on the road, while he was explaining the scriptures to us?” And they got up that same hour and returned to Jerusalem and found the eleven and those with them assembled, saying, “The יהוה Lord has really been raised, and has appeared to Simon!” And they began describing what happened on the road, and how he was recognized by them in the breaking of the bread. (Luke 24:13-35 LEB)

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus August 23 Personal faith belief about nature of God interprets (filters) what scripture text says. If faith belief about nature of God is truly correct, then we agree "observing context and overall scope of scripture reveals the true meaning of the text". Contrast is if faith belief about nature of God is incorrect, we also agree about "seemingly simply can't see (realize) what the Biblical text actually says nor what you are actually doing to the text.

@Wolfgang August 24 Should not belief about God and about nature of God be learned and ascertained from Scripture via observing what context and overall scope of Scripture reveals ??

And one of the scribes came up and heard them debating. When he saw that he answered them well, he asked him, “Which commandment is the most important of all?” Jesus answered, “The most important is, ‘Listen, Israel! The יהוה Lord our אלהים God, the יהוה Lord is one. And you shall love the יהוה Lord your אלהים God from your whole heart and from your whole soul and from your whole mind and from your whole strength.’ The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” And the scribe said to him, “That is true, Teacher. You have said correctly that he is one and there is no other except him. And to love him from your whole heart and from your whole understanding and from your whole strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself, is much more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.” And Jesus, when he saw that he had answered thoughtfully, said to him, “You are not far from the kingdom of אלהים God.” And no one dared to put a question to him any longer. (Mark 12:28-34 LEB)

“A new commandment I give to you: that you love one another—just as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples—if you have love for one another.” (John 13:34-35 LEB)

Teach me, O יהוה Yahweh, the way of your statutes, and I will keep it to the end. Give me understanding, that I may keep your law and heed it with my whole heart. Cause me to walk in the path of your commands, for I delight in it. Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to dishonest gain. Turn away my eyes from looking at what is worthless; revive me in your ways. Fulfill your word to your servant, which is to bring about a reverence for you. Turn away my disgrace that I dread, for your ordinances are good. Look, I have longed for your precepts; revive me in your righteousness. (Psalm 119:33-40 LEB)

@Wolfgang August 24 YOU seem to have this most basic principle for ascertaining truth BACKWARDS .... as you make your faith belief about the nature of God the measure by which you look at Scripture !! 

Considering numerous Scripture quoted in my replies, am surprised by your backward assertion idea, which reminds me of Matthew 7:3-5 repetition as your assertion about me seems to be "the beam of wood in your own eyes" (nature of God interpretative filter, which IIRC from earlier CD replies is NOT based on Scripture, but your personal encounter with a spirit so you believe Holy אלהים God only has one voice).

Keep Smiling 😊

[Deleted User]

To me, phrase "the MAN Jesus" emphasizes your faith belief idea that Jesus cannot be God, which disagrees with Scripture synopsis about Jesus:

The phrase doesn't disagree with anything but YOUR fabricated "to me" faith belief synopsis. I'd suggest it would be a good idea to go by the TEXT of scripture rather than "to me".

Considering numerous Scripture quoted in my replies, am surprised by your backward assertion idea, which reminds me of Matthew 7:3-5 repetition as your assertion about me seems to be "the beam of wood in your own eyes" (nature of God interpretative filter, which IIRC from earlier CD replies is NOT based on Scripture, but your personal encounter with a spirit so you believe Holy אלהים God only has one voice).

You consider and confuse theological dogma with Scripture text ... what you quote is what you think has to do with textual support for your dogmas ... but it doesn't and sometimes actually refutes your ideas (but you apparently can't see it). Long quotes and many quotes don't guarantee truth.

YOU are doing exactly what you claim others are doing.

Keep doing it and keep 😀 ... or else decide to change to what bible text actually says and teaches.

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus August 25 To me, phrase "the MAN Jesus" emphasizes your faith belief idea that Jesus cannot be God, which disagrees with Scripture synopsis about Jesus:

@Wolfgang August 26 The phrase doesn't disagree with anything but YOUR fabricated "to me" faith belief synopsis. I'd suggest it would be a good idea to go by the TEXT of scripture rather than "to me".

The TEXT of scripture simply says In beginning was being The Word, also The Word was being with The אלהים God, also אלהים God was being The Word ... The Word flesh became and took up residence amoung us => the MAN Jesus had The Word of אלהים God spiritually inside male human body so יהוה Lord Jesus outward appearence is human (truly understands all our sins & hurts) with inward quality אלהים God => Jesus is unique, Holy Redeemer for אלהים God. Prologue in John 1:1-18 is literally true where plan of אלהים God had The Word portion of אלהים God leave heaven to dwell in a Holy human body, which is consistent with Philippians 2:5-11 where Paul understood preexistent אלהים God form of יהוה Lord Jesus.

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus August 25 Considering numerous Scripture quoted in my replies, am surprised by your backward assertion idea, which reminds me of Matthew 7:3-5 repetition as your assertion about me seems to be "the beam of wood in your own eyes" (nature of God interpretative filter, which IIRC from earlier CD replies is NOT based on Scripture, but your personal encounter with a spirit so you believe Holy אלהים God only has one voice).

@Wolfgang August 26 You consider and confuse theological dogma with Scripture text ... what you quote is what you think has to do with textual support for your dogmas ... but it doesn't and sometimes actually refutes your ideas (but you apparently can't see it). Long quotes and many quotes don't guarantee truth.

Faith comes by hearing and hearing (reading) by The Word. Praying for Breath The Holy to open eyes & hearts to appreciate Holy אלהים God inspiration. My Bible Study learning includes knowing context, reason for long quotes (without artificial numbering).

@Wolfgang August 26 YOU are doing exactly what you claim others are doing.

Curious what you see me doing that am claiming others are doing ? (human hearts, including my own, are incredibly deceitful & stubborn)

@Wolfgang August 26 Keep doing it and keep 😀 ... or else decide to change to what bible text actually says and teaches.

To me, "or else" is non-sensical. Thankful for my faith belief in Holy יהוה Lord אלהים God that appreciates Holy אלהים God inspiration: am learning Scripture text tends to be literally True (so my study approach seeks first literal meaning & application before considering symbolic). Humanly am challenged to do what literally understand: e.g. Be Holy as אלהים God is Holy. Keep Smiling 4 Jesus 😍is my variation of Philippians 4:4 Rejoicing

Each person simply chooses what to Love Most: e.g. Holy אלהים God (includes Holy Scripture Truth) OR lying demonic spirit(s) OR themself. Every human believer in their journey with יהוה Lord אלהים God experiences tempting thoughts (our choice what to do with those thoughts). Holy אלהים God allows every human to be tempted while always providing a way of escape => For I do not want you to be ignorant, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all went through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ. But אלהים God was not pleased with the majority of them, for they were struck down in the desert. Now these things happened as examples for us, so that we should not be desirers of evil things, just as those also desired them, and not become idolaters, as some of them did, just as it is written, “The people sat down to eat and drink, and stood up to play,” nor commit sexual immorality, as some of them committed sexual immorality, and twenty-three thousand fell in one day, nor put Christ to the test, as some of them tested him, and were destroyed by snakes, nor grumble, just as some of them grumbled, and were destroyed by the destroyer. Now these things happened to those people as an example, but are written for our instruction, on whom the ends of the ages have come. Therefore, the one who thinks that he stands must watch out lest he fall. Temptation has not come upon you except what is common to humanity. But אלהים God is faithful, who will not permit you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but will also make a way out together with the temptation, so that you may be able to endure it. (1 Corinthians 10:1-13 LEB)

My human choices have sadly repeated "the one who thinks that he stands must watch out lest he fall" too many times so simply appreciate my ongoing need to hear & obey Holy יהוה Lord אלהים God ALWAYS => am a work in progress toward goal: Be Holy as אלהים God is Holy (includes Righteous Love ❤️). Simply being Holy as אלהים God is Holy fulfills the greatest commandments as taught by יהוה Lord Jesus.

Jewish religious leaders memorized every letter/word of Torah along with Jewish laws & traditions, but somewhere in their scripture studies lost Loving Holy אלהים God the Most so they appeared righteous outwardly, but inwardly were choosing to sin against Holy אלהים God. Thankful for Holy יהוה Lord אלהים God ALWAYS Loving ❤️ every creature (similar to gravity ALWAYS attracting physical objects). Thankful for human words being unable to express how much Holy יהוה Lord אלהים God ALWAYS Loves ❤️ 

Keep Smiling 😊

[Deleted User]

The TEXT of scripture simply says In beginning was being The Word, also The Word was being with The אלהים God, also אלהים God was being The Word ... The Word flesh became and took up residence amoung us => the MAN Jesus had The Word of אלהים God spiritually inside male human body so יהוה Lord Jesus outward appearence is human (truly understands all our sins & hurts) with inward quality אלהים God => Jesus is unique, Holy Redeemer for אלהים God. Prologue in John 1:1-18 is literally true where plan of אלהים God had The Word portion of אלהים God leave heaven to dwell in a Holy human body, which is consistent with Philippians 2:5-11 where Paul understood preexistent אלהים God form of יהוה Lord Jesus.

another example of your faith belief dogma interpretation .. a little "fancied up" with "Greek-English mixture" (cp. "was being The Word" etc.) to impress perhaps ? ... 😪

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus August 26 The TEXT of scripture simply says In beginning was being The Word, also The Word was being with The אלהים God, also אלהים God was being The Word ... The Word flesh became and took up residence amoung us => the MAN Jesus had The Word of אלהים God spiritually inside male human body so יהוה Lord Jesus outward appearence is human (truly understands all our sins & hurts) with inward quality אלהים God => Jesus is unique, Holy Redeemer for אלהים God. Prologue in John 1:1-18 is literally true where plan of אלהים God had The Word portion of אלהים God leave heaven to dwell in a Holy human body, which is consistent with Philippians 2:5-11 where Paul understood preexistent אלהים God form of יהוה Lord Jesus.

@Wolfgang August 26 another example of your faith belief dogma interpretation .. a little "fancied up" with "Greek-English mixture" (cp. "was being The Word" etc.) to impress perhaps ? ... 😪

In a SCRIPTURE based discussion, notable lacking is your scripture text basis for your faith belief dogma that One God only has one voice.

Curious about your English translation of: Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. ... Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν, (John 1:1 ... John 1:14a SBLGNT)

My literal translation "In beginning was being The Word, also The Word was being with The אלהים God, also אלהים God was being The Word ... The Word flesh became and took up residence amoung us" included אלהים from typical Jewish translation of אלהים => θεὸς in Septuagint (couple centuries before the Son of אלהים God was born on earth). Also my literal translation included Greek definite articles (bit different usage than English). If my literal translation from Koine Greek to English is flawed, please help me understand what is flawed (noticed my oops for leaving out And or Also after ... for connecting thoughts).

Keep Smiling 😊

[Deleted User]

please help me understand what is flawed

You think you will understand what the forest is about by looking and scrutinizing the bark and the leaves of a tree ... in other words, you try and understand the whole from a part and interpret an oak tree on the basis of a maple tree or fir tree etc.

True understanding will be gained by doing exactly the opposite ... having a correct view of the forest overall (scope), one can then on such basis correctly understand what different types of trees or a single kind of tree are part of the whole etc.

Individual words do not provide their meaning by themselves, rather it is the sentence and context in which they are used (the larger unit) which provides the meaning of a word (the smaller unit). Same principle for a true understanding of the text (btw, not just Bible text, but any text in any language) applies on next level, like single sentence and context of a speech or narrative of which the sentence is a part, etc.

I wonder if this will help ....

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus August 26  please help me understand what is flawed

@Wolfgang August 27 You think you will understand what the forest is about by looking and scrutinizing the bark and the leaves of a tree ... in other words, you try and understand the whole from a part and interpret an oak tree on the basis of a maple tree or fir tree etc.

Holy God truth is consistent from heavenly canopy over forest, in groves of trees, in individual trees, as well as the bark and leaves => And the one called to the other and said, “Holy, holy, holy is Yahweh of hosts! The whole earth is full of his glory.” (Isaiah 6:3 LEB)

@Wolfgang August 27 True understanding will be gained by doing exactly the opposite ... having a correct view of the forest overall (scope), one can then on such basis correctly understand what different types of trees or a single kind of tree are part of the whole etc.

Reminds me of your faith belief about One God being limited to one voice so you interpret scripture text according to your faith belief (so you simply do not believe scripture text ideas about One plural unique God that does not align with your faith belief about One God).

@Wolfgang August 27 Individual words do not provide their meaning by themselves, rather it is the sentence and context in which they are used (the larger unit) which provides the meaning of a word (the smaller unit). Same principle for a true understanding of the text (btw, not just Bible text, but any text in any language) applies on next level, like single sentence and context of a speech or narrative of which the sentence is a part, etc.

We agree about contextual meaning. Thankful for Fee & Stuart writing "How to read the Bible for all its worth" to use appropriate context for genre: e.g. poetry has different context than historical narrative.

Keep Smiling 😊

[Deleted User]

Holy God truth is consistent from heavenly canopy over forest, in groves of trees, in individual trees, as well as the bark and leaves => And the one called to the other and said, “Holy, holy, holy is Yahweh of hosts! The whole earth is full of his glory.” (Isaiah 6:3 LEB)

As I thought ... wasted my time and effort because you completely missed the point.

Reminds me of your faith belief about One God being limited to one voice so you interpret scripture text according to your faith belief (so you simply do not believe scripture text ideas about One plural unique God that does not align with your faith belief about One God).

And more of the same ... oblivious to what actually I had written

We agree about contextual meaning. Thankful for Fee & Stuart writing "How to read the Bible for all its worth" to use appropriate context for genre: e.g. poetry has different context than historical narrative.

And even here you have it backwards ... content determines what genre a text might have ... but one should not fix a genre on a text and then interpret content accordingly

Now, I admit that I am perhaps unable to correctly and clearly express myself in English (which is not my mother tongue), thus the reason for you totally missing what I tried to write may be my incompetence of communicating accurately.

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Wolfgang August 27 You think you will understand what the forest is about by looking and scrutinizing the bark and the leaves of a tree ... in other words, you try and understand the whole from a part and interpret an oak tree on the basis of a maple tree or fir tree etc.

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus August 27 Holy God truth is consistent from heavenly canopy over forest, in groves of trees, in individual trees, as well as the bark and leaves => And the one called to the other and said, “Holy, holy, holy is Yahweh of hosts! The whole earth is full of his glory.” (Isaiah 6:3 LEB)

@Wolfgang August 27 As I thought ... wasted my time and effort because you completely missed the point.

Notably lacking from your replies in a SCRIPTURE based discussion about the nature of One God is Scripture to discuss. Isaiah 6:3 declares the whole earth is full of Holy God's Glory (from blue marble view of earth in outer space to the details of tree bark and leaves, along with providing for birds of the air & lilies of the field => Matthew 6:25-34 also includes Holy God intensely loving every human). Holy Truth is simply consistent. Thankful for Ephesians 3:14-21 prayer encouraging search in every direction/dimension for God's Love: King of the Universe with minute details.

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus August 27 Reminds me of your faith belief about One God being limited to one voice so you interpret scripture text according to your faith belief (so you simply do not believe scripture text ideas about One plural unique God that does not align with your faith belief about One God).

@Wolfgang August 27 And more of the same ... oblivious to what actually I had written

FWIW: your assertion about my Scripture approach "You think you will understand what the forest is about by looking and scrutinizing the bark and the leaves of a tree ... in other words, you try and understand the whole from a part and interpret an oak tree on the basis of a maple tree or fir tree etc." is incomplete (as my approach to Loving, Admiring, & Worshipping One plural unique God seeks whole Holy truth: big view with little details). Scripture tends to be literally True in amazing details: e.g .in John 6:35 יהוה Jesus identified Himself => "I AM the bread of life.", who had been born in Beit-Lechem (House of Bread - Matthew 2 & Luke 2) along with temptation reply by Jesus that quoted Deuteronomy 8:3 => And he humbled you and let you go hungry, and then he fed you with that which you did not know nor did your ancestors know, in order to make you know that not by bread alone but by all that goes out of the mouth of יהוה Yahweh humankind shall live. (more context came to mind of original Jewish audiences since Torah scrolls do not have artificial chapter & verse numbering). Matthew 6:9-13 prayer includes "Give us today our daily bread"

@Wolfgang August 27 Now, I admit that I am perhaps unable to correctly and clearly express myself in English (which is not my mother tongue), thus the reason for you totally missing what I tried to write may be my incompetence of communicating accurately.

More to the point in a SCRIPTURE based discussion about nature of One God is our faith beliefs being substantially different. Thus far, no CD poster has provided me a single good reason to change my faith belief ideas about One plural unique God (1 Thessalonians 5:12-25). Thankful for discussions, which has caused me to pray, study, search, & ponder. FWIW: @Bill_Coley had many thought provoking Scripture comments (seems study results over emphasied "The MAN Jesus" that missed main points of Breath The Holy messages spoken thru Jewish fisherman Peter in Acts).

Curious about your thoughts of words from Arius describing Jesus: "ἦν ποτε ὄτε οὐκ ἦν" ? "he was being once when not he was being"

Ambrose of Milan (333-397 AD) wrote Exposition of the Christian Faith in 379, which has paragraph numbering added: 56 & 57 plus footnotes (*)

56. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God.” (7) “Was,” mark you, “with God.” “Was”—see, we have “was” four times over. Where did the blasphemer find it written that He “was not.” Again, John, in another passage—in his Epistle—speaketh of “That which was in the beginning.” (8) The extension of the “was” is infinite. Conceive any length of time you will, yet still the Son “was.” (9)

(7) S. John 1:1 f. St. Ambrose notices especially the quadruple “was” as unmistakably signifying the Son’s eternity. We may also notice the climax “The Word was in the beginning.… was with God.… was God.”

(8) 1 John 1:1

(9) Hurter cites similar passages from the Fathers of the Church, proving the Son’s pre-existence and eternity. “What is the force of those words ‘In the beginning’? Centuries are o’erleaped, ages are swallowed up. Take any beginning you will, yet you cannot include it in time, for that, whence time is reckoned, already was.”—Hilary.

“Although the word ‘was’ contains the notion of time past, frequently with a beginning, here it must be understood without the thought of a beginning, inasmuch as the text runs ‘was in the beginning.’ ”—Victorinus.

If we render the Greek ἐν ἀρχῆ and the Latin in principio by “at the beginning,” in place of the phrase used in the A. V. “in the beginning,” we shall perhaps better apprehend its full force and understand these Patristic interpretations.

Other passages cited by Hurter are:

“Thought cannot escape the dominion of the word ‘was,’ nor can the imagination pass beyond the ‘beginning,’ for however far back you press in thought, you find no point where the ‘was’ ceases to hold away, and however diligently you set yourself to see what is beyond the Son, you will not any the more be able to get to aught above the beginning.”—Basil.

“For this which was, without any beginning of existence, was truly at the beginning, for if it had begun to be, it would not have been ‘at the beginning,’ whereas that in which absolute existence without beginning is essential, is truly spoken of as existing ‘at the beginning.’ And so the Evangelist in saying ‘In the beginning was the Word’ said much the same as if he had said ‘The Word was in eternity.’ ”—Fulgentius.

“If the Word was, the Word was not made: if the Word was made, He was not” [absolutely existent]. “But since He ‘was’ He was not made: for whatsoever already is and subsists and so is ‘in the beginning’ cannot be said to become or to have been made.”—Cyril.

“Nothing before a beginning, so the beginning be one really and truly, for of a beginning there can in no way be any beginning, and if anything else before it is supposed or arises, it ceases to be a true beginning.…

“If the Word was ‘in the beginning,’ what mind, I would ask, can prevail against the power of that verb ‘was’? When, indeed, will that verb find its limit, and there, as it were, come to a halt, seeing that it even eludes the pursuit of thought and outstrips the fleetness of the mind.”—Cyril.

57. Now in this short passage our fisherman hath barred the way of all heresy. For that which was “in the beginning” is not comprehended in time, is not preceded by any beginning. Let Arius, therefore, hold his peace. (1) Moreover, that which was “with God” is not confounded and mingled with Him, but is distinguished by the perfection unblemished which it hath as the Word abiding with God; and so let Sabellius keep silence. (2) And “the Word was God,” This Word, therefore, consisteth not in uttered speech, but in the designation of celestial excellence, so that Photinus’ teaching is refuted. Furthermore, by the fact that in the beginning He was with God is proven the indivisible unity of eternal Godhead in Father and Son, to the shame and confusion of Eunomius. (3) Lastly, seeing that all things are said to have been made by Him, He is plainly shown to be author of the Old and of the New Testament alike; so that the Manichæan can find no ground for his assaults. (4) Thus hath the good fisherman caught them all in one net, to make them powerless to deceive, albeit unprofitable fish to take.

(1) The Arian teaching concerning the Son was—ἦν ποτε ὄτε οὐκ ἦν.” “There was a time when He was not.” This, St. Ambrose says, is irreconcilable with St. John’s ἐν ἀρχῆ ἦν ὀ λὀγος. “The Word was ‘in’ or ‘at the beginning.’ ”

(2) Sabellianism reduced the distinction of three Persons in the Godhead to a distinction of several aspects of the same Person. They did not “divide the substance,” but they “confounded the Persons.”

(3) Non in prolatione sermonis hoc Verbum est. That is to say, the Divine Word or Logos was not such in the sense of λόγος προφορικός—i.e. uttered spoken word, and so a creature, but rather in the sense of λόγος προφορικός—the inherent eternal object of the Divine Consciousness.

Cf. Eunomius (v. s. § 44), was a leading Arian teacher. The argument levelled against him here would also have been fitly directed against Arius himself.

(4) The heresy of Manes or Mani made its first appearance in Persia, in the reign of Shapur I. (240–272 a.d.). According to the Persian historian Mirkhond, Mani was a member of an ancient priestly house which had preserved the holy fire and the religion of Zoroaster during the dark age of Parthian domination. He attracted the notice of Shapur by pretensions to visions and prophetic powers, and sought to establish himself as another Daniel at the Persian Court. When the king, however, discovered Mani’s hostility to the established Zoroastrianism and the Magian hierarchy, the prophet was obliged to flee. Northern India appears to have been Mani’s refuge for a season, and thence, after some years of retirement, he reappeared, with an illustrated edition of his doctrines, composed and executed, as he said, by divine hands. Shapur was now dead and his successor Hormuz (272–274) was favourably disposed to Mani. But Hormuz only reigned two years, and was succeeded by a king who was a sworn foe to the new doctrine. Mani was challenged to a public disputation by the Magi. The king presided, so that Mani doubtless knew from the first what the issue would be. He was flayed alive, but he left numerous converts, and his death, which cast a certain halo of martyrdom around him, and their sufferings in persecution, really proved—as in the case of Christianity—conducive to the spread of Manichæan doctrine. The fundamental principle of Mani’s system was Dualism—the opposition of mind and matter, and the hypothesis of two co-eternal co-existent powers of good and of evil. In opposition to the Divine Essence, the Good Principle, was placed uncreated Evil, and thus the problem of sin and evil was solved. The purposes of creation and redemption were, in the Manichæan view, entirely self-seeking on the part of the Deity. The world was created by God, not out of free love, but out of the wish to protect Himself against evil, embodied in matter, which in its essence is chaotic. Redemption was the rescue of particles of the ethereal Light, buried amidst the gross darkness of matter, and yet leavening and informing it. Christ was identified with the Divine Principle and the sufferings of His members, the particles of divine Light buried in matter, were the Crucifixion, thus represented as an age-long agony. Jesus Christ was “crucified in the whole world.” Mani adopted the story of Eden, but he represented the eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge not as the cause of Man’s fall, but as the first step in redemption, for Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament, was not the true God, but the evil Demon, from whose tyranny man had to be rescued. In order to attain salvation, the body, material and therefore essentially evil, must be mortified and starved. Man really fell when Eve tempted him to indulge fleshly lust, not when he ate the forbidden fruit. The stricter sort of the Manichæans practised a severe asceticism, abstaining from flesh meat and marriage. They would not even grind corn or make bread, for in grain there was life—i.e. an emanation of the Divine Light—though they would eat bread, quieting their conscience, however, by saying before they took it, “It was not I who reaped or ground the corn to make this bread.” At the end of time they held the world was to be destroyed by fire, but matter being, on the Manichæan hypothesis, eternal, the proper inference appears to be that the conflict of Light and Chaotic Darkness would recommence, and proceed usque ad infinitum. The Manichæan system was a strange eclectic farrago, embodying, in chimerical monstrosity, features of Zoroastrianism, Judaism (in so far as the story of Eden was taken over), Gnosticism (appearing in the theory that Jehovah was the Demon and that the eating of forbidden fruit did not cause the Fall), Christianity, and Pantheism (the last, doubtless, an importation from Hindostan). The disciples of the school made their way into the Roman Empire, and we find them, 150 years after the death of Mani, opposed by Augustine of Hippo, who indeed had at one time actually numbered himself amongst them.

 Ambrose of Milan, “Exposition of the Christian Faith,” in St. Ambrose: Select Works and Letters, ed. Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, trans. H. de Romestin, E. de Romestin, and H. T. F. Duckworth, vol. 10, A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, Second Series (New York: Christian Literature Company, 1896), 209–210.

Thankful for Philip Schaff, et al. adding explanatory footnotes.

Keep Smiling 😊

[Deleted User]

Notably lacking from your replies in a SCRIPTURE based discussion about the nature of One God is Scripture to discuss.

Again, you miss the point .... if anyone wants to have a scripture bases discussion about any topic, it is mandatory that correct principles for reading and understanding any text be used. If such are not used, it doesn't matter how many scripture verses you throw around.

Thus far, no CD poster has provided me a single good reason to change my faith belief ideas about One plural unique God

You have been provided with plenty good reasons from plain text ... but you obviously can't see

Curious about your thoughts of words from Arius describing Jesus: "ἦν ποτε ὄτε οὐκ ἦν" ? "he was being once when not he was being"

I don't care about words of Arius .... I measure them as any other words of other people against plain text of Scripture.

Thankful for Philip Schaff, et al. adding explanatory footnotes.

Why are you not rather thankful for what is stated in the plain text of Scripture ???

Bill_Coley

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted:

FWIW: @Bill_Coley had many thought provoking Scripture comments (seems study results over emphasied "The MAN Jesus" that missed main points of Breath The Holy messages spoken thru Jewish fisherman Peter in Acts).

I "over emphasized" the New Testament claim that Jesus was a "man"? A novel argument whose analogous counterpart for my use would be that in our exchanges you "overemphasized" John 17.5, from which you drew the conclusion that "Jesus spiritually experienced continuously having God's Glory by the side of The Father before Holy God spoke to create physical world" (e.g. HERE and HERE).

Not a strong argument, is it? Not even "thought provoking," is it? And it's certainly not an argument I've ever made.

ONE CLARIFICATION: Peter is not the only New Testament witness to Jesus' having been a "man":

• Peter tells a Jerusalem audience that Jesus was "a man attested to you by God with deeds of power and wonders and signs that God did through him" (Acts 2.22), a "man who [was] delivered up by the determined plan and foreknowledge of God" (Acts 2.23), and whom God raised (Acts 2.24).
• Paul tells an Antioch audience that "through this man Jesus there is forgiveness for your sins" (Acts 13.38, NLT).
• Paul tells the church in Rome that the "grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ" multiplied to many (Romans 5.15), and that through the man Jesus Christ will "the gift of righteousness reign in life" (Romans 5.17) and "the many...be made righteous" (Romans 5.19).
• The writer of 1 Timothy makes a clear distinction between the "one God" and the "one mediator between God and human beings," a mediator he identifies as "the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2.5).

My argument is not that you "overemphasized" John 17.5 - whatever "overemphasized" means in this context - but that there is only one truth as to whether Jesus was God, a truth to which John 17.5, the verses I just cited, and the rest of Scripture must all somehow contribute. As followers of Jesus, our interpretive question thus is, how did the man Jesus have glory at his Father's side "before the world existed"? As I acknowledged in several posts, the answer to that question is not clear to me given the whole of the New Testament's witness about Jesus. I respect that for you, the answer to that question IS clear.

[Deleted User]

@Bill_Coley wrote:

As followers of Jesus, our interpretive question thus is, how did the man Jesus have glory at his Father's side "before the world existed"? As I acknowledged in several posts, the answer to that question is not clear to me given the whole of the New Testament's witness about Jesus. I respect that for you, the answer to that question IS clear.

I would contend that the correct understanding of the text in Joh 17:5 will not be in contradiction to the rather numerous verses which state that Jesus was a man, a male human being. I would also state that an interpretation of Joh 17:5 which claims that Jesus is God will therefore be incorrect. The idea that Joh 17:5 was "both God and a man" contradicts the numerous verses in Scripture which tell about both "God" and "man"

[Deleted User]

how did the man Jesus have glory at his Father's side "before the world existed"?

The translation of para as "with" instead of "at your side" does not portray "a location beside" but rather "an association with", which seems a lot more in harmony with the rest of Scripture mentioning Jesus and how he existed before the foundation of the world.

A comparison with Joh 1:1 as well as 1Pe 1:20 rather plainly reveals that the Messiah existed first in the form of "word" in God's foreknowledge ("was foreknown") ... When in due time ("fullness of time") the Messiah was born of a woman (cp. Gal 4:4) God's plan for the Messiah -- a man, a human being -- became reality ("word became flesh") in the birth of Jesus.

Bill_Coley

@Wolfgang posted:

The translation of para as "with" instead of "at your side" does not portray "a location beside" but rather "an association with", which seems a lot more in harmony with the rest of Scripture mentioning Jesus and how he existed before the foundation of the world.

A comparison with Joh 1:1 as well as 1Pe 1:20 rather plainly reveals that the Messiah existed first in the form of "word" in God's foreknowledge ("was foreknown") ... When in due time ("fullness of time") the Messiah was born of a woman (cp. Gal 4:4) God's plan for the Messiah -- a man, a human being -- became reality ("word became flesh") in the birth of Jesus.

Wolfgang, I think you offer a sensible and text-aware response to the question of how Jesus could have had glory at the Father's side "before the world existed." The need and God's plan for the ultimate provision of the Messiah/Christ is clear in both Testaments of the Bible. Jesus is the embodiment of that provision, a provision John's Gospel calls "the Word" that "became flesh and took up residence among us" (John 1.14).

[Deleted User]

@Bill_Coley wrote:

Jesus is the embodiment of that provision, a provision John's Gospel calls "the Word"

what is meant with "embodiment"? what is "a provision John calls 'the Word' "? Does the word "word [gr. logos]" really in Joh 1 have a different meaning from its use in other passages of Scripture? Why capitalize the term ("Word") in these verses seeing that the ancient texts did not have such use of capitalization for purpose of distinguishing meaning?

Bill_Coley

@Wolfgang posted:

what is meant with "embodiment"? what is "a provision John calls 'the Word' "? Does the word "word [gr. logos]" really in Joh 1 have a different meaning from its use in other passages of Scripture? Why capitalize the term ("Word") in these verses seeing that the ancient texts did not have such use of capitalization for purpose of distinguishing meaning?

"Embodiment" simply means tangible or visible. When John says "the Word became flesh" (John 7.14), he means God's idea or plan became visible/physical in human form. The example you've often cited of your and your wife's idea or plan for children is apropos here: At first your plan was no more than a plan. You didn't have children; you had only a plan for them. But then that idea became flesh when you became parents. Your children were the embodiment of your idea or plan.

God's "provision" is another way of referring to the promise of a savior/messiah that's evident in the Hebrew Bible. Jesus, as the embodiment of God's "logos," is the fulfillment of that promise.

My capitalizing "Word" conforms to the practice of every English Bible translation in my Logos library. The capitalization, in my view, signifies reference to the specific, and I believe ultimate, embodiment of God's "logos" - i.e. in Jesus - so yes, the word's meaning in John's prologue is different from other passages. For example, the "logos" found in 2 Timothy 4.2 and Hebrews 5.12 does not refer to a specific embodiment of the "word" of God.

In English, references to political offices and unspecified officeholders - e.g. presidents or prime ministers - are not capitalized. References to specific/named presidents or prime ministers ARE capitalized. For example: "We expect President Biden to address the nation from the White House tonight. The president is expected to announce several new appointments to his cabinet." Analogously, in my view, John's reference to God's "logos" in his prologue is to a specific embodiment of it, and hence deserving of capitalization. I welcome you to the capitalization practice of your choosing.

[Deleted User]

"Embodiment" simply means tangible or visible. ...

Ah ok ... seems like we are thinking in similar ways here, at least to some degree.

I would still understand "word [logos]" as "word" and not necessarily as something specific to a content from context. In other words, "word" in the context of a plan to build a house (e.g. an architect's description) or "word" in the context of traveling plans or "word" in the context of referring to a person are all in the same sense "word".

Thus, "word" in Joh 1:14, 2Tim 4:2 or Heb 5:12 to me is "word" with different contexts pointing to different content. Even in Joh 1:14, the "word" is still "word" and not the embodiment (it was not the embodiment that became embodied/flesh, but the "word" regarding the human Messiah became reality in that the Messiah (a human being of flesh and blood) was conceived and born (Gal 4:4).

Bill_Coley

@Wolfgang posted:

I would still understand "word [logos]" as "word" and not necessarily as something specific to a content from context. In other words, "word" in the context of a plan to build a house (e.g. an architect's description) or "word" in the context of traveling plans or "word" in the context of referring to a person are all in the same sense "word".

Thus, "word" in Joh 1:14, 2Tim 4:2 or Heb 5:12 to me is "word" with different contexts pointing to different content. Even in Joh 1:14, the "word" is still "word" and not the embodiment (it was not the embodiment that became embodied/flesh, but the "word" regarding the human Messiah became reality in that the Messiah (a human being of flesh and blood) was conceived and born (Gal 4:4).

As I noted in my previous post, I welcome you to the capitalization practice of your choosing.

Question: Why did you choose to capitalize "messiah" in your references to "the human Messiah" and "the Messiah (a human being of flesh and blood)"?

[Deleted User]

@Bill_Coley wote: Question: Why did you choose to capitalize "messiah" in your references to "the human Messiah" and "the Messiah (a human being of flesh and blood)"?

I did so for the common English practice regarding a title / proper name etc ...

I do not do so for "the Word" in Joh 1:1ff because the term is not a title nor a proper name ... Also, using capitalization for "Word" provides or suggests an interpretation which the text itself does not support.

The event when God's "word" (thought, plan, declaration) concerning the Messiah became reality in the conception and birth of Messiah Jesus, is described in Joh 1:14 as "the word became flesh".

Why do folks capitalize "Word" but they do not capitalize "Flesh" ??

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus August 29 Notably lacking from your replies in a SCRIPTURE based discussion about the nature of One God is Scripture to discuss.

@Wolfgang August 30 Again, you miss the point .... if anyone wants to have a scripture bases discussion about any topic, it is mandatory that correct principles for reading and understanding any text be used. If such are not used, it doesn't matter how many scripture verses you throw around.

Disagree about mandatory since my prayerful research of Scripture for CD discussions has helped me appreciate Holy God's Righteous Love ❤️

Thankful for Holy יהוה Lord אלהים God breathing Scripture words into variety of humans (sometimes as dictation: Thus saith The יהוה Lord), which contain awesome treasures so want to be living on every word from Holy יהוה Lord אלהים God. Thankful Breath The Holy helps humans see what Scripture text truly says so אלהים God convicts of sin along with helping humans who want to grow wisely in Holy Righteous Love ❤️

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus August 29 Thus far, no CD poster has provided me a single good reason to change my faith belief ideas about One plural unique God

@Wolfgang August 30 You have been provided with plenty good reasons from plain text ... but you obviously can't see

Please provide specific Scripture text(s) for me to see & prayerfully consider, which is appropriate in a SCRIPTURE based discussion.

We agree that we interpret (see) Scripture text differently because our current faith belief ideas about One God are different: you believe One God has one voice so the man Jesus cannot be God while my faith believes Scripture truly describes One plural voice unique God (three voices in One commUnity of Love). Thus far my reading & searching of Scripture has not found a single verse that says One God only has one voice. Also you have not provided any Scripture text that simply shows your faith belief of One God having only one voice (while you have expressed your interpration that nothing is plural in אלהים God, which is consistent with Paul's warning from Breath The Holy about "paying attention to deceitful spirits") and consistent with each human choosing what to believe & ❤️Love the most, which shows in words & actions flowing out of a person.

Scripture simply has three voices being One אלהים God: The Father spoke from heaven, Jesus spoke having authority (God quality: The Word), and Breath The Holy (e.g. 1 Timothy 4:1 "Now the Spirit explicitly says ..."). Also scripture does not have a single verse that says Jesus is NOT God (otherwise you, @Bill_Coley, @theMadJW would have quoted that text already). My faith believes Holy אלהים God truth is consistent.

Human wisdom "the one sent cannot be the one sending" by @Bill_Coley lacks Scripture basis plus has human counter examples: e.g. a group (board, committee, ...) can vote for a group member to represent that group => the group member is the one sent by the group. To avoid conflict of interest, the group may have member abstain from voting with caveat of unanimous decision to send includes group member sending self.

We agree the man Jesus had a male human physical body (flesh) while we disagree about spiritual nature dwelling inside that physical body. My learning from John 1:1-18 is The Word (quality was being אלהים God, which was in beginning with אלהים God) dwelling inside human body, which is consistent with Matthew 1:18-25 description of Jesus being אלהים God with us (Emmanuel), who will save His people from sin. Jesus knew He was unique => So he said to them again, “I am going away, and you will seek me and will die in your sin. Where I am going you cannot come!” Then the Jews began to say, “Perhaps he will kill himself, because he is saying, ‘Where I am going you cannot come.’ ” And he said to them, “You are from below; I AM from above. You are from this world; I AM not from this world. Thus I said to you that you will die in your sins. For if you do not believe that I AM he, you will die in your sins.” (John 8:21-24 LEB with "I AM" for  ἐγώ εἰμι and he - translation addition)

Choosing to believe יהוה Lord Jesus results in becoming His people => My sheep listen to my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. And I give them eternal life, and they will never perish forever, and no one will seize them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one can seize them from the Father’s hand. The Father and I are one.” (John 10:27-30 LEB)

Insightful is original Jewish audience hostility to idea "The Father and I are one אלהים God" => The Jews answered him, “We are not going to stone you concerning a good deed, but concerning blasphemy, and because you, although you are a man, make yourself to be אלהים God!” (John 10:33)

Also insightful about being held in יהוה Lord אלהים God's hands is no fence to forcibly keep one within יהוה Lord אלהים God's hands so can freely choose to depart from the faith as described in 1 Timothy 4:1-5 with hope for repentance from sin return to Holy יהוה Lord אלהים God => But flee from youthful desires, and pursue righteousness, faith, love, and peace, in company with those who call upon the יהוה Lord from a pure heart. But avoid foolish and uninformed controversies, because you know that they produce quarrels. And the slave of the יהוה Lord must not quarrel, but be kind toward everyone, skillful in teaching, tolerant, correcting those who are opposed with gentleness, seeing whether perhaps אלהים God may grant them repentance to a knowledge of the truth, and they will come to their senses again and escape from the trap of the devil, being held captive by him to do his will. (2 Timothy 2:22-26 LEB)

Our spiritual adversary, the father of lies, likes using generalities: e.g. your assertion: "You have been provided with plenty good reasons from plain text ... but you obviously can't see". In contrast, Breath The Holy is specific, especially when convicting of sin against Holy יהוה Lord אלהים God. Jesus lovingly desired Jewish religious leaders (who had lots of knowledge about Holy אלהים God) to choose repentence from their sins as Jesus knew the eternal torment judgement for those who depart from the faith, but willfully refuse to turn back to Love יהוה Lord אלהים God the most.

Our spiritual adversary is a master manipulator of words to express ideas of lies craftily mixed with truthful parts (our adversary intensely hates every human whose body reflects the Image of God so wants to steal & destroy human Love ❤️ for God using any possible means of deception). Thankful for Holy אלהים God faithfully Loving ❤️ while being Holy & Righteous so will correctly judge at the appropriate time.



@Wolfgang August 31 Why do folks capitalize "Word" but they do not capitalize "Flesh" ??

"The Word" was/is/will be an integral part in One Holy God, a single spiritual being. Human flesh is a temporary physical dwelling. Jesus is the unique combination of human flesh with "The Word" of יהוה Lord אלהים God spiritually inside so was/is/will be both God & human (unique).

Dwelling inside every human body is an eternal spirit/soul, who freely chooses what to Love Most. Righteous humans choose to Love Holy יהוה Lord אלהים God the Most in all life domains: emotional (Heart), mental (Mind), social (Soul), physical (Strength), spiritual (Worship).

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus August 29 FWIW: @Bill_Coley had many thought provoking Scripture comments (seems study results over emphasied "The MAN Jesus" that missed main points of Breath The Holy messages spoken thru Jewish fisherman Peter in Acts).

@Bill_Coley August 30 I "over emphasized" the New Testament claim that Jesus was a "man"? A novel argument whose analogous counterpart for my use would be that in our exchanges you "overemphasized" John 17.5, from which you drew the conclusion that "Jesus spiritually experienced continuously having God's Glory by the side of The Father before Holy God spoke to create physical world" (e.g. HERE and HERE).

Jesus knew He existed before God created physical realm (John 17:5, 17:24), was from above & not of this world (John 8:21-24), existed before Abraham (John 8:58), had authority & ability to lay his life down (crucifixion) so Jesus would take possession of his body again (John 10:17-18)

@Bill_Coley August 30 Not a strong argument, is it? Not even "thought provoking," is it? And it's certainly not an argument I've ever made.

Concur weak argument "The MAN Jesus" is not compelling for believing Jesus is NOT God. In contrast, truthful words by Jesus about Jesus should be compelling as no other human spoke as Jesus spoke with good Godly miracles for validation, which includes physical body resurrection.

We agree the man Jesus had a male human physical body (flesh) while we disagree about spiritual nature dwelling inside that body. My learning from John 1:1-18 is The Word (quality was being אלהים God, which was in beginning with אלהים God) dwelling inside human body that is consistent with Matthew 1:18-25 description of Jesus being אלהים God with us (Emmanuel), who will save His people from sin. Jesus knew He was unique => So he said to them again, “I am going away, and you will seek me and will die in your sin. Where I am going you cannot come!” Then the Jews began to say, “Perhaps he will kill himself, because he is saying, ‘Where I am going you cannot come.’ ” And he said to them, “You are from below; I AM from above. You are from this world; I AM not from this world. Thus I said to you that you will die in your sins. For if you do not believe that I AM he, you will die in your sins.” (John 8:21-24 LEB with "I AM" for  ἐγώ εἰμι and he - translation addition)

@Bill_Coley August 30 My argument is not that you "overemphasized" John 17.5 - whatever "overemphasized" means in this context - but that there is only one truth as to whether Jesus was God, a truth to which John 17.5, the verses I just cited, and the rest of Scripture must all somehow contribute. As followers of Jesus, our interpretive question thus is, how did the man Jesus have glory at his Father's side "before the world existed"? As I acknowledged in several posts, the answer to that question is not clear to me given the whole of the New Testament's witness about Jesus. I respect that for you, the answer to that question IS clear.

Concur my answer to question: "how did the man Jesus have glory at his Father's side "before the world existed"? is clear (lacks any doubt).

@Bill_Coley August 30 how did the man Jesus have glory at his Father's side "before the world existed"?

@Wolfgang August 30 The translation of para as "with" instead of "at your side" does not portray "a location beside" but rather "an association with", which seems a lot more in harmony with the rest of Scripture mentioning Jesus and how he existed before the foundation of the world.

Searching my Logos library for association WITHIN {Headword παρὰ} found results in five resources (while {Headword παρὰ} has results in 69 resources), which includes "associated with" describing a genitive (gen.) case use, but John 17:5 has dative (dat.) case usage:

παρά 3844

is found in the NT c. gen. (78 times), c. dat. (50 times), and c. acc. (60 times): see Proleg. p. 106. All these constructions can be freely illustrated from our sources.

(1) c. gen. indicating source or origin “from the side of,” “from,” used of persons after verbs of receiving etc.: Ostr 10273 (Ptol.) (= LAE, p. 152) ἀπέχω παρὰ σοῦ τὸ ἐπιβάλλον (cf. Lk 15:12) μοι ἐκφόριον, “I have received from you the fruit that falleth to me,” P Petr II. 11 (1)5 (mid. iii/b.c.) (= Witkowski2, p. 8) γίνωσκε δέ με ἔχοντα παρὰ Φιλωνίδου (δραχμὰς) ο̄, P Eleph 132 (b.c. 223–2) (= Witkowski2, p. 42) παραγενομένου Σανῶτος ἐκομισάμην τὴν παρὰ σοῦ ἐπιστολήν, P Tebt II. 28322 (b.c. 93 or 60) τούτου δὲ γενομ[έ]νου ἔσομαι τετευχὼς [τῆ]ς παρὰ σοῦ ἀντιλήμψεως, “for if this is done I shall have obtained succour from you” (Edd.), P Oxy IV. 7422 (b.c. 2) παράλαβε παρὰ Πόθου τὸν κάλαμ[ο]ν πανα[ρ]ιθμῶι, “take over from Pothus the reeds all together” (Edd.), P Fay 12113 (c. a.d. 100) καὶ τὸ δ̣[έρ]μ̣α τοῦ μόσχου … αἴτησον πα̣[ρὰ τοῦ] κυρτοῦ βυρσέως, “ask the hunch-backed tanner for the calf’s hide,” and ib. 936 (a.d. 161) βούλομαι μισθώσασθαι παρὰ σοῦ τὴν μυροπω̣λα̣ι̣κὴν καὶ ἀρομ̣ατικὴν ἐργασίαν, “I wish to lease from you your business of perfume-selling and unguent-making” (Edd.). For παρά c. gen. to denote the agent, as in Mt 18:19, cf. Epict. iv. 10. 29 τὰ ἀλλότρια ὄψεται … ὡς ἂν δίδωται παρὰ τοῦ ἔχοντος ἐξουσίαν (see Sharp, Epict. p. 92).

For a similar use after pass. verbs (like ὑπό: cf. Ac 22:30 TR παρά, but אABC ὑπό), cf. P Tebt I. 1215 (b.c. 118) ἐκομισάμην τὸ παρὰ σοῦ γρ(αφὲν) ἐπισ(τόλιον), ib. 346 (c. b.c. 100) χάριν τοῦ παρʼ αὐτοῦ ἀπηγμένου, “about the person arrested by him,” and the late P Oxy I. 12517 (a.d. 560) συγχωρήσω αὐτὴν ὑπομνησθῆναι παρʼ οἱουδήποτε προσώπου ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ, “I should permit you to be reminded of your suretyship for me by any person whatsoever” (Edd.).

Οἱ παρʼ αὐτοῦ is common in the sense of a man’s “agents” or “representatives,” e.g. P Tor II. 420 (ii/b.c.) μηδένα τῶν παρʼ αὐτῶν, “no one of those acting for them,” P Tebt I. 5160 (b.c. 118) οἰκο(νόμοις) ἢ τοῖς παρʼ αὐτῶν, “oeconomi or their agents,” P Amh II. 414 (ii/b.c.) πέπομφα τὸν παρʼ ἐμοῦ, “I have sent my agent” and ib. 11121 (a.d. 132) καὶ μηδὲν τὸν ὁμολογοῦντα μήτε τοὺς παρʼ αὐτοῦ ἐνκαλῖν τοῖς περὶ τὸν Στοτοῆτιν, “and that neither he nor his representatives make any claim on Stotoëtis” (Edd.).

The phrase is also used more generally of a man’s “neighbours,” “friends,” “associates,” e.g. P Par 3616 (b.c. 163–2) (= UPZ i. p. 138) Ἁρμᾶιν … τὸν παρʼ ἐμοῦ, “Harmais who is closely associated with me,” ib. 4913 (c. b.c. 161) (= UPZ i. p. 308f.) οἱ παρʼ ἐμοῦ γραμματεῖς, ib. 5140 (b.c. 159) (= UPZ i. p. 360) εὐφραίνεσθε, οἱ παρʼ ἐμοῦ πάν[τες, P Amh II. 3513 (b.c. 132) τοὺς παρʼ ἡμῶν γεωργούς, P Oxy II. 29837 (i/a.d.) Σαραπίων καὶ πάντες οἱ παρʼ ἡμῶν, “all of us,” and BGU II. 41914 (a.d. 277) οὐδεὶς τῶν παρʼ ἐμοῦ οὐδὲ τέκνον τ[έ]κνου. Cf. also Herodas I. 2 with Headlam’s note.

For a parallel to Mk 3:21, where the context seems to confine οἱ παρʼ αὐτοῦ to members of Christ’s “family” (see Swete and Field ad l.), we may cite P Revill Mél, p. 2957 (b.c. 131–0) καλῶς ποιήσεις παρακαλῶν σαυτὸν καὶ τοὺς πα̣ρʼ ἡμῶν, the reference being to the writer’s mother and sisters; cf. 13 and see Witkowski, Epp.2 p. 96. This narrower application may also perhaps be found in P Grenf II. 369 (b.c. 95) ἔρρωμαι δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς καὶ Ἐσθλύτις … καὶ οἱ παρʼ ἡμῶν πάντες, “all our family,” and BGU III. 998ii. 8 (b.c. 101) μήτʼ αὐτὸς Ψενμεγχῆς μήδʼ ἄλλον μηδένα τῶν παρʼ αὐτοῦ.

Τὰ παρʼ αὐτῆς πάντα, “all her means,” in Mk 5:26 (cf. Lk 10:7; Phil 4:18), may be illustrated from Priene 111177 (i/b.c.) ἐδαπάνησεν δὲ παρʼ ἑαυτοῦ μετὰ τῶν συναγωνοθετῶν, ib. 11815 (i/b.c.), and C. and B. ii. p. 394, No. 277, where a father stated that he has erected τὸν βω[μὸν σὺν τῷ γρά]δῳ to his children πα]ρὰ ἑαυ[τοῦ, “at his own expense.” Ramsay compares the similar use of παρά on coins. See also the exx. from Josephus in Field, Notes, p. 27.

For the neut. art. without a subst. followed by παρά c. gen. cf. P Hib I. 1099 (b.c. 247–6) τὸ παρʼ αὐτῶν καὶ τῶν μ̣ετ̣[όχων, with reference to an amount due “from them and their partners,” and PSI VI. 5982 (iii/b.c.) ἀκούσας τὰ παρʼ Ἔτεάρχου.

(2) c. dat. “by,” “beside,” is used only of persons in the NT except in Jn 19:25, with which we may compare P Oxy I. 12023 (ii/a.d.) ἐπεὶ (l. ἐπὶ) ξένης καὶ παρὰ τῇ τάξι(= ει) ὄντα (l. ὤν), “being a stranger to the place and engaged at his post.” See also Kaibel 7031 (ii/iii a.d.) ἐννεακαιδεκάμηνος ἐγὼ κεῖμαι παρὰ τύμβῳ. For the ordinary personal use see P Hib I. 147 (early iii/b.c.) σύντασσε [τοὺς] παρὰ σοὶ φ[ύ]λακ̣α̣ς̣ φυλάσσειν, P Oxy II. 29828 (i/a.d.) παρὰ σοί, “where you are,” P Fay 1223 (c. a.d. 100) τὸ παρὰ σοὶ σί[ν]απι τὸ ἐν τῶι θησαυρῶι Σοχώτου, “the mustard that is with you in the store of Sochotes,” P Oxy IX. 12208 (iii/a.d.) πέμψε(= αι) μοι κέρμα εἰς τὰ γινόμενα παρʼ ἐμοὶ ἔργα τῆς κ̣<αρπ> οφορίας, “send me some money for the business of harvesting going on here” (Ed.), ib. XII. 159315 (iv/a.d.) περὶ ὧν βούλῃς παρʼ ἐμοὶ ἀντίγραψόν μοι, and ib. VI. 9255 (Christian prayer—v/vi a.d.) φανέρωσόν μοι τὴν παρὰ σοὶ ἀλήθιαν. Cf. Herodas V. 61.

For the phrase παρὰ τοῖς θεοῖς and its equivalents with verbs of prayer etc. the following exx. may serve—BGU II. 6326 (ii/a.d.) (= LAE, p. 172) μνί̣αν σου ποιούμενος (cf. Philem 4) παρὰ τοῖς [ἐν]θάδε θεοῖς, P Oxy XII. 15834 (ii/a.d.) τὸ προ[σκ]ύνημά σ[ο]υ ποιῶ παρὰ τῷ κυρίῳ Σ[α]ρά[πι]δι, ib. XIV. 16782 (illiterate—iii/a.d.) πρὸ μὲν πάντων εὔχομέ σε ὁλοκληρεῖν καὶ ὑειένειν παρὰ τῷ κυρείῳ θεῷ, ib. XII. 14892 (late iii/a.d.) ἄσπα[[ζ]]σον Φίρμον καὶ Τεκοῦσαν καὶ τοὺς ἡμῶν πάντας παρὰ τοῖς θεοῖς τῆς πόλεως τῶν Ἀντινοαίων, “salute Firmus and Tecusa and all our friends before the gods of Antinoöpolis” (Edd.), and ib. 14954 (Christian—iv/a.d.) πρὸ μὲν πάντων εὔχομαί σοι τὴν ὁλοκληρίαν παρὰ τῷ κ(υρι)ῷ θ(ε)ῷ. See also the note by Ghedini in Aegyptus iii. p. 191f.

(3) c. acc. “by,” “beside,” “near”; P Eleph 217 (b.c. 285–4) τὴν δὲ συγγραφὴν ἑκόντες ἔθεντο παρὰ συγγραφοφύλακα Ἡράκλειτον, P Lille I. 1719 (iii/b.c.) ὁ σῖτος ὁ̣ παρʼ ὑμᾶς, P Petr III. 215 (b.c. 236) οὐλὴ ἐπὶ μήλου παρʼ ὄφρυν [ἀριστεράν, P Par 477 (c. b.c. 152–1) (= UPZ i. p. 332, Selections, p. 22) ψευδῆι πάντα καὶ οἱ παρὰ σὲ θεοὶ ὁμοίως, “all things are false and your gods with the rest,” P Tebt I. 3921 (b.c. 114) παρὰ τὸ αὐτόθι Διὸς ἱερόν, “near the temple of Zeus here” (Edd.), and P Oxy XII. 15835 (ii/a.d.) γενοῦ παρὰ Ἰσίδωρον χάριν τοῦ [φαι]νόλου, “go to Isidore for the cloak.” For a suggestion that in Ac 22:3 ἀνατεθραμμένος δὲ ἐν τῇ πόλει ταύτῃ παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιήλ should be translated “in this city I was brought under the influence of Gamaliel,” see Exp T xxx. p. 39f.

The temporal use of παρά = “during” is seen in P Oxy III. 47210 (c. a.d. 130) δύναται μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἄλ̣λ̣α τινὰ λελοι(= υ)πῆσθαι παρὰ τὸν τῆς προνοίας χρόνον, “he may indeed have had other troubles during the period of his stewardship” (Edd.). In Rom 14:5 ἡμέραν παρʼ ἡμέραν, παρά is best understood as = “in preference to,” the preceding κρίνει being then taken in the sense of “estimates,” “approves of” (see SH ad l.). For the phrase τὸ παρὰ τοῦτο indicating the “difference” between two figures, see P Hib I. 9910 (c. b.c. 148) with the editors’ note.

(4) Some miscellaneous uses of παρά may be illustrated. For the meaning “against,” “contrary to,” as in Ac 18:13; Rom 1:26 al., cf. P Tebt I. 592 (b.c. 118) τοὺς δὲ παρὰ ταῦτα ποιοῦντας θαν[άτωι ζ]ημιοῦσθαι, “those who disobey this decree are punishable with death” (Edd.), ib.205 τοὺς κεκοφότας τῶν ἰδίων ξύλα παρὰ <τὰ> ἐκ<κ>ε̣ίμενα προστάγματα, “those who have cut down wood on their own property in contravention of the published decrees” (Edd.), ib. 2741 (b.c. 113) τὰ παρὰ τὸ δέ{ι}ον κεχειρισμένα, “your improper procedure” (Edd.); also the common sepulchral inscr., as in C. and B. ii. p. 537, No. 3949 εἰ δέ τις παρὰ ταῦτα ποιήσει, ἔστε αὐτῷ πρὸς τὸν κρίτην θεόν.

Like the Semitic min, παρά is used of comparison in P Tebt I. 585 (b.c. 118) μί̣ζοσι μέ[τ]ροις [πα]ρὰ τ̣ὰ εὔσ<ταθμα>, “larger measures than the correct bronze measures,” ib. 1912 (b.c. 114) σὺ δὲ ὀρθῶς ποιήσεις τὸ προσάγγελμα μὴ ἐλλατώσας παρὰ τὸ πρῶτον, “you will be right in not diminishing the report compared with the first one” (Edd.): cf. Lk 13:2, 4; 18:14; Rom 1:25; 12:3. In MGr παρά and ἀπό are used to express comparison.

Παρά “on account of,” as in 1 Cor 12:15f., meets us in P Oxy XII. 14207 (c. a.d. 129) οὐ παρʼ ἐμὴν δὲ αἰτίαν οὐ κατεχωρίσθησαν, “but it is not on account of my fault that they have not been presented” (Edd.), P Ryl II. 2436 (ii/a.d.) ο̣ὐδὲ̣ν̣ παρὰ σὲ γέγονε, “nothing has occurred through any fault of yours” (Edd.). With this may be compared the use of παρὰ τό c. inf. to denote cause or origin, e.g. P Magd 115 (b.c. 221) παρὰ τὸ δὲ σύνεγγυς εἶναι τὸν Ἀρσι[ν]οΐτην, “because the Arsinoite district was near”: see Mayser Gr. II. i. p. 331.

In BGU IV. 107916 (a.d. 41) (= Selections, p. 39) παρὰ τάλαντόν σοι πέπρακα τὰ φο[ρτ]ία μου, the meaning is perhaps not more than “I have sold my wares for a talent.” For an adverbial use cf. P Grenf II. 363 (b.c. 95) (= Witkowski2, p. 119) Παγάνει Πανεβχούνιος καὶ Παθήμει, παρὰ καὶ Πετεαρσεμθεῖ, where παρὰ καί = “una et” (Witkowski). On the force of παρά in composition, see Proleg. p. 247.

As in the case of all the prepositions, reference should be made to the important theses by Kuhring and Rossberg, see under Abbreviations I. Full particulars of NT usage are given in Paul F. Regard’s monograph Contribution à l’étude des Prépositions dans la langue du Nouveau Testament (Paris, 1919).

 James Hope Moulton and George Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1930), 478–480.

Another resource includes Association with two dative uses in John:

παρά

Space—Παρά can convey spacial extension (from) or spacial position (among, near). For example, a decree went out from Caesar (Luke 2:1 gen.); the story was spread among the Jews (Matt. 28:15 dat.); Jesus passed alongside the sea (Mark 1:16 acc.); Jesus set the child beside Him (Luke 9:47 dat.); and he who does the law is righteous before God (Rom. 2:13 dat.).

Association—Two disciples spent the rest of the day with Jesus (John 1:39 dat.); Jesus spoke certain things while with His disciples (John 14:25 dat.).

Agency—Παρά with the genitive can denote agency. The things told to Mary by the Lord will come to pass (Luke 1:45; cf. Matthew 19:26).

Comparison—Paul says that one person thinks one day is more important than another (Rom. 14:5 acc.); the Son was made greater than the angels (Heb. 1:4 acc.).

Opposition—Paul warns the Galatians to beware of preaching contrary to what he taught them (Gal. 1:8–9 acc.; cf. Rom. 16:17 acc.).

Substitution—People worshiped nature instead of the Creator (Rom. 1:25 acc.).

 Richard A. Young, Intermediate New Testament Greek: A Linguistic and Exegetical Approach (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, 1994), 99–100.

Louw-Nida assigned semantic domain number 83.25 "at (location)" to παρά in John 17:5 while 89.111 "with (association)" example is Luke 11:37

Thankful for sentence numbered 1 Peter 1:17-21 => And if you call on him as Father who judges impartially according to each one’s work, conduct yourselves with fear during the time of your temporary residence, because you know that you were redeemed from your futile way of life inherited from your ancestors not with perishable things like silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of an unblemished and spotless lamb who was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has been revealed in these last times for you who through him are believing in אלהים God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in אלהים God. (LEB) reading to me that ALL of אלהים God (includes Jesus) foreknew plan for Holy human body sin sacrifice & resurrection before One אלהים God created the world.

Jesus experienced אלהים God's Glory and Love while planning Holy sin sacrifice to show אלהים God's Love ❤️ with Jesus descending into hell as sin substitute so experienced awful torment => for Holy Righteous judgement, Jesus truly knows eternal agony waiting for any creature choosing not to ❤️ Love אלהים God the most. Every creature being tormented for sin in hell choose eternal destination away from אלהים God's Love ❤️

Think this in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, existing in the form of אלהים God, did not consider being equal with אלהים God something to be grasped, but emptied himself by taking the form of a slave, by becoming in the likeness of people. And being found in appearance like a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, that is, death on a cross. Therefore also אלהים God exalted him and graciously granted him the name above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven and of those on earth and of those under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is יהוה Lord, to the glory of אלהים God the Father. (Philippians 2:5-11 LEB)

Keep Smiling 😊

Bill_Coley

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted:

Concur weak argument "The MAN Jesus" is not compelling for believing Jesus is NOT God. In contrast, truthful words by Jesus about Jesus should be compelling as no other human spoke as Jesus spoke with good Godly miracles for validation, which includes physical body resurrection.

Given the length, substance, and history of our exchanges on the matter, I've backed away from engaging you on the wider issue of Jesus' divinity. But since I did rejoin the fray to address your comments about my "this MAN Jesus" argument, I offer the following:

So that the record is accurate, the argument I labeled "not strong" was NOT my argument that New Testament writers refer to Jesus as a "man." Rather, what I labeled "not strong" was an argument I created to be an analogous counterpart to your contention that I had "overemphasized" the Jesus as a "man" claim - namely that you had "overemphasized" John 17.5. I labeled that created analogous counterpart as a "not strong" argument.

You are, of course, free to assess my "man" argument as you see fit. But your assessment of it cannot accurately be stated as your concurrence with my view because you and I don't agree as to the strength of my "man" argument.

byGeorge

Wait...Bill doesn't believe in the divinity of Jesus?

Bill_Coley

@byGeorge posted:

Wait...Bill doesn't believe in the divinity of Jesus?

I've incorrectly assumed you would have discovered my Christological views by now. What joy/disgust await you when you review my contributions to threads such as the one you're in right now, and this one:

https://christiandiscourse.net/discussion/749/a-text-based-discussion-of-the-trinity

ONE SUGGESTION: Don't assume that you will understand the fullness of my views after reading a small handful of posts. The identified threads present a deep dive into my and others' understandings of who Jesus is, understandings that cannot adequately be declared in one or a few posts. So if your objective is to understand my views before you judge them, read lots of my posts.... Of course, if that's not your objective, then stop whenever you darned well please. 😁

byGeorge

@Bill_Coley So, after the smoke settles, do you believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ or not?

Bill_Coley

@byGeorge posted:

@Bill_Coley So, after the smoke settles, do you believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ or not?

As my response to your question I'm tempted to paraphrase your response in THIS POST to my inquiry as to the meaning of one of your posts: "After re-reading my posts on the divinity of Christ in the threads to which I invited your attention, I find them to be sound and clear. If anyone else is disoriented by them, I might have interest in clarifying further for them." But I can't defend my dodge your question when I disagreed with your dodge of mine, so....

In my view, the overwhelming majority of the New Testament's witness about Jesus is that he was not God. He was God's chosen one - the Christ/Messiah - the savior of the world, and both the Son of God and Son of Man, but he was not God. I've posted scores, probably hundreds, of lengthy responses to this question, posts in which I dealt specifically and in detail with many of the issue's frequently cited texts. I stand by those posts, which are available in these threads. I can't possibly summarize all of that content, but for this post, here are some of the passages I find compelling (in no particular order; there are MANY, MANY, MANY more):

• Matthew 4.8-10: Satan invites Jesus to worship him in exchange for "all the kingdoms of the world and their glory." Jesus tells Satan to leave because the Scriptures say "You shall worship the Lord your God and serve only him." THE POINT: Satan asks for Jesus' worship. Jesus says he is commanded to worship only the Lord his God. One who thought himself to be God would not have reported his need to worship his God.
• John 20.15-17: In his instructions to Mary at the empty tomb, the resurrected Jesus tells her to inform his "brothers" that he is "ascending to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God." THE POINT: Jesus believes the one he calls his "Father" is ALSO his disciples' "Father," and the one he calls his "God" is ALSO their God. How could Jesus have thought of himself to be God if he believed he had a God, and that he and his followers had the same God?
• John 17.3: In his chapter-long prayer, Jesus defines eternal life as knowing his Father - whom Jesus characterizes as "the only true God" - and Jesus Christ, whom "the only true God" has sent. THE POINT: Jesus makes a clear distinction between himself and the "only true God." God is the sender. Jesus is the one God sent.
• 1 Timothy 2.5: The writer makes a clear distinction between the "one God" and "the man Jesus Christ," whom he characterizes as the "one mediator between God" and people. THE POINT: A "man" who is the mediator between God and people isn't God.
• Luke 18.18-19: Jesus asks a religious leader why he describes him as "good" when "[n]o one is good except God alone." THE POINT: Jesus rejects the leader's adjective on the grounds that it is reserved for God, a rejection which in my view clearly means he doesn't understand himself to be God.
• Matthew 26.38-39ff: In the garden at Gethsemane, Jesus three times asks God (the one he calls "Father") to take the cup of suffering from him, but on each occasion ALSO says he wants God's will to be done, not his own. THE POINT: If Jesus believed himself to be God, his will would have been God's will, and he would have had no cause to express the surrender of his own will. How could one who was God have had a will that was in any way different from God's will?
• Acts 2.22-25: Peter tells a Jerusalem audience that Jesus was the "man attested to you by God with deeds of power and wonders and signs that God did through him," as wells as the man they had crucified, but whom God had raised. THE POINT: One whom God attested to by doing deeds through him is not God. Similarly (and grammatically), one whom God raised was not God. The one raised is different from the one who raised him or her.

There is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more, including my take on John 1 and Thomas' "my Lord and my God." But all of that waits for you in the cited threads, if you want more info.