Featured Why jesus curse and stop the fig then he can't stop the devil sabotage activity

Ergo: Jesus Christ is not the Father. But he is the Son. John 1 identifies him as the Word that is God.

The beauty of the picture is its truth that no one knows the whole picture of truth. Not you, not me. No one. But we each have a part of the picture of truth that needs to be honored and spoken. I find it interesting that you disavow the Trinity, yet you make some of the very same statements that the doctrine makes. Could it be that both are true? I think so.

 

OMG people are stuck with John 1:1
and couldn't move on.



The Bible has plenty of passages showing Jesus is not God
that Jesus preached who is God
that Jesus introduced himself as a man.
And people are stuck with John 1:1 even though they themselves could not explain it.



Jesus is the Christ of God
We should accept Jesus as the Christ of God:

“But what about you? he asked. ‘Who do you say I am?’ Peter answered, ‘The Christ of God.’” (Luke 9:20 NIV)

The Bible clearly stated that “Jesus is the Christ of God.” If Jesus is God, then God (Jesus) is the Christ of God. This is an absurdity. Thus, let us stick to what the Bible teaches about Jesus, that He is “the Christ of God.”


Jesus as the Son of God

We should accept Jesus Christ as the Son of God:

“Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” (Matthew 16:16 NIV)

Although the apostles teach that Jesus is the Son of the living God, however, the Bible also tells us that Jesus, the Son of God, is a man:

“And when the centurion, who stood there in front of Jesus, heard his cry and saw how he died, he said, ‘Surely THIS MAN WAS THE SON OF GOD!’” (Mark 15:39, NIV, emphasis mine).

Thus, the Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is the Son of the living God, and not the living God.


Jesus as Lord
We should accept Jesus Christ as our Lord:

“So, all the people of Israel should know this truly: GOD HAS MADE JESUS — THE MAN YOU NAILED TO THE CROSS — BOTH LORD AND CHRIST.” (Acts 2:36, New Century Version, emphasis mine)

Christ’s lordship does not prove that He is God, because if so: (1) God (Jesus) is only made “Lord” by another God for the Bible said, “God has made Jesus – the man you nailed to the cross-both Lord and Christ”; and (2) God (Jesus) is a “man nailed to the cross.”

When the Apostle Peter teaches that Jesus is Lord, he also mentioned that Jesus was made Lord by God and “a man nailed to the cross.”


Jesus as Savior
We shouldaccept Jesus Christ as our Savior:

“The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had murdered by hanging Him on a tree. GOD EXALTED THIS MAN TO HIS RIGHT HAND AS RULER AND SAVIOR, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.” (Acts 5:30-31, Holman Christian Standard Bible, emphasis mine)

Jesus is our Savior, but He became our Savior because “God exalted this man to His right hand as ruler and Savior.” Although, Jesus is our Savior, but the Bible also mentioned that He is a man exalted by God.


Jesus as the Mediator between God and Men
We shouldaccept Jesus Christ as the Mediator between the one true God and men:

“For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (I Timothy 2:5, NIV, emphasis mine)

Apostle Paul’s statement clearly said that “there is one God.” And we are certain that the “one God” referred to by Apostle Paul is not the Lord Jesus, because he also mentioned that “the man Christ Jesus” is the “one mediator between God and men.”


LET US UPHOLD WHAT THE BIBLE
TEACHES ABOUT JESUS CHRIST

Let us uphold what the Bible teaches about the Lord Jesus Christ – the man Jesus Christ is the one mediator between God and men, for those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as “coming in the flesh” such person is the deceiver and the antichrist:

“Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist.” (II John 1:7 NIV)

Those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as “coming in the flesh” as those “who don’t believe that Jesus Christ came to earth as a human being”:

“Watch out for the false leaders-and there are many of them around-who don't believe that Jesus Christ came to earth as a human being with a body like ours. Such people are against the truth and against Christ.” (II John 1:7 Living Bible)

If Jesus is not the one true God, who is? This is what the apostles teach us:

“Praise be to THE GOD AND FATHER OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ.” (Ephesians 1:3 NIV, Emphasis Mine)

 

But we also have to stick to John 1 -- even if you don't like it. Plus, we have to stick with the exegetical content of the gospels and epistles that firmly place Jesus with the Divine, simply by the resurrection. In the biblical culture, only Divine beings could be resurrected.

Jesus can be both, you know. It's really not an either/or proposition.

 

That's correct.

The good figs were promised Jer 29:11 "I know the plans for you, plans of welfare and not of destruction to give you a future and a hope" But that is only a foretaste of something which concerns all in the New Covenant. Jer 32:40 "I will make a new covenant and I will NEVER turn from doing you good and I will put my spirit in you and you will NEVER turn from following me."

As it says in Romans 8 "all things work together FOR THOSE WHO LOVE GOD who are called according to his purpose"

 

Where did you read that?

John 5:30 Good News Translation (GNT)
“I can do nothing on my own authority; I judge only as God tells me, so my judgment is right, because I am not trying to do what I want, but only what he who sent me wants.

John 8:28 New International Version (NIV)
So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me.

John 12:49 New International Version (NIV)
For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken.

The Jesus of the Bible is different from your Jesus.
Your Jesus is not the Jesus of the Bible
It must be a different Jesus...

2 Corinthians 11:4 New Living Translation (NLT)
You happily put up with whatever anyone tells you, even if they preach a different Jesus than the one we preach, or a different kind of Spirit than the one you received, or a different kind of gospel than the one you believed.

People resurrected in the Old Testament

Child of a widow in Zarephath 1 King 17:17-24
Shunammite Woman's Son 2 Kings 4:18-37
An Israelite dead touched Elijah's bones 2 Kings 13:20–21

People resurrected in the New Testament

Widow of Nain's Son Luke 7:11–17
Jarius Daughter Luke 8:49–56
Lazarus John 11:1-44
Jesus Christ Matthew 28:1-20; Mark 16:1-20; Luke 24:1-49; John 20:1-21:25
Tabitha (named Dorcas in Greek) Acts 9:36-42
Eutychus Acts 20:7–12

So what was that again????
In the biblical culture, only Divine beings could be resurrected

 

I don’t know why you want to gloss over John 1 and you dismiss the Thomas story.

If you don’t understand the biblical anthropology there’s no help for you. You’re far too interested in peurile gifs to be interested in learning something that might inform your stances.

 

We are in the Figs not John 1:1
Sure you could stick to John 1:1
Tell me if you get past John 2:1


People may now ask, "If John 1:1 does not express the pre-existence of Christ as God already with the Father, what then does the verse mean?" In order to find out the biblical meaning of the verse in question, it must first be understood that there are three elements in John 1:1, namely:


1. In the beginning was the Word

2. And the Word was with God

3. And the Word was God

Let us take a look at this verse piece by piece to come to the true understanding of John 1:1. What is the meaning of the first segment, "In the beginning was the Word," Does it imply that Christ is God who had substance or state of being with God? The answer can be found in Apostle Paul's letter to the Ephesians,

"This was according to the eternal purpose which be realized in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Eph. 3:11,


There is an eternal purpose or plan which was realized in Jesus Christ. Since when did God conceive of this plan? Again the Apostle Paul further explains in Ephesians 3:9.

"And to make all men see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things;" Ibid.)


Paul tells us that the purpose or plan of God was conceived and was hidden for ages. In the same manner, John is teaching that in the beginning, ages ago, God already planned that there would be a Christ. When was this 'ages' ago? This is further revealed by the Apostle Peter in I Peter 1:20.

"For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you." (NASB)

There is an argument of some people who say even though Christ was planned before the foundation of the world, He was existing with God in the beginning in His present state of being. If this were the case and if people would continue to hold to such a line of reasoning what would be the disastrous effect in clinging to such a belief? In Ephesians 1:4, according to the Apostle Paul who else were chosen or planned before the foundation of the world?

"...just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him, in love." (Ibid.)

Man was also chosen to be in Christ before the foundation of the world. Is it correct to infer that all men had pre-existence in state of being? This is not what the apostle is teaching. It can be read quite clearly in the book of Genesis that God created the world before he created man. Paul is teaching that man was chosen or planned to be in Christ. Just as God also planned that there would be a Christ.

Attested to By Theologians

Therefore when the Bible speaks of a plan as it does with Christ, it does not mean something with substance or state of being. In fact if we were to consult other religious authorities as to how they understand John 1:1, what is their understanding of the verse?



The New American Catholic Edition, Douay Confraternity Bible with comments and footnotes of verses will enable us to see the Catholic Church's understanding of the verse. In the footnote of this Bible for John 1:1 this is what they have stated.

"St. John employs the term Word. It is so used only by St. John and designates the Son as a kind of intellectual emanation from the Father."

If we would consult a dictionary as to the meanings of intellectual and emanation, the understanding of the verse by Catholic authorities would become much clearer.

Intellectual-- "devoted to matters of the mind." Emanation--"to come out from a source." In other words "intellectual emanation from the Father" means a thought coming from the Father.

Furthermore, it must be remembered that the original language used in writing the New Testament is Greek. What is the Greek word for "Word" in John 1:1 and does it mean something with substance or already having a state of being? Turning again to Dr. Ryrie's comments in the Ryrie Study Bible, he states this on page 1599:

"Word (Greek: logos). Logos means word, thought, concept, and the expressions thereof."

Word or logos in the Greek language means thought or concept. This is very similar to what the Catholic authorities state as to the meaning of "Word." In fact, in the secular language of the Greeks, logos does not change its meaning, as can be read from the The New Encyclopaedia Britannica Micropaedia.

"Logos (Greek: 'word', 'reason,' or 'plan') (P. 302)

All these terms, which are descriptive of the word logos, do not indicate something with substance or state of being. Intellectual emanation, thought, concept, reason,and plan are terms that refer to things that are abstract and without substance. Therefore, when Apostle John wrote, "In the beginning was the Word," and the Apostle Paul wrote, "the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God," and Peter wrote, "He was foreknown before the foundation of the world," the Bible is not teaching that Christ eternally existed with state of being, but rather, God had a plan that there would be a Christ.

'And The Word Was With God'

This now leads us to the second part of the verse," the Word was with God." What is the meaning of this portion of the verse? As mentioned before in Ephesians 3:9, 11 and I Peter 1:20, there is a plan of God that there would be a Christ. Since it was God who thought of it, it follows that the word or plan was with God, because the source and origin of the word is God. Did this plan which originated with God remain only with Him? Did it remain hidden with God, who solely knows of it for all times? In Romans 1:2-3 the Apostle Paul reveals God's will and purpose.


"...which He promised beforehand through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures, concerning His Son who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh." (NASB)

God's plan did not remain with Him hidden in mystery but was revealed to mankind through His prophets. He revealed it in the form of a promise that we can find written in the Holy Scriptures.

'And The Word Was God'

This brings us to the third and last part of the verse, "and the Word was God." This is the reason why many people today believe that Christ is God. They say, "Can't you see that Christ is the Word, and the Word was God, therefore Christ is God!"

This is a hasty conclusion on their part regarding John 1:1. What is the biblical meaning of what John wrote "and the Word was God?" The Gospel according to Luke shows the uniqueness of God's word.


"For no word from God shall be void of power." (Lk 1:37,. ASV)


When John wrote, ". . .and the Word was God," he was not teaching that Christ is God but rather he was showing the quality of God's Word. This unique characteristic of the Word is that there is no word of God void of power. God's word possesses His power. What about God? What is the quality of God? God himself declares His uniqueness in Genesis 17:1.

"Now when Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, 'I am God Almighty,..." (NASB)

The quality of God is He is almighty or all-powerful, likewise, His words are powerful. This is why John said, "... and the Word was God." John was teaching God's word is powerful as the One who had spoken the word is all-powerful.

This is also attested to by other theologians like those who compiled The New Bible Dictionary, in reference to John 1:1 it is stated thus:

"The Word possesses a like power to God who speaks it." (p. 744)

This is not the only book written by theologians which agrees to the fact that the phrase "and the Word was God," speaks of the quality of the Word in power rather than to Christ allegedly having a state of being as God or pre-existing as God. In a book entitled An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek, by C.F.D. Moule, this is stated: "It is necessarily without the article (Theos not O'Theos) in as much as it describes the nature of the Word and does not identify His Person." (p. 116)

Moule is referring to the grammatical construction of the phrase, "the word was God," in the original Greek language. The Greek word in question is "Theos." When "Theos is preceded by the article "o" it indicates that God is being used as a noun. But what can be seen in the existing Greek manuscript of John 1:1 is that the article "o" is not present before the word Theos. This being the case, "theos" is not used as a noun but as an adjective. Apostle John used the word, "Theos," to express the quality of the Word rather than identifying the person. In other words, he employs the word Theos in describing the logos that the logos possesses the quality of God and not that the logos is God in state of being. The English equivalent of "Theos" without the article "o" would be the adjective divine. This is proven by other Bible translations such as Moffatt's rendition of the verse. Thus it is stated in John 1:1.

"The Logos existed in the very beginning, the Logos was with God, the Logos was divine."

This is also seen in the Smith-Goodspeed translation of the Bible in the same verse John 1:1,

"In the beginning the Word existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was divine."

Therefore, as much as people would like to assert that Christ is God because the Word was God, such a belief, however, is without foundation. The Greek manuscripts of John 1:1 do not support their claim. Even those Bible translators who are proficient in the Greek of the New Testament agree that "Theos" is being employed as an adjective describing the quality of the Word. Since the Word originated from God and the quality of God is powerful, so likewise is His Word. Why then is the Word of God powerful? God declares in Isaiah 46:11 the reason why His word has power.

"...Truly I have spoken; truly I will bring it to pass. I have planned it, surely I will do it." (NASB)

The word of God has power because God will do what He has planned, or will bring it to pass. What is the proof that what God has planned will come to pass hence His words have power? In John 1:14 --


"And the Word was made flesh..." (KJV).


God's plan that there would be a Christ came to pass. His word has power. But does this mean that the word has power by itself? No. The Word does not possess power by itself, because the Word did not make itself flesh. It was made flesh. Someone made the Word flesh. Who made it flesh? It was the One who spoke the Word, God the Father, the Creator of all things. The biblical meaning of "the Word was made flesh" is explained by the Apostle Paul in Galatians 4:4--

"But when the fulness of time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law." (NASB)

The Word was made flesh meant that God's plan was realized when God sent His Son born of a woman.

 

You spoke too soon.

John 20:24-27 New Living Translation (NLT)
One of the twelve disciples, Thomas (nicknamed the Twin), was not with the others when Jesus came. They told him, “We have seen the Lord!”

But he replied, “I won’t believe it unless I see the nail wounds in his hands, put my fingers into them, and place my hand into the wound in his side.”

Eight days later the disciples were together again, and this time Thomas was with them. The doors were locked; but suddenly, as before, Jesus was standing among them. “Peace be with you,” he said. Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and look at my hands. Put your hand into the wound in my side. Don’t be faithless any longer. Believe!”



Put your finger here,



and look at my hands.


Put your hand into the wound in my side.

Don’t be faithless any longer.
Believe!

John 20:28 New Living Translation (NLT)
“My Lord and my God!” Thomas exclaimed.



Thomas was surprised to see Jesus
Thomas saw the wounds of Jesus
Thomas touched the wounds of Jesus
Thomas was faithless because his policy is to see is to believe
Thomas exclaimed and did not declare an article of faith

 

Why would I dismiss anything?
I was Catholic before believing the Trinity crap
and I also asked the same questions you did.

ON JOHN 20:28
“MY LORD AND MY GOD”



WHAT THOMAS UTTERED in John 20:28 should not be regarded as a statement of faith nor be considered as a strong biblical foundation to assert the alleged divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ. John 20:28 reads:

“And Thomas answered and said to Him, ‘My Lord and my God!’” (John 20:28 NKJV)

Why it should not be regarded as a statement of faith nor be considered as a strong biblical foundation of the alleged divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ?


THOMAS’ STATEMENT CONTRADICTED JESUS’ STATEMENT

Before Jesus showed up to the disciples after His resurrection (thus, before Thomas made this statement recorded in John 20:28), the Lord first showed up to Mary Magdalene. This was what the Lord Jesus Christ told Mary Magdalene:

“1Now the first day of the week Mary Magdalene went to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb.

“Now when she had said this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, and did not know that it was Jesus. Jesus said to her, ‘Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you seeking?’ She, supposing Him to be the gardener, said to Him, ‘Sir, if You have carried Him away, tell me where You have laid Him, and I will take Him away.’ Jesus said to her, "Mary!" She turned and said to Him, ‘Rabboni!’ (which is to say, Teacher). Jesus said to her, "Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.'" (John 20:1,14-17, NKJV)

The Lord Jesus Christ told Mary Magdalene to go to My brethren and say to them, “I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.” Jesus explicitly said that His God is also their God, who is His Father and also their Father. Indeed, Mary Magdalene had told the disciples (including Thomas) of what the Lord had told her to tell to them:

“Jesus said to her, ‘Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.' Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that He had spoken these things to her.” (John 20:17-18, NKJV)

The disciples knew (including Thomas) that the “Father” who Jesus clearly called His God is not Jesus Christ because He Himself had taught them that He is different from the Father. This is what the Lord Jesus said in John 14:28:

“You have heard Me say to you, 'I am going away and coming back to you.' If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, 'I am going to the Father,' for My Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28 NKJV)

Jesus’ disciples also knew that the one the Lord Jesus Christ called as His Father and His God is the One True God because Jesus himself had taught this truth to His disciples:

“Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: ‘Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You,
“And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.” (John 17:1,3 NKJV)

The Lord Jesus Christ explicitly taught His disciples that the Father alone is the true God, and He is the messenger or whom the One True God have sent. Thus, to attain eternal life is to believe that the Father alone is the true God and that Jesus is sent by the One True God.

Take note that the Gospel that wrote that Thomas stated “My Lord and my God” was also the Gospel that wrote that the Lord Jesus Christ explicitly stated, “I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God,” also “My Father is greater than I,” and “Father…this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God…”

Obviously, Thomas failed to remember these words of his Master. Thus, Thomas statement in John 20:28 contradicted what His Master has taught Him.

 

I believe it’s against forum policy to reprint large sections of material, especially without citing sources.

What a waste of bandwidth for such a load of unsubstantial drivel.

 

Your theological reasoning has gone bye-bye.

 

We don't.

Same reason The Father doesn't stop him. After all, if God is God (not speaking of Jesus) - and God has not stopped him... does it mean that God does not have the ability to do so? I don't think so, for He is God, but we know that in the end God will throw the devil in the Lake of Fire.

So if God does not stop the devil, why would Jesus stop the devil? If Jesus stopped the devil, he would be going contrary to the Father's will.

So, to say that Jesus "couldn't" would be wrong. He told Satan, "Get thee behind me" and the devil had to leave.

Neither the Quran, the Torah or The New Testament says why. Just that in the end the devil will be thrown in the Lake of Fire.

 

I'm sure I cited even the name of the Bible translation.


Any rebuttal? None?
Typical.

 

You didn’t cite what you quoted.

A rebuttal is only required when the argument is valid.

 

What are your Bible verses so far?
John 1:1
and that is all you wrote.

 

There are the Gospel accounts...