Christ is God
- Thread starter posthuman
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
cracks me up because we all know the scripture states the INVISIBLE GOD has no form, body, for He is a SPIRIT, HOLY SPIRIT.
and trinitarians have limited this Spirit from being able to become flesh.
but in reality, the TRUE GOD before becoming flesh is a SPIRIT without form.
so, how can a SPIRIT without form be considered a PERSON?
how can the TRUE GOD which is a HOLY SPIRIT without form be a PERSON?
how can there be THREE PERSONS knowing the INVISBLE GOD is a SPIRIT without form?
this means the SPIRIT FATHER, the HOLY SPIRIT are formless, so how can they be considered a PERSON when they are without form?
this is why the physical body we know as Yeshua made the appearances in both the Old and New Testaments because He is the only ONE PERSON with a form and body!!
and, this is how we know Yeshua had both the formless Father Spirit and Holy Spirit inside Him because they are formless.
but until you have an actual body, how can you be considered a PERSON?
the Bible is clear the Yahweh Spirit, the Holy Spirit are without form.
so, how can they be accounted for as PERSONS without a form?
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
and trinitarians have limited this Spirit from being able to become flesh.
but in reality, the TRUE GOD before becoming flesh is a SPIRIT without form.
so, how can a SPIRIT without form be considered a PERSON?
how can the TRUE GOD which is a HOLY SPIRIT without form be a PERSON?
how can there be THREE PERSONS knowing the INVISBLE GOD is a SPIRIT without form?
this means the SPIRIT FATHER, the HOLY SPIRIT are formless, so how can they be considered a PERSON when they are without form?
this is why the physical body we know as Yeshua made the appearances in both the Old and New Testaments because He is the only ONE PERSON with a form and body!!
and, this is how we know Yeshua had both the formless Father Spirit and Holy Spirit inside Him because they are formless.
but until you have an actual body, how can you be considered a PERSON?
the Bible is clear the Yahweh Spirit, the Holy Spirit are without form.
so, how can they be accounted for as PERSONS without a form?
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
-
1
- Show all
Yes, that Jesus is distinct from the Father and created by the Father.
Good. As I mentioned previously people claim the Greek word for firstborn, prōtotokos, can mean firstborn in the sense of being preeminent, which it certainly can. For example in Psalm 89:20, 27 King David is talked about as becoming the firstborn King even though Saul was the firstborn King of Israel. Thus it can be seen that firstborn/prōtotokos can be used in the sense of being preeminent. Hence, Trinitarians will argue that Jesus being “the firstborn of all creation” is in effect saying Jesus became the firstborn in the sense that he is the head/ruler of all creation instead of the literal first thing created.
Because of this highlighted defense I will not be using this same argument of Col 1:15, even though I do support the idea Jesus was indeed firstborn of all creation in the sense of time as the scripture so plainly states. My argument is that Jesus is clearly shown as part of creation regardless of the meaning of prōtotokos in the verse, so regardless if prōtotokos means firstborn in the sense of time or in the sense of rank, Jesus is still firstborn of creation by the statement found in Col 1:15. This is because, by definition, to be firstborn of a group you firstly need to be part of that group to then be called firstborn of it.
For example Jesus died and was resurrected; Jesus was in the group of the dead. Thus Col 1:18 says that Jesus is “the firstborn from the dead”. Now if Jesus didn’t die it would be obvious that he could not be called firstborn from the dead, as to be firstborn from the dead you obviously needed to be dead in the first place, as you have already agreed.
To explain further can a kitten be the firstborn in a litter of puppies? No, because to be firstborn in a litter of puppies you must be part of that group, namely a puppy. I could use example after example to show that to be firstborn of a group you need to firstly be in that group. One could check every instance prōtotokos is used in the NT or the LXX and find that everything mentioned as being firstborn of something -regardless of the sense- they are always part of the group that they’re firstborn in.
Exodus 11:5 reads regarding the final plague of Egypt “Every firstborn son in Egypt will die, from the firstborn son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the firstborn son of the female slave, who is at her hand mill, and all the firstborn of the cattle as well”
Who was it relating to when the verse reads “every firstborn son in Egypt”? Obviously every firstborn son in Egypt, who did it relate to when it says “the firstborn son of Pharaoh”? Obviously a son of Pharaoh, who did it relate to when it says “firstborn son of the female slave”? Obviously the sons of female slaves, who was it relating to when it says the “firstborn of the cattle as well”? Obviously the cattle.
In no instance does the bible ever relate the firstborn of something as someone outside the group. Thus when it comes to Col 1:15 with Jesus being “the firstborn of all creation” it’s irrefutable that Jesus is part of the creation he’s firstborn of.
In order to refute this, show me a single scripture in the bible or any modern literature where when someone who is spoken of as firstborn of something, where they themselves aren't in the group they're firstborn of?
Good. As I mentioned previously people claim the Greek word for firstborn, prōtotokos, can mean firstborn in the sense of being preeminent, which it certainly can. For example in Psalm 89:20, 27 King David is talked about as becoming the firstborn King even though Saul was the firstborn King of Israel. Thus it can be seen that firstborn/prōtotokos can be used in the sense of being preeminent. Hence, Trinitarians will argue that Jesus being “the firstborn of all creation” is in effect saying Jesus became the firstborn in the sense that he is the head/ruler of all creation instead of the literal first thing created.
Because of this highlighted defense I will not be using this same argument of Col 1:15, even though I do support the idea Jesus was indeed firstborn of all creation in the sense of time as the scripture so plainly states. My argument is that Jesus is clearly shown as part of creation regardless of the meaning of prōtotokos in the verse, so regardless if prōtotokos means firstborn in the sense of time or in the sense of rank, Jesus is still firstborn of creation by the statement found in Col 1:15. This is because, by definition, to be firstborn of a group you firstly need to be part of that group to then be called firstborn of it.
For example Jesus died and was resurrected; Jesus was in the group of the dead. Thus Col 1:18 says that Jesus is “the firstborn from the dead”. Now if Jesus didn’t die it would be obvious that he could not be called firstborn from the dead, as to be firstborn from the dead you obviously needed to be dead in the first place, as you have already agreed.
To explain further can a kitten be the firstborn in a litter of puppies? No, because to be firstborn in a litter of puppies you must be part of that group, namely a puppy. I could use example after example to show that to be firstborn of a group you need to firstly be in that group. One could check every instance prōtotokos is used in the NT or the LXX and find that everything mentioned as being firstborn of something -regardless of the sense- they are always part of the group that they’re firstborn in.
Exodus 11:5 reads regarding the final plague of Egypt “Every firstborn son in Egypt will die, from the firstborn son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the firstborn son of the female slave, who is at her hand mill, and all the firstborn of the cattle as well”
Who was it relating to when the verse reads “every firstborn son in Egypt”? Obviously every firstborn son in Egypt, who did it relate to when it says “the firstborn son of Pharaoh”? Obviously a son of Pharaoh, who did it relate to when it says “firstborn son of the female slave”? Obviously the sons of female slaves, who was it relating to when it says the “firstborn of the cattle as well”? Obviously the cattle.
In no instance does the bible ever relate the firstborn of something as someone outside the group. Thus when it comes to Col 1:15 with Jesus being “the firstborn of all creation” it’s irrefutable that Jesus is part of the creation he’s firstborn of.
In order to refute this, show me a single scripture in the bible or any modern literature where when someone who is spoken of as firstborn of something, where they themselves aren't in the group they're firstborn of?
knowing the SPIRIT is without form actually explains the ONENESS better than anything else.
definitely explains why Ezekiel and Revelation describe ONE THRONE and ONE BODY [Ancient ONE - Yeshua] sitting upon the throne because SPIRITS are without form and would not be sitting on a throne because a SPIRIT has no body to be considered a PERSON!!
definitely explains why Ezekiel and Revelation describe ONE THRONE and ONE BODY [Ancient ONE - Yeshua] sitting upon the throne because SPIRITS are without form and would not be sitting on a throne because a SPIRIT has no body to be considered a PERSON!!
you are the trinitarian claiming THREE DISTINCT PERSONS!!
I am ONENESS claiming THREE MANIFESTATIONS.
knowing God and the Holy Spirit is a SPIRIT, which is without FORM, is IMPOSSIBLE to be considered a PERSON(s), clarifies my assessment of MANIFESTATIONS!!
and humans have several personalities within ONE BODY!!
a human can be sad, glad, happy, mad, angry, etc...these are all personality traits of ONE PERSON!!
I am ONENESS claiming THREE MANIFESTATIONS.
knowing God and the Holy Spirit is a SPIRIT, which is without FORM, is IMPOSSIBLE to be considered a PERSON(s), clarifies my assessment of MANIFESTATIONS!!
and humans have several personalities within ONE BODY!!
a human can be sad, glad, happy, mad, angry, etc...these are all personality traits of ONE PERSON!!
God doesn't need a human form to be a person. While here on earth, He took on human form, because obviously he had to.. a spirit couldn't hang on a cross and die for our sins. It had to be a human with form.
People under-estimate God if you think He needs ANY form, other than that of a spirit.
People under-estimate God if you think He needs ANY form, other than that of a spirit.
-
2
- Show all
my Grandfather taught in Bible School [Texas - Oklahoma - Florida]
was presbyter over state of Indiana
and along with the man who wrote the old hymnal song "I SEE A CRIMSON STREAM OF BLOOD THAT FLOWS FROM CALVARY" G.T. HAYWOOD, created the church movement which became an organization called "THE ASSEMBLIES OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST" in the early 1900's was indeed of the Pentecostal movement!!
was presbyter over state of Indiana
and along with the man who wrote the old hymnal song "I SEE A CRIMSON STREAM OF BLOOD THAT FLOWS FROM CALVARY" G.T. HAYWOOD, created the church movement which became an organization called "THE ASSEMBLIES OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST" in the early 1900's was indeed of the Pentecostal movement!!